[Senate Hearing 109-827]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
S. Hrg. 109-827, Pt. 6
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION FOR APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR
2007
=======================================================================
HEARINGS
before the
COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES
UNITED STATES SENATE
ONE HUNDRED NINTH CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
ON
S. 2766
TO AUTHORIZE APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2007 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
----------
MARCH 1, 14, 30; APRIL 4, 2006
Printed for the use of the Committee on Armed Services
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION FOR APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR
2007--Part 6 PERSONNEL
S. Hrg. 109-827, Pt. 6
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION FOR APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR
2007
=======================================================================
HEARINGS
before the
COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES
UNITED STATES SENATE
ONE HUNDRED NINTH CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
ON
S. 2766
TO AUTHORIZE APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2007 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
__________
MARCH 1, 14, 30; APRIL 4, 2006
Printed for the use of the Committee on Armed Services
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
30-352 PDF WASHINGTON DC: 2008
---------------------------------------------------------------------
For Sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office
Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512-1800; (202) 512�091800
Fax: (202) 512�092104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402�090001
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
Charles S. Abell, 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
march 1, 2006
Page
Chu, David S.C., Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and
Readiness...................................................... 4
Hagenbeck, LTG Franklin L., USA, Deputy Chief of Staff for
Personnel, United States Army.................................. 32
Brady, Lt. Gen. Roger A., USAF, Deputy Chief of Staff, Manpower
and Personnel, United States Air Force......................... 38
Harvey, VADM John C., Jr., USN, Chief of Naval Personnel, United
States Navy.................................................... 41
Osman, Lt. Gen. H.P., USMC, Deputy Commandant for Manpower and
Reserve Affairs, United States Marine Corps.................... 63
Health Benefits and Programs
march 14, 2006
Schmidli, Tanna, Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive
Officer, National Military Family Association.................. 107
McCarthy, Lt. Gen. Dennis, USMC (Ret.), Executive Director,
Reserve Officers Association................................... 128
Ryan, VADM Norbert R., Jr., USN (Ret.), President, The Military
Officers Association of America................................ 138
Zerr, Edgar M., National President, Fleet Reserve Association.... 171
Reserve Component Personnel Policies
march 30, 2006
Hall, Hon. Thomas F., Assistant Secretary of Defense for Reserve
Affairs........................................................ 192
Blum, LTG H. Steven, USA, Chief, National Guard Bureau........... 202
Vaughn, LTG Clyde A., ARNG, Director, Army National Guard........ 245
James, Lt. Gen. Daniel, III, ANG, Director, Air National Guard... 245
Helmly, LTG James R., USA, Chief, Army Reserve................... 246
Cotton, VADM John G., USNR, Chief, Navy Reserve.................. 274
Bergman, Lt. Gen. John W., USMCR, Commander, Marine Forces
Reserve........................................................ 280
Bradley, Lt. Gen. John A., USAF, Chief, Air Force Reserve........ 292
(iii)
Continuation of Health Benefits and Programs
april 4, 2006
Chu, Dr. David S.C., Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and
Readiness...................................................... 352
Winkenwerder, William, Jr., M.D., Assistant Secretary of Defense
for Health Affairs............................................. 354
Cody, GEN Richard A., USA, Vice Chief of Staff, United States
Army........................................................... 366
Willard, ADM Robert F., USN, Vice Chief of Naval Operations,
United States Navy............................................. 368
Magnus, Gen. Robert, USMC, Assistant Commandant of the Marine
Corps, United States Marine Corps.............................. 371
Corley, Gen. John D.W., USAF, Vice Chief of Staff, United States
Air Force...................................................... 375
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION FOR APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR
2007
----------
WEDNESDAY, MARCH 1, 2006
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 9:29 a.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 members present: Jonathan D. Clark, minority
counsel; Gabriella Eisen, research assistant; and Gerald J.
Leeling, minority counsel.
Staff assistants present: Jill L. Simodejka and Pendred K.
Wilson.
Committee members' assistants present: Meredith Beck,
assistant to Senator Graham; and Eric Pierce, assistant to
Senator Ben Nelson.
OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR LINDSEY O. GRAHAM, CHAIRMAN
Senator Graham. The hearing will come to order, and let the
record reflect that we're a minute early. That's history for
the Senate. The marines are out there doing some reconnaissance
somewhere, but we know they'll show up here soon. Thank you all
for coming. Good morning.
The subcommittee meets today to receive testimony on
Active-Duty, Reserve, and civilian personnel programs in review
of the National Defense Authorization Request (NDAA) for Fiscal
Year 2007.
Senator Nelson, my partner here on the subcommittee, will
be coming shortly. I would like to say, for the record, that I
could not have asked for a better person to work with. He has
been a terrific partner in trying to do what's best for the men
and women who serve our country. I look forward to hearing his
remarks here later on.
I also want to express my thanks to the other members of
the Personnel Subcommittee, Senators McCain, Collins,
Chambliss, Dole, Kennedy, Lieberman, and Akaka, and, of course,
to Senator Warner, who's been a great chairman, and Senator
Levin, the ranking member, for their support, encouragement,
and hard work. Each Senator and their staffs contributed
greatly to the formulation of last year's NDAA, which I am very
proud of, which provided new authorities for the benefit of our
Active-Duty, Reserve, and National Guard personnel. I'd like to
congratulate everyone, including our Department of Defense
(DOD) partners here, and the men and women in uniform on a job
well done last year.
Secretary Chu, we're glad to have you here again. You're a
reform-minded guy. I really enjoy working with you, and I think
you have some good ideas on how we can make the military and
the DOD run more efficiently.
We also have our personnel chiefs today: Lieutenant General
Hagenbeck, U.S. Army, Deputy Chief of Staff for Personnel--and
we appreciate your being here, sir; Vice Admiral John Harvey,
U.S. Navy, Chief of Naval Personnel; Lieutenant General Osman,
U.S. Marine Corps--he'll be here in a minute--and Lieutenant
General Brady, U.S. Air Force, Deputy Chief of Staff for
Personnel.
Thank you all for coming. I look forward to hearing what
you have to say.
I would like to introduce my opening statement in full for
the record.
[The prepared statement of Senator Graham follows:]
Prepared Statement by Senator Lindsey O. Graham
As chairman of the Subcommittee on Personnel, I am very pleased
with the accomplishments of the Committee on Armed Services last year
and with the advances that were made on behalf of the men and women of
the Army, Navy, Marine Corps, and Air Force. The conference report that
was signed by the President on January 6, 2006, was the product of
dedicated hard work and unprecedented cooperation by the House and
Senate Committees on Armed Services and their staffs. At a time of war
and ongoing combat operations, the Nation should expect no less. I
point out some of the key provisions of that legislation, which became
Public Law 109-163, later in this statement.
As the report of the Quadrennial Defense Review that was released
earlier this month made clear, the United States and the Armed Forces
have accepted the reality of a protracted, ``long war'' against
terrorism and in support of our national security goals, including the
advancement of democracy and freedom throughout the world. Our troops--
volunteers all--in the Active and Reserve components, have responded
superbly, to every mission and every call to duty. I want to express,
on behalf of all my colleagues, our gratitude and admiration for the
service and sacrifices of all men and women in uniform and their
families.
Without question, the stress of wartime operations in Operations
Iraqi Freedom and Enduring Freedom have affected recruiting in the All-
Volunteer Force. All the Services, and particularly the Army and Marine
Corps, have worked this challenge with characteristic energy and
positive attitudes. We are standing by to assist you as we can in
helping young Americans and their parents, relatives, and influencers
make good decisions about the great value of military service.
I assure all our members that the Committee on Armed Services and
this subcommittee, in particular, are determined to work with the
Department of Defense (DOD) to ensure good recruiting and retention,
outstanding programs in support of quality-of-life for the men and
women of the armed services and their families, and sustained
readiness.
national defense authorization act for fiscal year 2006
The Personnel Subcommittee continued its focus on improving
compensation and quality-of-life programs, supporting achievement of
recruiting and retention of military personnel, and providing for
severely wounded and the survivors of military personnel killed on
Active-Duty. Highlighting just a few of the key advances that were
made, the conference report:
Approved a 3.1 percent pay raise for all military
personnel
Authorized an increase to $100,000 in the death
gratuity payable to survivors of all military decedents,
including retroactive payment to October 7, 2001, the date of
commencement of Operation Enduring Freedom
Authorized increases in Active-Duty end strength of
10,000 for the Army and 1,000 for the Marine Corps
Authorized government-subsidized access to TRICARE
Standard for every member of the Selected Reserve who commits
to continued service in the Selected Reserve
Approved full basic allowance for housing for
reservists who are ordered to Active-Duty for more than 30 days
Authorized increases in the maximum amount of the
Active-Duty enlistment bonus and the selective reenlistment
bonus
Authorized $30 million in supplemental educational aid
to local school districts which are affected by the assignment
or location of military families, including $5.0 million for
educational services to severely disabled children, and an
additional $10.0 million for districts experiencing a change in
the number of students due to rebasing, activation of new
military units, or base realignment and closure
Authorized $50.0 million increase in military child
care services, and $10.0 million increase in family assistance
services
Authorized accelerated phase-in of full concurrent
receipt for military retirees receiving veterans' disability
compensation as a result of a disability by reason of a
determination of individual unemployability
Approved full basic allowance for housing for
reservists who are ordered to Active-Duty for more than 30 days
Approved income replacement payments for reservists
experiencing extended and frequent mobilization for Active-Duty
service
Authorized higher Selected Reserve officer affiliation
and accession bonuses and Selected Reserve enlistment bonus
Authorized an interservice transfer bonus of up to
$2,500 for Active and Reserve members who transfer to the
Active or Reserve component of another military service
Authorized a critical skills career retention bonus of
up to $100,000 for members of the Selected Reserve
Authorized a special pay for members undergoing
rehabilitation from injuries or wounds incurred in a combat
zone or combat operation
Directed establishment of comprehensive DOD policies
to improve assistance to survivors of military personnel killed
on Active-Duty and to families of seriously injured or wounded
servicemembers
Directed establishment of a DOD task force on mental
health matters affecting members of the Armed Forces and their
families
Authorized a $18.0 million increase in clinical
diagnosis and care of victims of blast injury, including
traumatic brain injury
Directed the Army to conduct a pilot program that
would provide for ``matching funds'' contributions of up to 5
percent of basic pay for first term enlistees who participate
in the Thrift Savings Plan
Authorized $10.0 million for pilot programs to improve
early diagnosis and treatment of post-traumatic stress disorder
and other mental health disorders
Authorized $77.0 million for physical examinations and
medical and dental readiness for members of the Selected
Reserve
Authorized up to 21 days of leave for military members
in connection with the adoption of a child
Directed the use of appropriated funds for overseas
transportation of Army and Air Force Exchange merchandise for
military members and their families overseas
Senator Graham. I'd like to end with this thought: The men
and women who are serving in Active and Reserve roles are
giving their all. They and their families are going above and
beyond any reasonable expectations. The Guard and Reserve are
being used at levels not seen since World War II. The Reserve
community air crews are all, basically, in volunteer status.
They've been activated for their 2-year statutory tour. They
could all quit tomorrow if they wanted to, but they've chosen
not to. I don't believe they will, because they're great
Americans. The stress on the family is real. The stress on our
troops is real, but it is part of the job. This year, our goal
is to come up with a budget that meets their needs and relieves
as much stress as possible.
With that said, Secretary Chu, I would love to hear what
you have to say about this year's proposal.
STATEMENT OF DAVID S.C. CHU, UNDER SECRETARY OF DEFENSE FOR
PERSONNEL AND READINESS
Secretary Chu. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you for your
leadership and the partnership with you and members of the
committee on the important issues facing our military
personnel.
This is the 33rd year in which the country returned to its
tradition of an All-Volunteer Force as the way of staffing its
military. I agree with you, this volunteer military has
performed magnificently in its current operations. It is, as my
colleagues would promptly remind me, not just an All-Volunteer
Force, but also an All-Recruited Force. In that regard, we
appreciate the partnership of Congress in speaking to what we
call the ``influencers,'' the older Americans, the adults,
parents, counselors, teachers, et cetera, who have such an
important effect on young people's decisions. We need more help
from them in celebrating the positive choice of young Americans
to consider military service.
We recognize, however, that, in an All-Volunteer Force, our
pay and benefits package must be competitive. That is the
reason we are proposing an across-the-board pay increase for
the uniformed force this year that matches the change in the
employment cost index in the economy as a whole. At the same
time, we are proposing additional increases for the
noncommissioned officer (NCO) corps in order to bring them to
the standard that the 9th Quadrennial Review of Military
Compensation set; that is to say, to be at the level that is
equal or better than 70 percent of the American workforce,
adjusted for experience and degree of educational achievement.
We're looking forward to the 10th Quadrennial Review of
Military Compensation, which began this year, as required by
statute. We will, of course, take as one of the important
documents for that review, the soon-to-be-received report from
the Defense Advisory Committee on Military Compensation
appointed by the Secretary last year at this time.
We recognize that personnel are the single largest element
in the overall budget of DOD; and, therefore, we have to be
judicious in our choices about compensation, pay, and benefits.
We thank the conferees who worked on last year's NDAA, for
giving great deference to the issue of costs, in terms of
changing pay and benefit programs. This is one of the reasons
the Department has been very careful about any change in the
permanent planned end strength of the force--the Active
military force, specifically. At the same time, on the pay and
benefits side, we recognize we must be able to sustain the
package we have now--for those who are serving, especially.
Hence, our proposals on the health benefit for retirees under
65. We should keep that benefit, the fine program that it is
now, into the future.
We look forward to working with you, Mr. Chairman, and I
look forward to answering your questions now and in the weeks
ahead.
Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Secretary Chu follows:]
Prepared Statement by Hon. David S.C. Chu
introduction
Mr. Chairman and members of this distinguished subcommittee, thank
you for inviting me to be here today.
I am struck by the consistent theme of our annual review of the
Department of Defense's (DOD) personnel programs: we are a Nation
committed to an All-Volunteer Military Force and we must do our very
best to sustain it. It falls to us to sustain it not in a time of peace
and tranquility, but in the midst of a long war--a war irregular in
nature in which we fight against unconventional enemies, extremists,
and global terrorist networks.
Additionally, we must sustain that force with limited resources.
Difficult choices will need to be made, predicated on careful analysis
and careful consideration of risks.
The Department began its transformation journey before September
11, 2001, and we have been re-tooling continuously our structure,
missions, and capabilities. The Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR)
represents the latest stage in that journey. It recommends developing
an information age human capital strategy to shape a 21st century Total
Force. Over 3 million people across the military services and
components, multiple organizations and agencies work for DOD. The
Department uses over 15 different occupational systems with over 6,000
occupational definitions. The future human capital strategy should
provide a uniform competency-based approach to occupational planning,
performance-based management, and enhanced opportunities for personal
and professional growth.
Some ask if the force is broken. It is not. Our military and
civilian forces comprise high quality, motivated individuals who are
choosing to continue to serve. Almost two thirds of the Active military
tell us they intend to stay on Active-Duty and a similar fraction
expresses satisfaction with the overall military way of life. Survey
results likewise show a strong, resilient Reserve Force--over 70
percent are satisfied overall with the military way of life.
Furthermore, in recent surveys over 80 percent of civilians indicate
they are satisfied with their jobs and three quarters indicate they
plan to continue to work for their current organization.
Obviously, we have done many things right over the last several
years, but we should not assume that we have done enough. To that end,
we seek expert reviews of some of our most important policies and
programs. The Defense Advisory Committee on Military Compensation was
chartered last year to provide the Secretary with advice on matters
pertaining to military compensation. The Advisory Committee has been
examining approaches to balancing military pay and benefits and
incentive structures and may make suggestions for improvements that
they believe will assist us in meeting our recruiting and retention
objectives. I look forward to the release of the final report in April
and discussing its conclusions with the leadership of the Department
and Congress. We will use the Advisory Committee's report as a starting
point for the 10th Quadrennial Review of Military Compensation,
mandated by statute.
the all-volunteer force
End Strength, Stress, and Shaping the Force
Maintaining a strong defense which is able to quickly overcome and
defeat enemy threats remains an imperative for our Nation. In that
regard, the DOD continues to take actions aimed at reducing the stress
on the force as operations in Iraq, Afghanistan, and the global war on
terrorism continue, while maximizing present and future Total Force
capabilities. By focusing our efforts on more effectively structuring
and managing our forces, and employing advanced technology, we strongly
believe there is no requirement for permanent increases in our end
strength. In fact, we believe that planned reductions resulting from
transformation efforts in the active Air Force and Navy manpower
programs, and the Navy Reserve, as stated in our fiscal year 2007
President's budget request, balance risk with fiscally responsible
manpower program decisions.
To support these programmed strengths, we continue to transform how
the U.S. military is structured. We are continuing to develop an
integrated package of voluntary separation incentives that do not
``break faith'' with members who have given loyal and dedicated
service. I want to recognize the targeted incentive authority that you
provided us, which allows us to offer monetary incentives to shape the
military services in specific year of service officer cohorts.
Voluntary incentive tools like this are of particular importance when
the Air Force and Navy are decreasing in size while the Army and Marine
Corps are increasing operating strength. Our goal is to use these tools
sparingly to make sure our forces are sized and shaped to be the most
effective, flexible, and lethal. Only if voluntary separations do not
suffice would the military departments, as a last resort, implement
involuntary separation measures such as Selective Early Retirement.
We also recognize that stability of the force, particularly its
leaders, is key to the successful transformation of organizations.
Although development is an important endeavor that requires a breadth
of experience, far too often we accept extraordinary turbulence in
positions of special responsibility, and tacitly accept shorter careers
and earlier retirement. I do not believe this is a prescription for
long-term success, particularly during periods of transformation. As a
result, we have begun looking for opportunities to extend tenure and
careers where it makes sense.
The old force structure, designed to respond to Cold War threats,
does not provide us with the best balance of capabilities in the Active
and Reserve components for the 21st century. Rebalancing the force must
continue, converting capabilities within and between the Active and
Reserve components, shifting resources from lower demand capabilities
to higher priorities. The Services are improving their posture with
respect to the Active component/Reserve component mix and have
rebalanced about 70,000 spaces through fiscal year 2005. The Services
are pursuing additional rebalancing initiatives for fiscal year 2006
through fiscal year 2011 totaling 55,000 additional spaces.
Military-to-civilian conversions are also helping to alleviate
stress on the force while increasing our combat potential. In fiscal
year 2004 and fiscal year 2005, the Department converted over 20,000
military billets to DOD civilian or private sector performance and
currently plans to convert an additional 10,000 plus billets in fiscal
year 2006 and fiscal year 2007. Further conversions are being
identified for fiscal year 2008 through fiscal year 2011. Military
strength made available from these conversions is being used to
ameliorate high demand/low density challenges, alleviate stressed
career fields, and enable initiatives such as Army Modularity. Because
of conversions, the Navy and the Air Force will be able to reduce their
authorized military end strength without any loss of combat
capabilities. In fact, savings from these conversions will result in
increased force effectiveness as resultant savings are applied toward
force modernization, recapitalization, and other compelling needs.
Stress on our All-Volunteer Force will also be reduced through
targeted investments in less manpower intensive platforms and new age
technologies such as electronic hardware, communications systems,
precision weapons and unmanned air, land and sea vehicles. One such
example is the application of new technologies that reduce the manpower
required for the performance of Air Force installation security. This
success is being implemented around the world. To ease the burden on
some high demand/low density units and individuals, we have employed
innovative joint concepts to meet mission requirements. Today, Navy and
Air Force personnel are augmenting ground forces in Iraq and elsewhere.
Actions like this result in additional capabilities and effects that
would simply not be possible in a parochial ``stove-piped''
organization.
Active-Duty Recruiting and Retention
The success of our All-Volunteer Force starts with recruiting. An
improving economy, growing concerns from global war on terrorism,
increased Army recruiting goals, and high operational tempo continue to
challenge our ability to recruit. During fiscal year 2005, the military
services recruited 153,887 first-term enlistees and an additional 9,372
individuals with previous military service into their Active-Duty
components, for a total of 163,259 Active-Duty recruits, attaining 96
percent of the DOD goal of 169,452 accessions. The quality of new
Active-Duty recruits remained high in fiscal year 2005. DOD-wide, 95
percent of new Active-Duty recruits were high school diploma graduates
(against a goal of 90 percent) and 70 percent scored above average on
the Armed Forces Qualification Test (versus a desired minimum of 60
percent).
Through January, fiscal year 2006 all Services have met or exceeded
numerical recruiting objectives for the Active Force. Army achieved
19,859 of its 19,100 recruiting goal through January, for a 104 percent
accomplishment. However, the Army's high school diploma graduate rate
of 85 percent is not yet at our desired level (90 percent). The Army is
focusing its recruiting on the summer months when more high school
diploma graduates are available.
FISCAL YEAR 2006 ACTIVE COMPONENT ACCESSIONS
[Through January 2006]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Quantity
-----------------------------------
Percent of
Accessions Goal Goal
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Army................................ 19,859 19,100 104.0
Navy................................ 9,758 9,643 101.2
Marine Corps........................ 9,836 9,674 101.7
Air Force........................... 9,711 9,641 100.7
-----------------------------------
Total............................. 49,164 48,058 102.3
------------------------------------------------------------------------
We appreciate the new authorities to support recruiting you
provided in the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for Fiscal
Year 2006, especially the increased levels of enlistment bonuses and
the $1,000 referral bonus. Additionally, the 3-year opportunity for the
Army to provide additional recruitment incentives will allow the
Department a level of additional flexibility to tailor incentives
quickly to meet current needs. We have every confidence that requested
supplemental funding and policy modifications will be sufficient to
ensure continued success in achieving recruiting goals. Active-Duty
officer accessions are on track in all Services for numerical success
this year.
Army, Air Force, and Marine Corps met or exceeded fiscal year 2005
retention goals. Navy did well, achieving 91 percent of its mid-career
goal, reflecting a shortfall in retention for a limited number of
nuclear specialties. Retention bonuses for nuclear specialties at the
statutory ceilings were insufficient for fiscal year 2005, but
legislation in fiscal year 2006 provides higher retention bonus
ceiling.
Overall, retention remains healthy in fiscal year 2006, and we
expect all Services to meet or exceed fiscal year 2006 retention goals.
To date, the Army has reenlisted 24,671 soldiers toward an end of year
goal of 64,200. Army mid-career retention is 5 percent below the
desired glide path, but the Army is targeting bonuses toward that
population, and we believe the additional Non-Commissioned Officer
(NCO) pay raise for fiscal year 2007 will also help the Army finish
fiscal year 2006 in a strong position. Navy, Marine Corps and Air Force
have enjoyed excellent reenlistment rates through January 2006, and are
predicted to meet their goals for the fiscal year.
The Army is the only Service currently executing stop-loss. As of
December 2005, 7,620 Active soldiers, 2,418 Army Reserve soldiers, and
2,429 Army National Guard soldiers were impacted by the stop-loss
program. 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 the present need for stop-loss.
Over the past 3 years, the Department has worked to improve
servicemembers' quality-of-life. We look forward to working with
Congress to achieve needed military pay raises and flexible,
discretionary compensation programs. We have every confidence that
those actions will be sufficient to ensure continued success in
achieving desired strength levels.
Purpose, Missions, and Policies of the Reserve Components
The Department's use of the Reserve components has changed
significantly since 1990, and a mission-ready National Guard and
Reserve Force has become a critical element in implementing our
National Security Strategy. The Reserve components support day-to-day
defense requirements, and portions of the Reserve have served as an
operational force since Operations Desert Shield/Desert Storm. This
force is no longer just a strategic Reserve used only in a generation.
Since September 11, 2001, an annual average of about 60 million duty
days have been provided by Reserve component members--the equivalent of
adding over 164,000 personnel to the Active strength each year.
The Reserve components support the full spectrum of operational
missions and currently furnish about 20 percent of the troops in the
Central Command (CENTCOM) theater of operation. The Reserve components
are performing a variety of nontraditional missions in support of the
global war on terrorism, including 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 also remains integral to homeland defense
missions and will remain a dual-missioned force, performing Federal and
state missions, exemplified by the more than 50,000 National Guard
members who responded to Hurricane Katrina relief efforts last fall.
The Department's development of a ``continuum of service''
construct in fiscal year 2001 facilitates this transition to an
Operational Reserve and provides the foundation for the new
``Operational Support'' strength accounting category authorized by
Congress in the fiscal year 2005 NDAA. This new strength category makes
it easier and less disruptive for Reserve component members to
volunteer to perform operational missions.
Recognizing that this Operational Reserve is still a Reserve Force,
our policies continue to support the prudent and judicious use of
National Guard and Reserve members--something we have emphasized since
2001. We have focused on husbanding Reserve component resources and
being sensitive to the quality-of-life of mobilized personnel, their
families, and the impact on civilian employers of reservists. Our
policies stress advance notification to aid in predictability, as well
as now enabling reservists and their families to take advantage of
early access to medical benefits.
Volunteerism is the cornerstone of our force. Of the more than
485,000 Reserve component members who have served since September 11,
2001, approximately 84,000 have served more than once--and almost all
of those who have served more than once have been volunteers. No
reservist has been involuntarily mobilized for more than 24 cumulative
months.
This Operational Reserve supports ongoing missions where
appropriate, while providing the additional Reserve capacity needed to
meet surge requirements or support wartime or contingency operations.
This new construct allows greater flexibility to perform new missions
ideally suited to Reserve service, such as ``reach-back'' missions
(intelligence, communications, unmanned arial vehicles, etc.) and
training missions which would be appropriate to assign to a Reserve
component unit.
One element in 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 support our Nation's local first responders by
identifying the agents or substances involved, 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 36 of the 55 congressionally authorized teams as being
operationally ready. The WMD CST funding for fiscal year 2006 is $214.6
million, and the budget request for fiscal year 2007 is for $224.2
million. The Department is preparing eight teams for certification in
fiscal year 2006. The final 11 teams are being prepared for
certification in fiscal year 2007.
Reserve and National Guard Utilization
There continues to be considerable discussion about the stress that
the global war on terrorism is placing on the force. The most
frequently asked 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 is a long war, the
Department established a strategic approach to ensure the judicious and
prudent use of the Reserve components, postulating involuntary
mobilization no more than 1 year in 6. We will continue to assess the
impact of mobilization and deployment on the Guard and Reserve and
adjust our policies as needed to sustain the Reserve components.
As stated earlier, more than 485,000 Reserve component members have
served in support if the current contingency since September 11, 2001.
Of the current Selected Reserve Force of about 825,000 today, slightly
more than 46 percent have been mobilized. We are monitoring the effects
of this level of effort.
End strength achievement in fiscal year 2004 was less than 100
percent (98.4 percent) for the first time in 5 years, with the
shortfall primarily in the Army National Guard and the Navy Reserve.
Fiscal year 2005 the Army National Guard, the Army Reserve, and the
Navy Reserve fell short of achieving their authorized strengths. Fiscal
year 2006 projections, based partially on first quarter fiscal year
2006 data, indicate we will see some improvement in end strength
achievement for the Army Guard.
The composite Reserve component percentage of recruiting goals
achieved over the past 3 years are 97.5 percent in fiscal year 2003,
95.9 percent in fiscal year 2004, and 85.5 percent in fiscal year 2005.
However, fiscal year 2006 first quarter recruiting results show a
general reversal of this negative trend, with four of the six DOD
Reserve components meeting or exceeding their recruiting goals--
including both Army Reserve components.
Overall, Reserve component attrition rates remain at historically
low levels: 18.4 percent in fiscal year 2003, 18.7 percent in fiscal
year 2004, and 19.2 percent in fiscal year 2005. Fiscal year 2006 first
quarter data indicate that attrition rates will remain at this level
for fiscal year 2006, and may even decrease.
Department of Labor (DOL) cases involving Reserve component member
claims of mistreatment by civilian employers have risen from 724 in
fiscal year 2001 to 1,752 fiscal year 2005, reflecting the mobilization
of nearly half million Reserve personnel, and a usage rate of Reserve
component members in 2005 over five times higher than in 2001 (68
million mandays in 2005 compared to 12.7 million mandays in 2001).
We implemented a variety of mitigation strategies to reduce stress:
retaining reservists on Active-Duty only as long as absolutely
necessary; limiting the total period that a member may be involuntarily
mobilized to 24 cumulative months for the current contingency
operation; using innovative concepts to spread mission requirements
across the Reserve Force where possible; rebalancing forces to reduce
the need for involuntary Guard and Reserve mobilization; and, providing
increased predictability of service and increased notification time to
aid members, their families, and their employers. Simultaneously, to
help ensure that we meet rotation requirements, other mitigation
strategies have been developed. These strategies include, but are not
limited to: use of provisional units; use of joint solutions; use of
civilians and contractors; developing new incentives; increased use of
volunteers; and, the training and use of indigenous forces.
Compared to Operation Desert Storm when we mobilized 30,000
Individual Ready Reserve (IRR) members, since September 11, 2001, we
have only mobilized slightly over 10,000 IRR members. We have
established an enhanced expectation management program to ensure that
members, their families, their employers, Congress, and the public are
more informed of Reserve service obligations and requirements--
including obligations and service while in the IRR.
Reserve Component Recruiting and Retention
As noted earlier, recruiting has been a challenge for the Reserve
components over the last 3 fiscal years. Although fiscal year 2006
first quarter data indicate a reversal, we are aware that the Reserves
will continue to face a very challenging recruiting environment.
Through January 2006, four of the six Reserve components met or
exceeded their recruiting goals; only the Navy Reserve and Air National
Guard did not achieve their goals. We are seeing steady improvements
with overall Reserve component attainment of recruiting objectives--
increasing from 98 percent achievement in October 2005 to 101 percent,
year-to-date, in January 2006. The Army National Guard is leading the
Reserve components at 109 percent achievement of its goal through
January 2006, with the Army, Marine Corps and Air Force Reserve all
attaining 100 percent of their goals. 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 it has had the
greatest proportion of its force mobilized since September 11, 2001, in
support of the global war on terrorism, yet recruiting remains strong.
Fiscal year 2006 Reserve component enlisted accession performance,
year-to-date, is depicted below.
FISCAL YEAR 2006 RESERVE COMPONENT RECRUITING
[Through January 2006]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Accessions Percent of Annual
Reserve Component Goal YTD YTD Goal Goal
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Army National Guard............................................. 18,219 19,807 109 70,000
Army Reserve.................................................... 8,888 8,854 100 36,032
Navy Reserve.................................................... 3,147 2,705 86 11,180
Marine Corps Reserve............................................ 2,458 2,468 100 8,035
Air National Guard.............................................. 3,142 2,499 80 9,380
Air Force Reserve............................................... 2,354 2,362 100 6,780
DOD............................................................. 38,208 38,695 101 141,407
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
To address their recruiting challenges, the Army National Guard and
Army Reserve have employed the enhanced enlistment and reenlistment
incentives provided in the National Defense Authorization Acts for
Fiscal Year 2004 and Fiscal Year 2005. They fielded additional
recruiters and increased advertising funding. As a result, Army
National Guard and Reserve recruiting is trending upward. Additionally,
Army Reserve component recruiting efforts are again focusing on those
personnel separating from Active service who have long been an
important Reserve recruiting source. Accordingly, they are determining
how to best use incentives that encourage those leaving Active service
to join the Reserves, and also offering interservice transfers to help
accessions.
The Navy Reserve is still experiencing both quantity and quality
recruiting shortfalls. Part of the reason for the Navy Reserve
shortfalls is the downsizing that the Navy Reserve has been undergoing.
Once the significant programmed downsizing is over at the end of fiscal
year 2006, healthier recruiting numbers are expected.
All Reserve components, with the exception of Navy, are achieving
success in retention, with attrition (through December 2005) at or
below our baseline year of 2000. Reserve attrition rates remain at
historically low levels.
RESERVE COMPONENT ATTRITION
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiscal Fiscal Fiscal Fiscal
Year 2006 Year 2000 Year 2005 Year 2006
Component Target YTD Dec. YTD Dec. YTD Dec.
(Ceiling) 1999 2004 2005
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Army National Guard............................................. 19.5 5.44 5.33 4.17
Army Reserve.................................................... 28.6 6.5 5.45 4.69
Navy Reserve.................................................... 36 3.91 7.79 7.92
Marine Corps Reserve............................................ 30 7.15 4.58 5.11
Air National Guard.............................................. 12 3.05 2.52 2.62
Air Force Reserve............................................... 18 5.73 3.48 3.33
DOD............................................................. NA 5.33 5.02 4.38
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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 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, considering the continuing demand the global war on terrorism
has placed on the Nation's Reserve components and the employers who
share this precious manpower resource. The broad-based, nationwide
support for our troops by employers continues to be superb.
Through its locally-based network of 3,500 volunteers and its full-
time national staff, ESGR reaches out to both employers and
servicemembers to help ensure the requirements of the Uniformed
Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act (USERRA), 38 U.S.C.,
(sections 4301-4334) are understood and applied. Servicemembers and
employers may resolve USERRA conflicts by utilizing the free mediation
and ombudsman services provided by ESGR. ESGR's aggressive outreach
efforts have resulted in a 50-percent reduction in the number of
ombudsman cases from 2004 to 2005. ESGR continually increases the
percentage of cases resolved through informal mediation. Additionally,
DOD and DOL have established a Memorandum of Understanding that
enhances communication and information sharing and provides greater
efficiencies of all available government resources for Reserve
component members.
We established the Civilian Employment Information Database and now
require Reserve component members to register their employers. ESGR has
established a Customer Service Center Hotline to provide information,
assistance, and to gather data on issues related to Reserve component
service. Used together, these databases enable ESGR to develop personal
relationships with employers, measure and manage employment issues, and
advise the Department when developing policies and practices to
mitigate the impact on employers when a reservist employee is called to
military duty.
compensation and management
Compensation
Prosecuting the global war on terrorism requires top quality,
highly skilled men and women whose compensation package must be
competitive enough to recruit and retain them in 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.
Since September 11, 2001, the DOD and Congress have worked together
to increase military basic pay by approximately 25 percent. In addition
to an overall pay raise of 2.2 percent, the fiscal year 2007 budget
increases pay for warrant officers and higher ranking enlisted
personnel. DOD intends to propose extending the pay table to encourage
longer service. With these pay increases, the Department will reach the
standard for pay that the 9th Quadrennial Review of Military
Compensation established--that is, enlisted at the 70th percentile
against the distribution of comparably educated civilians.
Members 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. The
Basic Allowance for Housing increased almost 70 percent since 2000 as a
direct result of the close cooperation between the Department and
Congress. To ensure the allowance accurately reflects the current
housing markets where servicemembers and their families reside, the
Department will continue its efforts to improve our data collection.
Additionally, we are grateful to Congress for the authority to increase
the allowance or extend the Temporary Lodging Expense period for areas
subject to major disasters or installations experiencing a sudden
increase in troop levels.
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 Operation Enduring Freedom (OEF)
and Operation Iraqi Freedom (OIF) 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 and $250 per month in Family
Separation Allowance. Additionally, these individuals qualify for
Hardship Duty Pay (HDP)-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.
In recognition of deployments of 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 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 compensate appropriately members who are called
on to extend their service in demanding assignments by increasing the
cap to $3,000 and providing for lump sum payments. We also appreciate
the increase in the ceiling for HDP, as it will allow us further
flexibility with additional options to better address these pressing
issues of frequent deployments as well as those that follow in quick
succession.
Retention of Special Operations Forces (SOFs) presents another
critical compensation challenge. The United States Special Operations
Command force structure is projected to increase. Retention of current
SOF members, in the face of ever demanding requirements and lucrative
alternatives, is critical to the success of that growth. In 2004, the
Department authorized a robust retention incentive package that
includes extensive use of the Critical Skills Retention Bonus, Special
Duty Assignment Pay, AIP, and the Accession Bonus for new Warrant
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 SOF
retention and review initiatives to sustain these highly valued
professionals.
We realize that no benefits can replace a human life; the lost
presence of the family member is what survivors face. We are grateful
to Congress for supporting the President's initiative to increase death
benefits in the NDAA for Fiscal Year 2006, which acknowledges the
principle that a servicemember be able to elect a benefits package that
would provide up to $500,000 to the surviving family. 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.
Joint Officer Management
In 1986, title IV of the Goldwater-Nichols Act codified joint
officer personnel policies, providing specific personnel management
guidance on how to identify, educate, train, promote, and assign
officers to joint duties. While the operational forces have developed
an exceptional capability to execute joint operations, the system used
for Joint Officer Management has not kept pace. We recognize the need
to modernize current joint management processes to enable a flexible
joint qualified officer construct to meet both the challenges of today
and the 21st century warfighting environment.
Joint Task Forces (JTFs) now define the way we array our Armed
Forces for both war and operations other than war. The effectiveness of
joint operations is no longer simply the interoperability of two or
more military services; it requires the synergistic employment of
forces from multiple services, agencies, and nations. Nongovernmental
agencies and commercial enterprises must now be routinely combined with
traditional military forces and interagency components to achieve
national objectives. Such a dynamic and varied environment demands
flexibility, responsiveness, and adaptability not only from the
individual soldiers, sailors, airmen, and marines, but also from the
programmatic infrastructure supporting joint force development.
The Department will deliver to Congress in the next few weeks the
culmination of a multi-phase strategic review of joint officer
management and joint officer development. This review examined the
demand for joint officers in the 21st century environment and our
ability to produce a supply to meet the demand. Also assessed was
whether today's management structure is suitable to fit the supply-
demand model. The findings from this review were incorporated in the
recently completed Strategic Plan for Joint Officer Management and
Joint Professional Military Education.
This strategic plan proposes an expansion of the existing joint
officer management system in pursuit of a career-long development
model. This model recognizes that joint experience can be gained in a
myriad of locations and organizational constructs. Many of these
constructs were not in existence when the Goldwater-Nichols Act was
initiated. This model also takes into consideration that the level, or
amount, of joint experience attained by an officer may be a function of
currency, frequency, and intensity in addition to the standard measure
of a specific period of time in a billet. This expansion can be
executed with only minor increases in flexibility to the existing
statutes. Flexibility which will recognize the realities of today's
multi-national and interagency operating environment and the need to
capture all joint experiences, not just those attained through
traditional means. The end result of this proposed expansion will be a
flexible and dynamic joint officer management system which will stay
true to the stated and implied objectives and goals of the Goldwater-
Nichols Act throughout the 21st century.
Transforming DOD Training
Secretary Rumsfeld reported to you, in his submission of the 2006
QDR, that although the military departments have established
operationally proven processes and standards, it is clear that further
advances in joint training and education are urgently needed to prepare
for complex multinational and interagency operations in the future. The
Department has made extraordinary progress in building a transformed
joint training capability. Our ability to successfully defend our
Nation's interests relies heavily upon the Department's Total Force--
its Active and Reserve military components, its civil servants, and its
contractors--for its war fighting capability and capacity. The Total
Force must be trained and educated to adapt to different joint
operating environments, develop new skills and rebalance its
capabilities and people if it is to remain prepared for the new
challenges of an uncertain future. Our forces must be capable of
adapting to rapidly changing situations, ill-defined threats, and a
growing need to operate across a broad spectrum of asymmetric missions,
including stability and support operations and disaster response.
The Department's Training Transforming Program is focused on
melding world-class individual Service competencies and training
capabilities into a cohesive joint capability. We are developing three
joint capabilities: Joint knowledge development and distribution
capability (joint training and education for individuals), joint
national training capability (joint unit and staff training), and joint
assessment and enabling capability (assessments to answer the question:
are we truly transforming training?).
The joint knowledge development and distribution capability (JKDDC)
provides access to Service and DOD agency learning management systems,
anywhere and anytime. Populated with 19 joint courses, the JKDDC Web
site addresses prioritized combatant command needs and fills individual
joint knowledge gaps and seams. Another success for JKDDC is its
hosting of the ``Combating Trafficking in Persons'' course developed
collaboratively with the Department of State and our Academic Advanced
Distributed Learning Co-laboratory at the University of Wisconsin.
Joint National Training Capability (JNTC) is providing realistic
distributed joint context to the Services' training sites and events as
well as to the combatant commands. JNTC has already moved from discrete
``throw-away after one use'' events to a more persistent ``stay-
behind'' capability. Service and combatant command training sites and
training events are now being accredited and certified. We continue to
decrease planning time for joint training and mission rehearsal
exercises. We are distributing joint training over large distances to
the right training audience for their specific mission needs. Jointness
is moving from the strategic to the tactical level. All DOD operations
in the global war on terrorism are joint. We are creating, a live,
virtual, constructive (LVC) environment that supports efficient
participation of joint forces in appropriate training across the
country and around the world. When not utilized for joint training,
this LVC environment is being used by the Services to improve their own
training capability. We will, with your continued support, expand the
persistence of JNTC to be more globally postured. JNTC will become a
joint global training capability in the future.
Our joint assessment and enabling capability created a performance
assessment architecture and used it as a start point for the conduct of
a block assessment and balanced scorecard assessment. Our first block
assessment serves as a baseline set of metrics to measure training
transformation. Upon completion of these assessments and outcome
measurements of training transformation missions and programs we will
adapt and revise our strategic guidance and programmatics.
The training transformation interagency, intergovernmental,
multinational mission essential tasks (TIM2) task force is a
collaborative effort supported by my staff and is under the purview of
the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense (Policy). TIM2 seeks to
integrate DOD capabilities better in support of other Federal entities,
including the Departments of State and Homeland Security.
Training Transformation has created a capability to tailor
distributed training to deploying forces. In fact, our priority for
joint training is to the deploying force. Exercise Unified Endeavor 06-
1 this past fall prepared Army's 10th Mountain Division headquarters
and staff for their upcoming rotation to Afghanistan to head Combined
Joint Task Force 76. The exercise used actual lessons learned from
Afghan operations. Real and simulated input and stimuli were used to
feed real--world systems and decision cycles. Tailored realistic joint
training tasked members of the training audience to conduct joint
operations while coordinating air, ground and space forces with the
ongoing ground campaign and all its related cultural exigencies. The
leadership also had to work with the North Atlantic Treaty Organization
(NATO), coalition, Afghan and non-governmental organizations during
each phase of the operation. This could not have been done 3 years ago.
Sexual Assault Prevention
The Department's Sexual Assault Prevention and Response (SAPR)
Program has made great progress during the past year. We introduced and
implemented a comprehensive policy designed to effect a cultural change
and serve as a benchmark for other large organizations. The Joint Task
Force for Sexual Assault Prevention and Response (JTF-SAPR) published a
DOD Directive. The JTF-SAPR has transitioned into a permanent office to
lead the Department's long-term efforts.
The Directive and its forthcoming Instruction incorporate the 14
Directive Type Memorandums that the DOD released in 2005. These
publications form the framework of a comprehensive response structure
and protocol that ensures a consistent level of care and support
worldwide for military victims of sexual assault. These documents
implement a fundamental change in how the Department responds to sexual
assault with a confidential reporting structure for victims of sexual
assault. This removes a major barrier to reporting by enabling victims
to receive medical care without necessarily initiating a criminal
investigation. Although confidential reporting has been available only
since June 14, 2005, early analysis indicates that the program is
meeting our objective of increasing victim access to care and support.
The Department has mandated an aggressive training and education
program that ensures training is conducted throughout every
servicemember's career at both the unit level and at all professional
military education programs. The military services have implemented
ambitious training programs to meet this requirement and to provide
trained sexual assault response coordinators at all major
installations. Additionally all major commands in the Army have
received baseline SAPR training as well as 1,850 deployable uniformed
victim advocates. The Navy has successfully integrated SAPR baseline
training into all Navy military training, resulting in 365,900 trained
sailors. In addition to its sexual assault response coordinator
training, the Marine Corps has trained over 700 unit victim advocates
and has targeted leadership instruction at both the junior and advanced
level. As part of its training program, the Air Force produced a highly
acclaimed video which facilitated the training of over 356,000 airmen.
This aggressive training and outreach program along with
confidential reporting will predictably result in an increase in the
overall number of reported sexual assaults in DOD. Future data will
assist the Department in evaluating how the new sexual assault policy
and our training efforts are affecting the incidence of this crime.
Trend data on reported cases will be augmented with surveys such as the
Reserve component survey which now provides a baseline to measure
progress in the Reserve component.
The Department's next steps will focus on continued guidance to the
Services and oversight of their implementation of the SAPR program. We
will continue our comprehensive survey schedule in 2006, including the
Service academies \1\, and the fourth quadrennial survey of Active-Duty
members. Additionally, we will use the Defense Task Force on Sexual
Assault in the military services as another source to evaluate the
effectiveness of the SAPR program.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ We believe it would be more effective to conduct the Academy
Survey biennually, and is considering a change in the statute to permit
this.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
readiness
Readiness Assessment and Reporting
To meet its challenges, the Department needs visibility into the
current status and capabilities of forces across the Department. Over
the past year we have increased the capabilities of our new Defense
Readiness Reporting System (DRRS). DRRS contains near real time
assessments of military capabilities in terms of the tasks or missions
that units and organizations are currently able to perform. These
assessments are informed by the availability of specific personnel and
equipment. Our partnerships with United States Northern Command
(NORTHCOM), United States Joint Forces Command, United States Pacific
Command, and United States Strategic Command have produced working,
scalable versions of measurement, assessment and force management tools
over the past year. We continue to add more data describing the
structure, status, and location of military forces. Of special interest
this year is the registry of title 32 capabilities in support of the
homeland defense/security mission under NORTHCOM. Development of DRRS
will continue through 2007.
Expanding Our Foreign Language and Regional Expertise Capabilities
To win the long war the Department must embrace and
institutionalize foreign language and regional expertise into DOD
doctrine, planning, contingencies, organizational structure, and
training, as the QDR directs. Last year the Defense Language
Transformation Roadmap provided three broad goals that will ensure a
strong foundation in language and cultural expertise, a capacity to
surge, and a cadre of language professionals. This year our focus and
goal is to take deliberate steps and actions to transform our force.
One key goal is to establish policies, practices and funding that will
ensure a base of officers possessing language ability in key languages
such as Arabic, Chinese, Persian Farsi, and Urdu. We have been
successful in establishing policies that will create language as a core
capability and obtained necessary funding through the QDR to effect
this needed change.
We have begun the process to imbed language and regional expertise
as a core military skill. The Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff has
published an instruction that will drive a more accurate documentation
of language capabilities needed, which is essential to effective
planning, commanders and planners will identify and analyze the key
language skills and performance capabilities they will need to be
successful in all operations.
The need for language and regional expertise has long been a core
requirement for Special Forces Command, but as the type of conflicts
and wars in which we engage change, and irregular operations and
counterinsurgency and stability operations increase, language and
regional expertise and cultural awareness become key skills needed by
every soldier, marine, sailor, and airman for this century's global and
ever-changing mission.
Through guidance in the roadmap, we have completed self-reported
screening of 83 percent of our military personnel. Over 17,000 of our
members reported language skills in Arabic, Chinese, Farsi, Urdu, Hindi
and Korean. We have provided for increased proficiency by adding 785
training billets for crypto-language analysts in the Army, Navy, and
the Air Force and increasing funding for Defense Language Institute
Foreign Language Center (DLIFLC) to change the graduation standard to
higher proficiency levels. We have developed 26 on-line language
survival courses and provided over 183,000 language survival kits for
deploying units. Our prestigious DLIFLC has scheduled 23 languages
classes for fiscal year 2006 for over 3,000 new students. Special
Operations Command will teach over 1,300 students in 10 different
languages focused on the long war.
The QDR provided $429.7 million through the Future Years Defense
Program for nine initiatives that include technology, training and
education, and recruitment. The QDR targets officer candidates for
foreign language training, with regional and cultural training to be
embedded in follow-on professional military education. It funds the
enhancement of the three Service Academies language training of cadets
and midshipmen in the strategic languages; grants to colleges and
universities with Reserve Officers Training Corps (ROTC) programs to
incentivize teaching of languages of strategic interest to the
Department; increased grants to expand the National Security Education
Program, which provides civilians scholarships and fellowships to
undergraduate and graduate students in critical languages to national
security; and expansion and continuation of the Army's successful 09L
Translator Aide heritage language recruiting program. The QDR also
directed funding for the development of a pilot Civilian Linguist
Reserve Corps; increased foreign language proficiency pay based on
language in the NDAA for Fiscal Year 2005; technology enhancement at
the DLIFLC; pre-deployment training for members prior to deployment;
and centralized accession screening to identify personnel with language
aptitude.
We are very proud is the Army's 09L Translator Aide program. This
pilot program generated over 500 Arabic and Afghani speaking soldiers
in the IRR to support OEF and OIF. Acclaimed by on-the-ground
commanders, 09L is now the Army's newest Military Occupational
Specialty (MOS). Establishment of the MOS allows soldiers to pursue
full careers in the Army, making it more likely they will remain. The
QDR provided $50 million to further expand this program.
We view Foreign Area Officers (FAO) as a key asset for the 21st
century military--providing a unique combination of regional expertise,
political knowledge, languages and military skills. That is why we are
building a more robust FAO program that will form a professional cadre
of military officers with the right skills to support our combatant
commanders. We published a new ``Military Department Foreign Area
Officer Programs'' Directive in April 2005 which provides common
standards for the FAO program across the Services, focusing on
accession, training, utilization, promotion and retention rates. Our
current plan will create an additional 400 officers with languages and
skills critical to the Department's mission.
At the national level, we have worked with other Federal agencies
and were proud to be part of the team for the President's announcement
of the National Security Language Initiative (NSLI). The initiatives
have three broad goals which will expand the number of Americans
mastering critical languages at a younger age, increase the number of
advance-level speakers of foreign languages, and increase the number of
foreign language teachers and their resources. We will support this
initiative through the Civilian Linguist Reserve Corps, which will
develop a cadre of civilian personnel with high levels of language
proficiency in less commonly taught languages, available when needed by
the Nation. We have also expanded the National Security Education
Program by adding additional fellowships and languages which will
produce 2,000 advanced speakers of Arabic, Chinese, Persian, Hindi, and
central Asian languages by 2009. Additionally, in September 2005,
through our National Security Education Program, we launched a pilot K-
16 Chinese program with the University of Oregon. The program is a
major grant to the University of Oregon and Portland Public Schools to
become the National model for the study of Mandarin Chinese. The goal
of the K-16 project is to develop a fully articulated program of
instruction for students that progress from early learning through
advanced proficiency levels in high school to superior levels in
college. This is the first project of its kind in the U.S; the NSLI
proposes to build on this model.
Secretary Rumsfeld's Mishap Reduction Initiative
The Department continues its pursuit of reducing mishaps and
injuries. We have established a 75-percent reduction goal by the end of
fiscal year 2008 from our fiscal year 2002 baseline. Our metrics focus
on civilian and military injuries, aviation mishaps and the number one
non-combat killer: private motor vehicle accidents.
The direct cost of these accidents and injuries is over $3 billion
per year. We believe that the use of technologies to address these
safety issues has a demonstrated cost benefit and increases operational
readiness. Safety technologies include systems and processes. For
example, we are pursuing the Military Flight Operations Quality
Assurance process to reduce aircraft flight mishaps. We are exploring
the use of data recorders and roll-over warning systems as tools to
help drivers avoid wheeled vehicle accidents. Our plan is for all DOD
components to include these and other appropriate safety technologies
as a standard requirement in all future acquisition programs.
Range Sustainment
Training transformation calls for significant advancements in the
joint nature of training and a major change in the way we use our
existing training infrastructure. Continued and assured access to high-
quality test and training ranges and operating areas plays a critically
important role in sustaining force readiness.
However, the DOD finds itself increasingly in competition with a
broad range of interests for a diminishing supply of land, air and sea
space and frequency spectrum that we use to test and train effectively.
Exacerbating the encroachment challenge, the demands of the military
mission are expanding. The increased complexity and integration of
training opportunities necessary to satisfy joint mission requirements,
combined with the increasing testing and training battlespace needs of
new weapons systems and evolving tactics associated with force
transformation, point to a military need for more, rather than less,
range space. The confluence of these competing trends makes it clear
that encroachment remains a powerful challenge to military readiness,
and requires a comprehensive and continuing response.
Through the DOD Range Sustainment Integrated Product Team, the
Department seeks to mitigate encroachment's impacts and to ensure the
long-term sustainability of military readiness and the resources
entrusted to our care. Congressional action on a number of DOD
legislative provisions has provided increased mission flexibility, and
at the same time has enabled improved environment management on our
test and training ranges. The Department is increasingly looking beyond
its fence lines to engage with local, State, regional, and national
stakeholders in order to address concerns and build effective
partnerships that advance range sustainment.
As we move forward, we are emphasizing cooperative approaches to
sustainment, such as the acquisition of buffers from willing sellers
around our ranges, conservation partnering, increased interagency
coordination on cooperative Federal land use, improved sustainment
policy and planning for overseas training with our allies, and more
integrated development of information and decision making tools for
range management. Such thrusts clearly build on our past efforts, and
will emplace enabling capabilities, tools, and processes to support
range sustainment goals well into the future.
the dod civilian force
Human Capital Planning
Department of Defense civilian employees have joined our military
forces and faced significant challenges this past year. They have
supported the global war on terrorism here and on the front-line of
battle, helped build democracies in Afghanistan and Iraq, and responded
with alacrity and compassion to those affected by the tsunami,
hurricanes, and earthquakes around the globe and here at home. Just as
agile military forces are needed to meet a mission characterized by
irregular, catastrophic and disruptive challenges, we need agile and
decisive support from our DOD civilians. 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 great 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
(HCSP). Our 2006-2011 HCSP recognizes the need to refocus civilian
force capabilities for the future--that is a civilian workforce with
the attributes and capabilities to perform in an environment of
uncertainty and surprise, execute with a wartime sense of urgency,
create tailored solutions to multiple complex challenges, build
partnerships, shape choices, and plan rapidly.
Our HCSP is based upon the 2006 QDR. The QDR calls for an updated
integrated human capital strategy for the development of talent that is
more consistent with 21st century demands. As a human capital strategy
it aims to ensure DOD has the right people, doing the right jobs, at
the right time and place, and at the best value. The HCSP is delineated
by a DOD-wide set of human resources goals and objectives that focus on
leadership and knowledge management, workforce capabilities, and a
mission-focused, results-oriented, high-performing workforce. These
goals and objectives incorporate a competency-based occupational system
that reinforce a performance-based management system and provide
enhanced opportunities for personal and professional growth.
The National Security Personnel System (NSPS) provides the
framework for implementation. This modern, flexible, and agile human
resource system enables contemporary responses to meet our national
security mission requirements, while preserving employee protections
and benefits, veterans' preference, as well as the enduring core values
of the civil service.
The Department plans to begin implementing NSPS this spring. 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,
or Spirals. The first phases of NSPS will cover over 11,000 DOD
civilian employees. We anticipate that the labor relations portion of
NSPS will likewise be implemented across the Department this spring,
providing a collaborative, issue-based labor management relations
system that is more responsive to our national security mission while
respecting and preserving collective bargaining.
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's challenge will be attracting and sustaining the right
talent--those who can perform in ambiguous, uncertain environments,
create rapid solutions, perform with a wartime sense of urgency,
develop integrated approaches, and lead multiple complex challenges
with integrity and excellence. Technological advances, contract
oversight, and complex missions have generated the need for more
employees with advanced education and more sophisticated technical
skills. 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.
Last year, the Department launched a campaign to reach out to the
injured and disabled men and women who 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, their spouses, and
managers. To date, 68 servicemembers have been offered positions, of
whom 54 have accepted positions at various DOD and Federal agencies. We
are continuing to work with other Federal agencies, such as, the DOL to
provide job training, counseling, and reemployment services to
seriously injured or wounded veterans.
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, including importantly 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 Servicemembers, 67 percent of
whom are eligible to retire in 2008. Our HCSP calls for the
identification and closing of leadership competency gaps and
strengthening the pipeline to ensure continuity of diverse and capable
leaders. In addition, the Department is updating its civilian human
resources policies for the deployment of civilians in support of
military operations to ensure that DOD civilian employees are able to
contribute to the DOD mission.
The Defense Leadership and Management Program (DLAMP) is the
premier DOD program to develop senior civilian leaders and a key
component of the Department's succession management strategy. DLAMP is
important to DOD readiness, providing a vehicle to mature a diverse
cadre of civilian leaders throughout the Department, 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. With 350 participants who have
met program goals to date and approximately 200 more each year
projected to complete their development programs, DLAMP is providing a
pipeline of well-qualified leaders ready for tomorrow's challenges. We
are currently reviewing the DLAMP curriculum to ensure alignment with a
DOD-wide competency-based leadership development model and best
practices in private and public sector executive development.
The Department has established and fully implemented 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
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. To date the Pipeline program has returned 211 of
employees to productive positions, and saved the Department
approximately $171 million in cost avoidance charges.
Civilian Force Shaping
A number of initiatives are influencing the size and shape of the
Department's civilian workforce. The most significant items are
upcoming Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) actions, global
repositioning of deployed military and civilians, competitive sourcing,
and military-to-civilian conversions. The DOD is committed to provide
comprehensive transition tools and programs that take care of our
employees and families when these changes occur. Since the first BRAC
round in 1988, the Department has reduced the civilian workforce by
more than 400,000, with less than 10 percent of that total separated
involuntarily. To mitigate the impact of these force-shaping
initiatives on our civilians, we have sought and obtained extensions to
several of our transition tools assuring that any drawdown or
reorganizations are handled strategically and to make sure we maintain
and continue to recruit the talent needed to support the Department's
mission.
Employees adversely affected by BRAC may be offered the opportunity
to separate voluntarily under the Voluntary Early Retirement Authority
and the Voluntary Separation Incentive Payment programs. Involuntarily
separated employees are also eligible for a number of post-separation
benefits and entitlements, to include temporary continuation of health
insurance for 18 months with the Department paying the employer portion
of the premium; severance pay, including a lump-sum payment option; and
unemployment compensation.
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 continuing to
establish and foster 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.
the military health system
Sustaining the Military Health Benefit
Department seeks to sustain this important benefit for the future
by rebalancing its fees in a way that will control long-term costs. As
Secretary Rumsfeld and General Pace have testified, it is critically
important to place the health benefit program on a sound fiscal
foundation for the long term. Costs have doubled in 5 years from $19
billion in fiscal year 2001 to $38 billion in fiscal year 2006, despite
management actions to make the system more efficient. Our analysts
project these costs will reach $64 billion by 2015, over 12 percent of
the Department's projected budget (vs. 4.5 percent in 1990). One of the
important factors contributing to this cost spiral is increased usage
among retirees under 65, reflecting our failure to adjust cost-sharing
since the TRICARE program began 11 years ago.
Our proposals to manage cost growth and sustain this valuable
benefit encourage beneficiaries to elect medically appropriate, cost-
effective health care options. Our proposals seek to re-norm
contributions closer to those when TRICARE was established in 1995,
while recognizing differences in the financial circumstances of
officers and enlisted personnel.
Management
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 Military Health System (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
Defense Health Program (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.
During fiscal year 2005, we successfully introduced the TRICARE
Reserve Select program for Reserve component members and their
families. We deployed the Extended Health Care Option (ECHO) which
replaced the Program for Persons with Disabilities and recently revised
policy allows survivors to remain eligible for TRICARE prime during a
3-year transitional survivor period.
AHLTA, an innovative electronic record system, is being implemented
throughout the MHS. Information in AHLTA's one central data repository
can be accessed anytime, anywhere. It represents one of the most
comprehensive technology deployments ever undertaken by any health care
system.
We have begun on the design and development of government
requirements for TRICARE's third generation of contracts (T-3). The
Managed Care Support Contracts are TRICARE's largest and most complex
purchase care contracts. Others include the TRICARE Pharmacy Program,
the TRICARE Dual Eligible Fiscal Intermediary Contract (TDEFIC), the
Active-Duty Dental Contract, the National Quality Monitoring Contract,
and the TRICARE Retiree Dental Contract.
Military medical facilities remain at the core of the MHS, and the
TRICARE structure promotes increased involvement of the military
commanders in determining the optimum approach to health care delivery
within each region. Military commanders' accountability and
responsibility for patient care in their communities is now centered on
sound business planning and resourcing to meet their planned
production.
We now have in place a new TRICARE Regional Governance structure.
The three TRICARE Regional Directors 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.
Force Health Protection
Force Health Protection embraces 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 Department of
Veterans' Affairs (VA).
Since January 2003, environmental health professionals have
analyzed over 4000 theater air, water, and soil samples to ensure that
forces are not unduly exposed to harmful substances during deployments.
These samples were taken at 274 locations in Iraq, 28 locations in
Afghanistan, and from other sites across the world. 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 base our programs
on sound scientific information that independent experts have verified.
Insect repellant impregnated uniforms and prophylactic medications also
protect our servicemembers from endemic diseases during deployments.
Among the many performance measures tracked within the MHS is the
medical readiness status of individual members, both Active and
Reserve. The MHS tracks individual dental health, immunizations,
required laboratory tests, deployment-limiting conditions, service-
specific health assessments, and availability of required individual
medical equipment. 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.
Servicemembers receive pre-deployment health assessments to ensure
they are fit to deploy 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 begun
post-deployment health reassessments, which are conducted 3 to 6 months
after deployment.
Mental health services are available for all servicemembers and
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 because of deployment. Combat stress control and mental health
care are 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 educated and assessed for signs of mental health
issues, including depression and Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD),
and physical health issues. During the post-deployment reassessment we
include additional education and assessment for signs of mental and
physical health issues. The Services began initial implementation of
this program in June 2005 and we are working toward Department-wide
implementation. After returning home, help for any mental health issues
that may arise, including depression and PTSD, is available through the
MHS 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, the Military OneSource Program--a 24/7 referral and
assistance service--is available by telephone and on the Internet.
Medical technology on the battlefield includes expanded
implementation of the Theater Medical Information Program and Joint
Medical Work Station in support of OIF. These capabilities provide a
means for medical units to capture and disseminate electronically 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. With the expanded use of the Web-based Joint Patient
Tracking Application, our medical providers should have total
visibility into the continuum of care across the battlefield, and from
theater to sustaining base. New medical devices introduced to OIF
provide field medics with blood-clotting capability, while light,
modular diagnostic equipment improves the mobility of our medical
forces, and individual protective armor serves to prevent injuries and
save lives.
Pandemic influenza represents a new threat to national security.
With our global footprint and far-reaching capabilities, we are
actively engaged in the Federal interagency effort to help prevent,
detect and respond to the threat of avian influenza, domestically and
internationally. The President's National Strategy for Pandemic
Influenza includes the DOD as an integral component in our Nation's
response to this threat.
DOD-VA 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 for improvement remain. Early in this administration we
formed the DOD-VA Joint Executive Council, which meets quarterly to
coordinate health and benefit actions of the two cabinet departments.
DOD and VA are electronically sharing health information to enhance
the continuity of care for our Nation's veterans. Each month, DOD
transfers electronic patient information on servicemembers who have
recently separated. This data includes laboratory and radiology
results, outpatient pharmacy data, allergy information, consult
reports, discharge summaries, transfer information and patient
demographic information. To date, we have transferred this electronic
health information on more than 3.2 million separated servicemembers to
a central data repository at the VA Austin Automation Center. Over 2
million of these separated servicemembers have presented to VA. We are
in the process of developing solutions for transmitting key inpatient
information and documentation to the VA. 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.
Another important capability is the bidirectional real-time sharing of
allergy information, outpatient prescription and demographic data, and
laboratory and radiology results between DOD and VA for patients being
treated by both DOD and VA. This capability is operational at seven
sites, including the National Capital Area. Deployment to additional
sites is planned in fiscal year 2006. The electronic health information
from each DOD facility that implements this functionality is available
to all VA facilities.
In addition, DOD is now sending electronic pre- and post-deployment
health assessment information to VA. More than 515,000 pre- and post-
deployment health assessments on over 266,000 individuals are available
to VA. This number will continue to grow as assessments on newly
separated servicemembers are sent each month. VA providers began
accessing the data in December 2005. DOD plans to add post-deployment
health reassessment information in fiscal year 2006.
In the past year, DOD and VA have developed and improved a number
of joint planning efforts. For instance, the 2006 Joint Strategic Plan
builds upon successes of the two previous plans. 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 Joint Incentive Fund (JIF) and
Demonstration Site Projects required by sections 721 and 722 of the
NDAA for Fiscal Year 2003, respectively. 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 benefit from continuity of care, DOD
works with the VA's Office of Seamless Transition. In the past year,
DOD and VA completed a Memorandum of Understanding to define protected
health information datasharing activities between DOD and VA. DOD is
now transmitting rosters to VA's Office of Seamless Transition
containing pertinent demographic and clinical information of all
servicemembers who have been recommended for Medical and/or Physical
Evaluation Boards. This enables VA to place its benefits counselors and
social workers in touch with prospective veterans prior to separation
to expedite the delivery of benefits.
DOD has worked closely with VA's Office of Seamless Transition to
ensure that VA is a partner in a new program, the Post-Deployment
Health Reassessment (PDHRA). The PDHRA is a force health protection
process designed to enhance the deployment-related continuum of care.
Targeted at 3 to 6 months post return for a contingency operation, the
PDHRA provides education, screening and a global health assessment to
identify and facilitate access to care for deployment-related physical
and mental health as well as re-adjustment concerns.
In the coming year, the VA/DOD Joint Executive Council will
continue to focus on further improving 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 our families
The Department's Social Compact with troops and families declares
that ``families also serve.'' Today, our troops and families are rising
to the current challenge and responding to unprecedented deployments in
support of the global war on terrorism. We are committed to providing
troops and families with the support and services necessary to balance
the competing demands of military and personal life.
State Liaison Initiation
The Department has recognized the need to collaborate with State
and local governments to effect positive change at the local level.
Through interaction with governors and other State officials, DOD has
prompted action on 10 key quality-of-life issues. With DOD assistance,
the National Governors Association (NGA) developed a survey of state
actions to support Guard and Reserve members and families, which showed
the 50 States are providing over 600 benefits in education, family
support, licensure and certification, tax breaks, and State employment
benefits. In April 2005, the NGA co-hosted a working conference
attended by senior gubernatorial policy advisors from 18 States with
large military populations to discuss best practices relative to the 10
key issues.
Communication
We have instituted an integrated communication strategy to ensure
troops and families have access to reliable information and support
services 24 hours per day/7 days a week. Our communications system is
comprised of a variety of Web sites, linked together by a portal, to
provide information and to connect with troops and families,
particularly those outside the gate, and Guard and Reserve components.
In fiscal year 2005, total contacts with troops and families averaged
3.8 million per month. During the first 3 months of fiscal year 2006,
contacts have increased to over 8 million per month.
The cornerstone of our communications with troops and families is
Military OneSource. Each military service has its own OneSource
identity: Marine Corps Community Services OneSource, Army OneSource,
Navy OneSource and Air Force OneSource. This toll-free information
service is available 24 hours a day, 365 days a year, from anyplace in
the world. Military OneSource has quickly become the trusted source of
information and assistance for our troops and families.
This very high performance capability provides families with
immediate access to professionals trained to listen and assess any
number of situations for the best solution. The telephones are staffed
by Master's level professionals, and questions can be answered in over
120 languages. Case managers can refer troops and families to licensed
counselors if they wish to receive personal assistance. The areas that
receive the most inquiries are deployment-related issues, parenting,
child care, and finances. Military OneSource professionals can also be
accessed via the Internet with researched, tailored answers to each
question. In January 2006, Military OneSource incorporated Turbo Tax
into its arsenal of resources, and to date, nearly 150,000
servicemembers (including Guard and Reserve members) have filed their
2005 taxes online with Turbo Tax at no-cost to them. Troops can even
file while overseas in Iraq, Afghanistan, or anywhere their military
duties take them.
Research has shown that use of the Internet/Web sites is the number
one way troops prefer to get information for themselves and their
families. The sources of information expand so frequently that DOD
needed to launch a quality of life Web portal--
www.MilitaryHomefront.mil, to consolidate all military Web sites and
act as a directory of all quality of life information.
MilitaryHomefront has been in operation less than a year and has
already reached 2 million hits a month.
Another component of communication is telephone service for
personnel in OEF and OIF. U.S. CENTCOM provides two phone services that
enable servicemembers to call anywhere in the world--health, morale,
and welfare calls using official phone lines and unofficial
telecommunications provided by the Armed Services Exchanges. There are
an average of 27,000 health, morale, and welfare calls made each day.
The November 2005 unofficial call volume was nearly 16.4 million
minutes. Servicemembers also have free access to the non-secure
military Internet by using their military e-mail address and free
Internet access through 32 morale, welfare, and recreation (MWR)
operated fixed site Internet cafes and 146 military unit operated
mobile Internet cafes in Iraq.
Expediting Citizenship
On behalf of the non-citizens on Active-Duty, the Department
continues to work closely with the Department of Homeland Security's
(DHS) Citizenship and Immigration Service to expedite citizenship
applications for non-U.S. citizen members of the Armed Forces. Over
27,000 military members have been granted U.S. citizenship through an
expedited process since September 2001. We are working with the DHS and
the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) to streamline the military
member citizenship application process by accessing fingerprints
provided at the time of enlistment versus requiring fingerprints to be
retaken for a citizenship application. The Department has also worked
closely with the Citizenship and Immigration Service to accomplish
naturalization processing for military personnel overseas. Over 1,500
military members have been naturalized at overseas ceremonies conducted
since October 1, 2004; most recently, 249 military members were
naturalized in Iraq and Kuwait in December 2005.
Child Care
The DOD continues to be the model for the Nation on employer
supported child care. A report issued in 2005 on non-monetary benefits
shows child care to be one of the most important benefits we provide to
our servicemembers and families. The Senior Enlisted Advisors testified
last year that child care is the number one quality-of-life issue.
Child care also supports spouse employment as part of a family's
financial readiness. Currently, DOD provides 184,000 spaces--but needs
30,000 more. We appreciate the support from Congress in the fiscal year
2006 appropriation for child care, and will apply the increase to child
care for deployed high personnel tempo installations.
The Department initiated an emergency intervention strategy, funded
with emergency supplemental funding, to address the most pressing child
care needs at locations affected by significant deployments. Many
locations had high post-deployment birth rates, causing a greater need
for infant care. To increase child care spaces, the Department
dedicated over $90 million toward the purchase of modular facilities
and renovations and expansion of current facilities. The intervention
will create 4,077 child care spaces in 35 high personnel tempo
locations. The Army will build 17 centers and the Navy and Marine Corps
will each build 2 centers. The Air Force will add or renovate space at
24 locations.
Further, in fiscal year 2005 the Department used $9 million to
subsidize child care on a temporary basis for deployed Active-Duty and
activated Guard and Reserve families who do not have access to on-base
care. Funding provided extended hours care, subsidies for family child
care providers, Reserve component weekend drill care, and family
support group meetings. Since fiscal year 2003, over 10 million hours
of subsidized child care has been provided to support families affected
by the global war on terrorism.
Casualty Assistance
The Department's longstanding practice is to recover, identify, and
return deceased servicemembers to their families as expeditiously and
respectfully as possible. When a military member dies, our first
concern is to inform the next-of-kin in a manner that is accurate,
timely, and deeply respectful. Casualty assistance is provided until
family members indicate assistance is no longer needed. Our military
personnel assigned to casualty assistance or notification
responsibilities receive appropriate training, and when possible a
servicemember who has prior assistance experience assists first-time
casualty assistance officers.
The Department's casualty program is constantly reviewed and
revised as needed to ensure the most accurate reporting systems are
utilized and the most compassionate and dignified notification and
assistance procedures are provided to the survivors of servicemembers.
Today's complex family structures demanded that we establish a new
procedure that requires all servicemembers to identify the person
authorized to direct disposition of their remains should they be
killed. During the casualty assistance process, family members provide
instructions for their loved one's remains; every possible action is
taken to satisfy the requests and directions of the family. The remains
of the fallen are handled in the most appropriate and respectful manner
possible at each point of the final journey home.
We have established partnerships with non-governmental
organizations to draw on their expertise in responding to the needs of
survivors. This ensures our policies are responsive and are addressing
the needs of our families. The expedited claims process initiated in
partnership with the VA and the Social Security Administration
continues to enhance the delivery of critically needed financial
assistance and service to our families.
Military Severely Injured Center
In February 2005, DOD established the Military Severely Injured
(MSI) Center, a 24/7 call center to assist OEF and OIF severely injured
and their families as they transition through their recovery,
rehabilitation, and reintegration either back into the military or into
the civilian communities. The Center augments the efforts of severely
injured programs of the individual Services (Army Wounded Warrior
Program, Marine-For-Life Injured Support, Air Force Palace HART, and
Navy SAFE HARBOR) in serving these men and women who have sacrificed so
much. The MSI Center team of military personnel and contractors, to
include counselor advocates at hospitals with large numbers of the
severely injured, has made more than 11,000 contacts with severely
injured servicemembers, their families and support resources.
Assistance provided encompasses advocacy for rehabilitation, education
and training, job placement, accommodations, coordination of air
travel, personal and family counseling, and financial resources.
To assist in this effort, the MSI Center has as part of its full-
time staff representatives from three Federal agencies: DOL, the VA,
and the DHS's Transportation Security Administration (TSA). With these
key partnerships, the Center can facilitate resolution of the issues
important to the severely injured: Labor assists in finding employment
for the severely injured and in some cases, the spouses and parents;
the VA helps with health and benefits related issues; and TSA helps
troops travel through security checkpoints at airports. The Department
is also committed to linking severely injured members and their
families with local, State, and national level groups to ensure that
their continuing needs are provided for.
We thank Congress for its support for the administration's
Traumatic Servicemember's Group Life Insurance (TSGLI) legislation
which is now providing our severely injured from OIF and OEF with lump
sum payments ranging from $25,000 to $100,000, depending on the
injuries sustained. While no amount of money will ever compensate for a
loss, the TSGLI payments are certainly appreciated by the members and
their families, and are assisting with the challenges they face as they
progress through recovery, rehabilitation, and long-term reintegration.
Transition Assistance Program
In partnership with the DOL and the VA, our transition assistance
program helps separating, retiring, and deactivating servicemembers and
their families, from both Active and Reserve components, make smooth
and successful transitions to civilian life. Upon separation or
demobilization, servicemembers are provided information on employment,
relocation, education and training, health and life insurance, finances
and other veterans' benefits. We established an Interagency Working
Group to focus on the improvement of transition assistance. To respond
to the needs of the Guard and Reserve members, DOD is working to retool
the Transition Assistance Program (TAP) and bring it into the 21st
century. The vision, entitled ``Just in Time Transition Assistance,''
is to make TAP a Web-based accessible program, available whenever the
member may need it.
The DOL, in collaboration with DOD, recently launched a new ``Key
to Career Success Campaign'' focused on career guidance, job search,
skills training, child care, and transportation services available at
the local DOL One-Stop Career Centers. Additionally, the VA and the
National Guard Bureau signed a Memorandum of Understanding to locate
additional opportunities to provide veterans benefits information to
members of the Guard and other military personnel.
Voluntary Education
We are proud to continue our commitment to our Voluntary Education
Program, the largest continuing education program in the world--each
year over 420,000 servicemembers enroll in postsecondary education. In
fiscal year 2003, we began uniformly funding 100 percent tuition
assistance across the Services, up to $250 per semester hour of credit
and $4,500 per year. This past year 789,000 enrollments were funded and
well over 35,000 diplomas and degrees were completed. In the coming
year, we plan to place even more emphasis on our voluntary education
benefits, including working with major book distributors to reduce
expenditures of the cost of books and providing personal, one-on-one
education counseling for our severely injured personnel.
Financial Readiness
Equipping servicemembers with the tools and resources they need to
make sound financial decisions is integral to both military readiness
and the strength and stability of our servicemembers and their
families. The Department has partnered with over 26 Federal agencies
and nonprofit organizations to increase awareness and education of
servicemembers and their families. For example, the InCharge Institute,
in collaboration with the National Military Family Association,
distributes 250,000 copies of Military Money Magazine quarterly to
military spouses through commissaries and direct distribution. The
Financial Literacy and Education Commission ``mymoney.gov'' Web site
has linked the resources of 20 Federal agencies to DOD and Service
quality-of-life Web sites. Additionally, the National Association of
Securities Dealers has developed a $6.8 million multi-year personal
finance education program focused on training troops and families on
the importance of saving money.
However, unscrupulous insurance and financial product solicitors
continue to prey on our troops. Over the past 18 months we have
included predatory lending, in particular payday lending, as one of our
key issues which we have addressed with governors and state legislators
to make them aware of the impact of their statutes on the quality-of-
life of servicemembers and their families. We are collaborating with
consumer advocate organizations who have pledged their assistance, some
of whom have agreed to assist installations in defining the prevalence
of predatory lending activities. We appreciate the support of Congress
in providing additional protections to servicemembers and their
families with regards to the sale of insurance and certain investment
products.
Spousal Careers and Education
The majority of military spouses continue to work outside of the
home in order to stay current in their career of choice and supplement
the family income. The Department is committed to helping military
spouses pursue rewarding careers and to remove barriers to career
advancement. Significant progress has occurred in the last 2 years.
Employers have been made aware of the value of hiring military spouses
and we have greatly increased our efforts at the State level where
licensing and certification requirements differ from State to State. We
have identified a range of popular spouse careers that have state-
specific licensing requirements and have designed strategies to address
them, initially focusing on teaching and real-estate. To offer more
scholarships, grants, and reduced tuition for servicemembers' spouses,
we are working closely with colleges and universities.
In order to raise employer awareness, we partnered with
military.com, a division of Monster, Inc. to create a military spouse
career network Web site portal: www.military.com/spouse. At this site,
spouses can post their resumes, search both private sector and Federal
jobs (USAJOBS) simultaneously and they can search them by using
installation names. Over 60 spouse-friendly employers are actively
recruiting military spouses for their vacant positions; these
organizations can post jobs at no cost and may search this exclusive
database for military spouse candidates. In the 9 months since this
site was launched, over 800,000 spouses have visited the site; over
500,00 have signed up for the newsletter, over 400,000 have visited the
chat rooms and over 1.5 million job searches have been conducted. In
recent months, DOD has co-sponsored specialty career fairs that focus
employers on severely injured servicemembers and military spouses.
To assist military spouses to find employment and careers the
Department's partnership with the DOL was expanded to include a Web
site (www.milspouse.org). This site assists spouses with resume
development, locating careers and identifying available training.
During this past year, the DOL was able to include military spouses
under the definition of dislocated workers. This increases the
benefits, such as training, available to them and also ensures they get
assistance in finding new employment.
Military Children's Education
The Department recognizes that quality education for their children
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).
Our DOD schools have high expectations for the 91,300 students
enrolled in our 220 schools located in 13 countries, 7 States, and 2
territories. The worldwide Department of Defense Schools system serves
as a model education system for the Nation and is critical to the
quality-of-life for servicemembers and families. DOD students are among
the highest performing in the Nation as measured by norm-reference
assessments like the TerraNova and the National Assessment of Education
Progress. DOD schools are also leading the Nation in closing the
achievement gap between white and non-white students.
Our schools work aggressively to resolve transition issues as more
than 30 percent of the student body transitions each year. The
Department recently entered into a formal memorandum of understanding
to promote cooperative efforts between the DOD and the U.S. Department
of Education to address the quality of education and the unique
challenges of children of military families who move from one education
system to another. We are working 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 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, Web site information and program
development for students of deployed families, their parents and
teachers. All publications are on a special Web site 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.
Youth and Family Support
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 development 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.
Boys and 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 the 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.
For the youngest children of parents deployed, our ``Read to the
Kids'' program was developed in partnership with the Army Library
program and the Army Arts and Crafts program manager. The project films
individual soldiers reading a children's book to their children while
deployed or during pre-deployment. The books used in the program will
be available in the base libraries for the child to take home and read
along with the deployed parent.
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. Thanks to the National Guard Bureau,
over 400 family assistance centers provide outreach to Guard and
Reserve families who are not located near an installation. Unit Family
Readiness Groups, staffed by volunteers, actively maintain
communication with families in outlying areas through newsletters, Web
sites, and direct communication to enhance unit-to-family communication
Young families, although resourceful and resilient, occasionally
need guidance and support to help them over life's rough spots. The
Department's non-medical counseling program helps these families by
providing civilian counselors in the military family's community, at no
cost to troops or families. The goal of this program is to deliver
short-term assistance on everyday issues and problems, such as raising
children when the member is deployed, managing finances, and preparing
for deployment and reunion. Counseling is offered in a variety of
settings to individuals, families and couples, and groups. Using
civilian counselors is an important aspect of this program, because
research has shown that military members and their families prefer the
privacy thus provided.
Domestic Violence
We have strengthened our response to domestic violence. We have
adopted a restricted reporting policy for incidents of domestic abuse--
this new policy offers the option of confidentiality to victims. In the
military community, a victim is usually concerned that reporting will
have immediate repercussions on the military career of the family-
member offender, and thus affect the family's financial welfare. Our
new system affords victims access to medical and victim advocacy
services without immediate command or law enforcement involvement and
encourages victims to feel more comfortable and safe about reporting
domestic abuse.
I am pleased to report that we have initiated implementation of 121
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, we conducted eight domestic violence training
conferences, five of which were offered to joint gatherings of
commanding officers, Judge Advocates, and law enforcement personnel.
These conferences addressed each groups' responsibilities in responding
to domestic violence in accordance with new domestic violence policies
issued by the Department.
In partnership with the Office on Violence Against Women of the
Department of Justice, we have continued several joint initiatives,
including training for law enforcement professionals, victim advocates,
chaplains, and fatality review team members. Additionally, we are
conducting domestic violence coordinated community response
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.
In partnership with the National Domestic Violence Hotline, we
developed and launched a public awareness campaign to increase
awareness of the Hotline as a resource for victims and their families.
Finally, a central victim advocacy program provides access to on-call
victim advocates and shelters to assist victims of domestic violence.
Exchanges and Commissaries
All three of the exchange systems are modernizing their policies
and practices. Force repositioning, BRAC, and the global war on
terrorism, with its attendant increased costs to provide the exchange
benefit, will continue to challenge exchange profitability. We are
currently reviewing options to save on costs through consolidation of
backroom functions. The DOD Executive Resale Board is providing
oversight of exchange operations and revenues.
To directly support troops in the OIF and OEF theaters, there are
40 Tactical Field Exchanges, 60 exchange supported/unit run field
exchanges, and an average of 15 ships' stores 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 missions requirements.
Commissaries now have `gift' food packs that can be forwarded to
troops.
The Department's commissary is a critical quality-of-life component
for members of the Active-Duty and Reserve Forces and their families.
The Department's strategy remains to sustain the value of the
commissary benefit without increasing--indeed, preferably reducing--its
cost. The Defense Commissary Agency's (DeCA) re-engineering efforts are
aimed at reducing overhead by centralizing support and streamlining
store operations. Although in the early states of re-engineering, DeCA
has demonstrated success. DeCA's strong stewardship of taxpayer dollars
has also been demonstrated by the fourth consecutive unqualified audit
opinion of its financial records. DeCA's sales remain strong with solid
growth over the last 2 years. This demonstrated vote of confidence by
military families is confirmed by both the internal and external
customer satisfaction scores awarded to DeCA.
Morale, Welfare, and Recreation
MWR programs support the servicemembers and families at the
homestation and while the servicemembers are deployed. Fitness centers
consistently rank as the most popular MWR program and improving fitness
programs, to include upgrading and modernizing fitness facilities, is a
high priority within the Department. The military services operate 478
fitness centers worldwide.
Computers and Internet service at home station libraries, youth
centers, and Internet cafes provide for access to world events and
ensure families can send and receive e-mails to and from their loved
ones who are deployed. Additional recreational and social activities
include sports, motion pictures, continuing education support, board
games, large screen televisions, DVD/CD players, video games and game
CDs. MWR programs are designed to support all phases of deployment; the
Army's ``Battlemind'' program is noteworthy for engaging personnel in
high adventure activities to address the high adrenalin of the
returning warriors.
MWR libraries are very important component in the education and
advancement of today's servicemembers. Paperback book kits are an
essential part of MWR during combat situations. On ships, Library
Multimedia Resource Centers provide a much needed communication vehicle
for those back home. This support in the areas of operation provides a
means of mental escape from the rigors of being deployed in a hostile
environment.
The Department has a responsibility to provide morale enhancing
entertainment for troops and families assigned overseas. Nowhere is
this support more important than in the austere locations where
servicemembers are performing duty in support of the global war on
terrorism. Armed Forces Entertainment (AFE), in cooperation with the
United Service Organization, continues to provide much welcomed
entertainment to our forces, both overseas and on military installation
in the United States. In 2005, AFE provided 136 tours with 1,268 shows
at 370 sites overseas. From 2002 through 2005, the Robert and Nina
Rosenthal Foundation has worked closely with the Country Music industry
to provide 62 celebrity entertainment shows at military installations
at no cost to military personnel and their families. The Spirit of
America Tour provides a brief reprieve from the stresses of
deployments. Performers have given generously of their time and
talents.
BRAC and Rebasing
Our most recent challenge is to ensure quality-of-life support is
realigned to coincide with the movement of troops and families during
BRAC and rebasing. Once BRAC/rebasing decisions were announced,
commanders began working with local communities to lay out timelines.
We are taking a proactive approach to ensure quality-of-life for our
troops and families is being planned as they move to new communities.
Twenty-five installations are gaining more than 500 Active-Duty members
in 16 States. We estimate BRAC and rebasing will affect more than
77,000 Active-Duty members, more than 40,000 military spouses and over
78,000 minor children. Currently, two thirds of families live outside
the gates and service policies are allowing E-4 and above more choice
to live off base. Our plan is to partner with community based service
agencies to serve large numbers of our military servicemembers and
their families. Community partnerships will need to be increased to
deliver support such as child care, fitness opportunities, youth
services, and other family services.
conclusion
Mr. Chairman, 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.
We established our survey program to listen to our military and
civilian personnel. We believe they are telling us that we have a
stable, satisfied, and committed Total Force.
Four-fifths of Active-Duty members believe they are personally
prepared, and two-thirds believe their unit is prepared, for their
wartime jobs. These views have held steady from the start of OIF (March
2003) through the latest survey (December 2005). The top concerns of
those currently deployed are problems their spouses are facing back
home, the ability to communicate with their families, and the
possibility of experiencing emotional issues as a result of deployment.
Today I have reviewed many of the programs that address these specific
issues, and we are fielding special surveys to spouses so we can fully
understand the impact of deployments on the family.
In April 2004, 14 percent of our servicemembers indicated they were
having problems ``making ends meet'' or ``being in over their head,''
while only 9 percent indicated this in a March 2005 survey. Overall,
more than three-fifths of members reported being financially
comfortable in March 2005, up 10 percentage points from results in the
previous year.
Reserve retention intentions are currently at 67 percent--up three
percentage points between June and December 2005. We also have seen
increased perceptions of personal and unit readiness, and a reduction
in reports of stress. Through the survey program, we have identified
the factors affecting reservists' continuation decisions--and pay and
allowances top that list. With your help, we have taken actions to
improve Reserve pay incentives and medical and dental benefits. Seventy
percent of members indicated TRICARE medical and dental coverage was
better or comparable to their civilian plans--food for thought as we
consider how to sustain the military health program. The June 2005
survey results show that approximately two-thirds of members say they
have not been away longer than expected. In addition, over three-
fourths of members indicate their Reserve duty has been what they
expected--or better than they expected--when first entering the
Reserves.
Although we have challenges ahead managing our civilian workforce--
assimilating them into jobs previously performed by the military,
implementing a new personnel system, and managing the exodus of
retiring personnel--the outlook is very encouraging. Since we began
surveying civilians in the fall of 2003, we have learned that large
majorities are satisfied, and their satisfaction levels on a number of
indicators are rising. Two-thirds are satisfied with their overall
quality-of-work life, the quality of their co-workers and supervisors.
Ninety percent consistently report they are prepared to perform their
duties in support of their organization's mission, and over half are
satisfied with management and leadership.
In conclusion, we continue to have a dynamic, energetic, adaptable
All-Volunteer Total Force. The force is increasingly joint and,
increasingly ready for new challenges. I look forward to working with
you this year to provide the means by which we can sustain this
success.
Senator Graham. Thank you very much.
Let's just go to the theme of military compensation. Do you
think that there is a pay gap between military salaries for
enlisted personnel and the private sector? Is the 2.2 percent
raise sufficient, in your view, to bridge the gap or maintain
parity?
Secretary Chu. The short answer is, no, we do not think
there is a gap, in the sense that perhaps some might mean it.
Our standard is actually a little bit different. We have to be
competitive. We have to be successful in attracting the talent
we need, and retaining that talent over time.
Against that standard, we do believe that the 2.2 percent
proposed increase is appropriate. But we also believe that we
need somewhat more for the NCO corps, and that, with that
additional increase, we think we'll be in the right competitive
position.
We intend to propose an extension of the pay table, as
well, to 40 years of service. We need to encourage some people
to stay longer, and we need to recognize that longer service
with some degree of additional pay increase. We look forward to
transmitting that to you for your consideration at the earliest
possible date.
Senator Graham. I think that's a very clever thing to do
now, to adopt some private sector programs, in terms of giving
pay raises to particular specialties. How does that work? How
is that being received by the troops in the field?
Secretary Chu. I would defer to my colleagues. I think it
has been very important in achieving the high degree of
retention in the career force that we have enjoyed the last
several years. I think it also has an extraordinary effect on
morale. It signals, particularly to the NCO force, that we
recognize their contribution to the outcomes that our military
forces are enjoying.
General Hagenbeck, do you want to say a word?
General Hagenbeck. Yes sir, I would echo that.
Senator Graham. Give me an example of how it would work.
General Hagenbeck. Sir, it would be keeping them beyond
their eligible retirement date. Our retention has exceeded all
expectations for the last 6 years, and we're on a glide path
now to exceed even last year's, which saw historic highs. So,
we're going after 64,200. We have over 31,000 on Active-Duty
that have already re-enlisted this fiscal year. That's been a
function, of course, of both the incentives and the bonuses
that have been available to them. What they always have to
weigh is what their base pay is, which is applied against the
retirement compensation. That would be an additional incentive
to keep those combat-experienced and veteran NCOs in our force.
Senator Graham. Do you think the stop-loss utilization is
going to go down?
General Hagenbeck. Sir, I could address that. It will
always wax and wane. It's really a function of team building.
We have about 15,000 across the force now that are deployed on
stop-loss. About 8,000 or so, on average, of Active-Duty. The
delta is with our Reserve and Guard. So, as our footprint
shrinks, as it is now in Iraq with the National Guard, for
instance, the numbers in stop-loss will go down. But in out
years, if there's continued mobilization, it will tend to go
back and forth.
Senator Graham. Is there any period in service where we're
having a harder time retaining people, like the 10-year mark or
the 8-year mark?
General Hagenbeck. It's always a challenge. We've been
doing very well. When we talk about the first-termers, mid-
career, and then career soldiers, the mid-grades are the ones
that we always have to take a close look at. Certainly in our
Reserves, we're paying a lot of attention to that.
Secretary Chu. That is one of the reasons, Mr. Chairman,
that we are seeking this additional increase for the NCO corps,
to give them that added motivation to stay with us.
Senator Graham. On the recruiting front, how is that going?
Secretary Chu. I think we should all be pleased at the
efforts that have been made, and the success enjoyed, on the
recruiting front. The Army had troubles toward the middle of
fiscal year 2005, and, as a result, did not makes its Active-
Duty nor its National Guard or Reserve recruiting targets. I'm
pleased that, in the first months of the current fiscal year,
all Services on the Active front have made their recruiting
targets. The Army Guard is also making its recruiting targets.
Senator Graham. What would you say contributes to the
change?
Secretary Chu. I think there are three elements out there,
sir.
First, all Services, particularly the Army and the Army
Guard, have put a lot more energy into the recruiting, and have
put more recruiters out there. That's crucial. This is an All-
Recruited Force, my colleagues are right about that point.
Second, the large set of incentives that this committee has
given the Department has been very important. Those tools are
out there. They were given to us in a series of actions over
the last 2 years. They are being employed. They are working.
They are very helpful.
Third, I think the leadership of everyone in pointing to
military service as an excellent choice for young people is
crucial to reinforcing what we see from our polls that it is
their natural inclination to consider military service. We need
to continue to emphasize the value of that service, and that
we, as older adults, see it as valuable, and that they're
making a good choice.
Senator Graham. I have one last remark, and then we'll let
Senator Nelson make his opening statement and ask questions.
The number of people getting off Active-Duty going into the
Guard and Reserve had a dramatic drop. Has that turned around
at all? How is minority recruiting going?
General Hagenbeck. Sir, with regard to Active-Duty going to
the Guard and Reserves, with some of the incentives that
Congress has provided, we think that's turned around. It's not
to the level that we would like right now. The other side of
that equation is that we're encouraging them to stay on Active-
Duty, as well. There's a dynamic there that sometimes works
against each other. But we're seeing more of that right now.
We're keeping an eye on it.
Senator Graham. Senator Nelson?
STATEMENT OF SENATOR E. BENJAMIN NELSON
Senator Ben Nelson. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I apologize
for being delayed this morning.
I want to, first, Mr. Chairman, thank you for setting this
hearing today. It's a privilege to serve with you. You've
always graciously included me in the decisions of the
subcommittee, and we've worked together, and will continue to
do so, to significantly improve the quality-of-life for our
servicemembers and their families.
I also want to thank the witnesses for being here today,
but, more importantly, for what you do to improve and continue
to help develop additional efforts to improve recruitment,
retention, and to develop what's necessary to maintain and
manage our forces. I believe we are going to continue to have
an All-Volunteer Force, and we should. It's being tested for a
prolonged engagement at the present time, and I think we can
all conclude that, overall, it's working well. Obviously, we
have some challenges that are before us. The stress that is
felt by the force is affecting reenlistment. In some cases,
reenlistment figures are at record highs, in spite of the high
operational tempo. We hope that will continue.
Our National Guard and Reserve Forces have responded
magnificently on every occasion, demonstrating the quality of
our Total Force. Of course, now is the time to assess our
personnel policies and authorities to ensure that we have the
right programs in place to recruit and retain. That's why it's
important to have you here today, to help us understand whether
or not that's the case. It's too easy, in an office, to sit
down and decide what kinds of incentives we ought to have. It's
very different to test them out and find out whether or not
they work. Obviously, we're only interested in having things
that work, but, unfortunately, we have to come up with the
ideas before we can even test them.
So, now, the Army--and, to some extent, the Marine Corps--
is seeking innovative tools for recruiting and retaining the
right people as they are challenged to meet their authorized
end strengths. At the same time, the Air Force and the Navy
need force-shaping tools to allow them to make rather
substantial reductions to their end strength, but in a very
smart way that keeps the servicemembers with these skills and
training experience that they need in the post-Cold War era. We
need to work together to find ways to invigorate underused
force-shaping tools, such as the Blue-to-Green Program, perhaps
by tying that program's effectiveness to other force-shaping
programs to incentivize the Services to work together to
increase the number of Navy and Air Force personnel who
participate in Blue-to-Green. We need to continue to do that. I
know that adding Federal civilian employees and contractor
personnel can help with that, to some degree.
This year we also face important decisions about sustaining
health care benefits for our servicemembers and retirees, as
well as their family members, and we need to work on the
Terrorism Risk Insurance Act (TRIA). I appreciate having had
the opportunity to visit with Secretary Chu on this previously.
Obviously, the cost of providing benefits continues to rise in
this field, as in every field. The question is, at what rate
can we pass that cost back to retirees? We need to find a way
to do that that's not only appropriate, but is also fully
protective of budgets at home. While increases may not be as
large for enlisted as for retired officers' nevertheless, a
sudden impact on a budget for a retired person is not something
to be ignored.
Mr. Chairman, I appreciate this opportunity so much, and
I'm anxious to hear from our witnesses on the many questions
we're all going to have and try to find a way to make that all
work.
Senator Graham. Thank you very much, Senator. I've enjoyed
working with you. It's been a real pleasure.
It's now time to hear from the Services. I'm sorry I didn't
allow that to happen at first. I apologize.
General Hagenbeck.
STATEMENT OF LTG FRANKLIN L. HAGENBECK, USA, DEPUTY CHIEF OF
STAFF FOR PERSONNEL, UNITED STATES ARMY
General Hagenbeck. Senator Graham and Senator Nelson, thank
you for the opportunity to come before you today on behalf of
America's Army.
The United States Army is grateful for all the legislation
passed recently that improved incentives and bonuses,
attracting and retaining the very best soldiers. We're
competing in a very tough recruiting market within an improving
economy. These recent legislative changes will truly assist the
Army to continue the successes of the All-Volunteer Force.
With regard to the short time that we have now, I'll
suspend any further statements. I've submitted a written
statement for the record.
Please let me thank you again for all the support that
you've given in the past, and we look forward to your continued
support here in the coming months and over the fiscal year.
Thank you, sir.
[The prepared statement of General Hagenbeck follows:]
Prepared Statement by LTG Franklin L. Hagenbeck, USA
Senator Graham, Senator Nelson, distinguished members of the
subcommittee, thank you for providing me opportunity to appear before
you today on behalf of America's Army. The United States Army is
grateful to this committee for all legislation passed recently that
improved incentives and bonuses for attracting and retaining the very
best soldiers. We are competing in a very tough market within a robust
economy and these recent legislative enactments will assist the Army to
continue to grow and maintain the All-Volunteer Force. With your
support now and in the future, our Army will meet the needs of the
Nation and continue to fight the global war on terror. These soldiers
continue to make history and demonstrate to America that this Army is
unparalleled. This generation shows for the first time in our history
that the All-Volunteer Force can be called upon to face a prolonged
conflict and persevere. Creating the right composition of this All-
Volunteer Army is our challenge. With your assistance we will achieve
the right mix of incentives to compensate, educate, and keep the Army
properly manned with the best and brightest our Nation has to offer.
As the Army transforms, the soldier remains the centerpiece in all
that the Army is now and aspires to achieve. The responsibility is ours
to provide these soldiers as relevant and ready land forces to the
combatant commanders to meet mission accomplishment, now and in the
future. As I speak to you today, more than 600,000 soldiers are serving
on Active-Duty. Currently we have more than 245,000 soldiers, Active,
Guard, and Reserve deployed or forward stationed overseas and another
13,000 securing the homeland. Soldiers from every State and territory .
. . soldiers from every corner of this country . . . serving the people
of the United States with incredible honor and distinction. Soldiers
participate in homeland security activities and support civil
authorities on a variety of different missions within the United
States. This past year showed an unprecedented reliance on the Army
National Guard and Reserve Forces both here and abroad in reaction to
natural disasters and to the continued fight in the global war on
terrorism. As the regular Army rotated out of theater to re-set as a
modular force for continued operations in the global war on terrorism,
the Reserve component stepped up to the mission. We are truly one Army
with Active and Reserve Forces working the same mission in concert and
with great successes. Additionally, a large Army civilian workforce
(over 240,000), 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 remain fully
engaged around the world and 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 will fight and win on the battlefield is
critical to the success of our mission. These soldiers must be
confident, adaptive, and competent; able to handle the full complexity
of 21st century warfare in our current combined, joint, expeditionary
environment. They are the warriors of the 21st century. However,
recruiting these qualified young men and women is extremely challenging
in the highly competitive environment. The head to head competition
with industry, an improving economy, lower unemployment, decreased
support from key influencers, the media and the continuing global war
on terrorism present significant challenges.
Currently we are meeting our recruiting missions. The Active
component finished January 2006 at 103 percent accomplished with a
year-to-date achievement of 104 percent. The United States Army Reserve
finished January 2006 at 103 percent accomplished with a year to date
achievement of 114 percent. The National Guard finished January 2006 at
113 percent accomplished with a year to date achievement of 109
percent. All components are projecting successful annual missions for
fiscal year 2006. Bear in mind, there is still two-thirds of the
mission remaining. Much work remains to be done but the assistance from
Congress and the current efforts of the recruiting force are cause for
optimism. It is a challenge that we must meet.
incentives and enlistment bonuses
The Army must maintain a competitive advantage to remain successful
in attracting high quality applicants. Bonuses are the primary and most
effective competitive advantage for the Army. These incentives are
instrumental in filling critical Military Occupation Specialties.
Enacted legislation last year has assisted the Army in this effort
by increasing the cap on bonuses from $20,000 to $40,000. ($10,000 to
$20,000 for Reserves) These bonuses are designed to attract the special
needs of the Army and our applicants. These bonuses help us to compete
against current market conditions now and in the future. The bonuses
enable us to target critical skills in an increasingly college oriented
market and meet seasonal (``quick-ship'') priorities.
The Army's recruiting program is most effective when equipped with
the right mix of incentives and bonuses. 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 66 percent of the
high school market attending college within 1 year of graduation. The
Army College Fund allows recruits to both serve their country and earn
additional money for college.
The Loan Repayment Program, with a maximum of $65,000 payment for
already accrued college expenses, is another expander of the high-
quality market. This Loan Repayment Program is the best tool for those
who have college education credits and student loans. In fiscal year
2005, 28 percent of our recruits had some college education credits.
Other recently passed legislation we expect to assist in our
recruiting mission includes the increase of enlistment age, the $1,000
referral bonus (Pilot ends December 31, 2007), the expanded Student
Loan Repayment Program to include officers, and the Temporary
Recruiting Incentives Authority. Collectively these will directly
assist the Army in achieving the fiscal year 2006 mission and build the
entry pool for fiscal year 2007. The reality is that given the
competition with industry, an improving economy, decreased support from
key influencers and continuing deployments to wage the global war on
terrorism, we need your continued support for the additional resources
to maintain the All-Volunteer Army.
enlisted retention
The Active Army has achieved all retention goals for the past 6
years, a result that can be directly attributed to the Army's Selective
Reenlistment Bonus (SRB) program and the motivation of our soldiers to
accept their ``Call to Duty.'' The Active Army retained 69,512 soldiers
in fiscal year 2005, finishing the year 108 percent of mission. The
Army Reserve finished the year 102 percent of mission and the Army
National Guard finished at 104 percent of mission.
In fiscal year 2006, the Active Army must retain approximately
64,200 soldiers to achieve the desired manning levels. This year's
mission is similar in size to last year 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 107
percent of the year-to-date mission, while the Army Reserve has
achieved 96 percent of the year-to-date mission and the Army National
Guard has achieved 103 percent of their year-to-date mission. A robust
bonus program facilitates meeting Army retention goals.
We continue to review our Reenlistment Bonus Programs and their
impacts on retaining 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 a deployed reenlistment bonus as a tool to
attract and retain quality soldiers with combat experience. This bonus
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.
Worldwide deployments and an improving economy 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 the retention program. Ultimately, we expect to
achieve fiscal year 2006 retention success in the active Army, the Army
National Guard, and the United States Army Reserve.
officer retention
The Army is retaining roughly 92 percent of our company grade
officers. Company grade loss rates (lieutenant and captain) for fiscal
year 2005 were 8.55 percent, slightly below the historical Army average
of 8.64 percent (fiscal years 1996-2004). First quarter, fiscal year
2006 company grade loss rates were 8.4 percent. Immediately following
September 11, 2001, company grade loss rates were at historical lows:
7.08 percent and 6.29 percent respectively. The 3 years prior to
September 11, 2001, company grade loss rates averaged 9.8 percent.
Officer retention has taken on renewed interest not because of an
increase in officer loss rates, but because of a significant force
structure growth and modularity. The Army is short roughly 3,500 Active
component officers, most of which are senior captains and majors. While
the overall company grade loss rates are not alarming, the Army is
being proactive and is working several initiatives to retain more of
our best and brightest officers. These initiatives include higher
promotion rates for captains and majors. The Army is currently
promoting qualified officers above the Defense Officer Personnel
Management Act promotion goals. These initiatives also include earlier
promotion pin-on points. The Army is promoting officers sooner than
historical averages in order to fill the expanding captain and major
authorizations. Promotion to captain averages 38 months time-in-
service, against the historical average of 42 months. Another
initiative we are utilizing is expanding graduate school opportunities.
The Army is offering up to an additional 200 fully funded graduate
school opportunities to high performing company grade officers. These
officers will begin attending school in the summer of 2006. This is
above the normal 412 officers the Army currently sends to school.
Branch and Posting for Active Service is another program that offers
United States Military Academy and Reserve Officer Training Corps
cadets their first choice for branch or assignment in exchange of 3
additional years of Active-Duty service. To date, over 800 officers
have signed up for these programs. Officer loss rates are consistent
with historical trends; however, in order to fill the growth of officer
modularity structure, we must retain more of our officers. We are
confident that we can achieve this through these officer retention
initiatives.
stop-loss
The focus of Army deployments is on trained and ready units. Stop-
loss is a management tool that effectively sustains a force that has
trained together, to remain a cohesive element throughout its
deployment. Losses caused by non-casualty oriented separations,
retirements, and reassignments have the potential to adversely impact
training, cohesion, and stability in Operation Iraqi Freedom (OIF),
Operation Enduring Freedom (OEF), and Operation Nobel Eagle (ONE)
deploying units. The commitment to pursue the global war on terrorism
requires us to provide our combatant commanders with cohesive, trained,
and ready forces necessary that will decisively defeat the enemy. This
effort requires us to continue the following two stop-loss programs,
the first of which is Active Army Unit stop-loss. This applies to all
Regular Army soldiers assigned units alerted or participating in OIF
and OEF. The second program is the Reserve component unit stop-loss
which is applicable to all Ready Reserve soldiers who are members of
Army National Guard or United States Army Reserve who are assigned to
Reserve component units alerted or mobilized for participation in ONE,
OEF, and OIF.
There is not a specific end date for the current use of stop-loss.
The size of future troop rotations will in large measure determine the
levels of stop-loss needed in the future. Initiatives such as Force
Stabilization (3-year life cycle managed units), Modularity, and the
program to rebalance/restructure the Active component/Reserve component
for mix should alleviate much stress on the force and will help
mitigate stop-loss in the future.
The number of soldiers affected by stop-loss will decrease as the
Army moves towards more lifecycle manned units, reduced deployment
requirements and a smaller overseas footprint. For the National Guard
and Reserve, unit stop-loss will still occur--at a reduced level--
during periods of mobilization due to limited control for distributing
personnel resulting from community based manning. The Army intends to
terminate stop-loss as soon as operationally feasible or upon
determination that it is no longer needed.
As of the end of the month of December 2005 stop-loss potentially
affected a total of 12,467 soldiers from all components (Active Army,
7,620; Army National Guard, 2,429; and United States Army Reserve,
2,418).
individual ready reserve mobilization
The mission of the Individual Ready Reserve (IRR) is to provide a
pool of soldiers who are ``individually ready'' for call-up. In August
of 2004, the Army began its most current IRR mobilization effort. As of
February 2006, over 5,347 IRR soldiers have served on Active-Duty in
support of current operations. The IRR has been used primarily to fill
deploying Reserve component forces supporting OIF and OEF and to fill
individual augmentation requirements in joint organizations supporting
combatant commanders.
The IRR has improved the readiness of deploying Reserve component
units and has reduced required cross-leveling from other Reserve
component units, which allows us to preserve units for future
operations. Currently there are over 2,200 IRR soldiers filling
positions in deployed units, with approximately 500 more in the
training process who will link up with their units by the end of March
2006. Approximately 87 percent of the soldiers scheduled to report to
Active-Duty through February 2006 reported for duty. We continue to
work with the remaining 13 percent to resolve issues that may have
precluded them from reporting.
The IRR has also contributed to the manning of joint headquarters
elements such as the Multi-National Force-Iraq, Combined Forces
Command-Afghanistan, and others; which allows the Army to balance the
contributions of the active and Reserve components in these
headquarters. Over 365 IRR soldiers have served in individual
augmentation positions. Another 143 IRR soldiers have served in a
special linguist program to support commanders on the ground in the
Central Command (CENTCOM) area of operations.
The Army plans to continue use of the IRR and has developed a
transformation plan to reset and reinvigorate the IRR. Previously a
large number of the IRR were either unaware of their service
obligations or not qualified to perform further service. The Army is
implementing several programmed initiatives to transform the IRR into a
more viable and ready prior-service talent bank. We created a new
administrative category called the Individual Warrior. This category
requires soldiers to participate in virtual musters, attend annual
readiness processing and participate in training opportunities thus
maintaining their military occupational specialties. To improve
soldier's understanding of service commitments, the Army will develop
and deliver expectation management briefings and obligation
confirmation checklists to all soldiers at initial enlistments/
appointments and again during transition. The Army is also conducting
systematic screening to reconcile records and identify non-mobilization
assets which will likely result in a reduction in the current IRR
population and aid in establishing realistic readiness reporting.
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 designed to support our soldiers and their
families. An effective compensation package is critical to efforts in
the global war on terrorism as we transition to a more joint,
expeditionary, and cohesive force.
The Reserve components represent a significant portion of the
capability of the Total Force and are an essential element in the full
spectrum of worldwide military operations. Both the Department of
Defense (DOD) and Congress recognize the importance of appropriate
compensation and benefits for these soldiers. The National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2006 authorized the full rate of
Basic Allowance for Housing for Reserve component members called or
ordered to Active-Duty for greater than 30 days. We now have the
ability to provide involuntarily mobilized soldiers replacement income
should they make less money on Active-Duty than they do in their
civilian employment. Additionally, we believe the increases to
affiliation bonus and special pay for high priority units will ensure
we can attract and retain our Reserve component force.
The Army continues to develop programs to address the unique
challenges we face with our recruiting and retention mission. The
legislation authorized by Congress provides the flexible tools needed
to encourage citizens to enlist in the Army. The Army is currently
developing the pilot program for first-term initial entry soldiers to
offer matching funds for Thrift Savings Plan contributions. We expect
to announce this program 3rd quarter of this fiscal year. We are
executing increases in enlistment and reenlistment bonuses. We continue
to use the 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.
We constantly look for ways to compensate our soldiers for the
hardships they and their families endure and we appreciate your
commitment in this regard. We evaluated military housing areas affected
by Hurricane Katrina and will continue to address areas where soldiers
may need additional housing assistance due to the impacts of disasters
on the local housing market.
The Army appreciates your emphasis and interest in soldiers and
families and their need for financial support when they suffer a combat
injury or become a casualty. Soldiers perform best when they know their
families are in good care. Many of our surviving families are able to
stay in Government housing for an extended period during their recovery
from the loss of their spouse contributing to a better organized
transition from the Service and allowing their children to continue the
school year with the least amount of interruption. The changes to
survivor benefits ensure all soldiers and their families are treated
fairly and equitably. We are working with our sister services and the
Office of the Secretary of Defense in developing the procedures to
implement the Combat-injury Rehabilitation Pay to assist our injured
soldiers in their time of need. These enhancements to survivor benefits
and entitlements for our wounded soldiers demonstrate recognition of
their ultimate contributions and a commitment to taking care of our
own.
well being
A broad spectrum of services, programs, and initiatives from a
number of Army agencies provide for the well-being of our people while
supporting senior leaders in sustaining their joint warfighting human
capabilities requirements. Our well-being efforts are focused on
strengthening the mental, physical, spiritual and material condition of
our soldiers, civilians, and their families while balancing demanding
institutional needs of today's expeditionary Army. Allow me to take a
few minutes to address three of our programs that directly support our
Army at war, regardless of component.
u.s. army wounded warrior program
Wounded soldiers from OEF and OIF deserve the highest priority from
the Army for support services, healing and recuperation,
rehabilitation, evaluation for return to duty and successful transition
from Active-Duty if required. To date the Army has assisted nearly
1,000 soldiers under this program.
The Army Wounded Warrior (AW2) Program takes to heart the Warrior
Ethos, ``Never leave a fallen comrade.'' The severely injured soldier
can be assured the Army will be with him and do whatever it takes to
assist a soldier during and after the recovery process.
As soldiers progress through their care and rehab, AW2 remains with
them to ensure all their immediate non clinical needs are met (securing
financial assistance in the form of grants from a network of providers,
resolving travel claims, and finding a place for family members to
live). AW2 has resolved numerous wounded soldier pay issues and
benefits to ensure all soldiers' pay is properly protected and
monitored while they recover. AW2 is staffed now with an Army Finance
Specialist, Veterans' Affairs (VA) Specialist, Human Resources and
Employment Specialists to get to the root of the problems and fix them
quickly.
AW2 has taken active roles in changing policy to resolve soldier
debts, remain on Active-Duty despite traumatic injuries (e.g.
amputations, blindness), and working with public and private sector
employers to provide meaningful employment. Corporations interested in
our wounded soldiers include Disney, Evergreen Aviation Intl, Osh-Kosh
Trucking and other Federal agencies as well.
centcom rest and recuperation leave program
A fit, mission-focused soldier is the irreducible foundation of our
readiness. For soldiers fighting the global war on terrorism in the
CENTCOM area of responsibility, the Rest and Recuperation (R&R) Leave
Program is a vital component of their well-being and readiness.
Every day, flights depart Kuwait City International Airport
carrying hundreds of soldiers and DOD civilians to scores of leave
destinations in the continental United States and throughout the world.
Such R&R opportunities are essential to maintaining combat readiness
and capability when units are deployed and engaged in such intense and
sustained operations. Since September 25, 2003, 311,949 soldiers and
DOD civilians have participated in this highly successful program. They
have benefited through a break from the tensions of the combat
environment and from the opportunity to reconnect with family and loved
ones.
General Abizaid, the CENTCOM Commander has stated, ``The Rest and
Recuperation Leave Program has been a major success.'' Additionally,
this program also generates substantial, positive public reaction and
increased political support for U.S. objectives in the global war on
terrorism. The R&R Leave Program has become an integral part of
operations and readiness and is a significant contributor to our
soldiers' success.
deployment cycle support
Deployment Cycle Support (DCS) is a comprehensive process focused
on preparing soldiers, their families, and deployed Department of the
Army civilians for their return and reintegration into their families,
communities, and jobs.
As of February 10, 2006, nearly 400,000 (387,550) soldiers have
completed the in-theater Redeployment Phase DCS tasks prior to
returning home to their pre-deployment environment. The DCS phase is
expanding to include all phases of the deployment cycle (train up/
preparation, mobilization, deployment, employment phases).
The bravery and sacrifices of today's soldiers and family members
are in the tradition set by our retired soldiers and family members.
Those who fight the global war on terrorism follow in the footsteps of
retired soldiers who fought in World War II, Korea, Vietnam, and
Operation Desert Storm and the families who supported them.
retirement services
I would like to also point out that our efforts extend beyond our
Active-Duty population. The Army counts on its retired soldiers to
continue to serve as mobilization assets and as volunteers on military
installations. Retired soldiers are the face of the military in
communities far from military installations and often act as adjunct
recruiters, encouraging neighbors and relatives to become part of their
Army.
Retired soldiers and family members are a force of more than a
million strong. Retired soldiers receiving retired pay and retired
Reserve soldiers not yet age 60 and not yet receiving retired pay,
total almost 800,000 and their spouses and family members brings this
total to over a million.
conclusion
In our efforts to maintain your All-Volunteer Army, we need the
continued support of Congress for the appropriate level of resources.
In addition we need your support as national leaders to affect
influencers and encourage all who are ready to answer this Nation's
call to duty. To ensure our Army is prepared for the future, we need
full support for the issues and funding requested in the fiscal year
2006 supplemental and the fiscal year 2007 President's budget to
support the Army manning requirements given the current operational
environment.
Once again thank you for the opportunity to appear before you
today. I look forward to answering your questions.
Senator Graham. General Brady.
STATEMENT OF LT. GEN. ROGER A. BRADY, USAF, DEPUTY CHIEF OF
STAFF, MANPOWER AND PERSONNEL, UNITED STATES AIR FORCE
General Brady. Thank you, Senator Graham and Senator
Nelson. I'd like to echo General Hagenbeck's comments. The
committee has been extraordinarily helpful to us in making sure
that we retain the quality-of-life that our men and women need
so much.
I'll also make my remarks very brief, given the limits on
time.
This year, the Air Force is in the situation of balancing
books. We have huge challenges, like the other Services do. So,
we're balancing investment programs to recapitalize the oldest
fleet we've ever flown. We're also looking at getting the right
structure, the right operation and maintenance accounts, and
the right people accounts. People are the most important thing
we have. They also turn out to be the most expensive. So, we
are working very hard to make sure that we have the very best
people, with the right skills, in the right places. We
appreciate your help in assisting us in shaping our force in a
way that recognizes the tremendous sacrifice and contribution
of our people, and, at the same time, being responsible in the
way that we provide the force to this Nation.
Thank you, and I look forward to any questions that you
have.
[The prepared statement of General Brady follows:]
Prepared Statement by Lt. Gen. Roger A. Brady, USAF
introduction
We are America's airmen. Our mission is to deliver sovereign
options for the defense of the United States of America and its global
interests--we fly and we fight--in air, space, and cyberspace. For the
past 15 years, our Air Force team has proven its mettle and skill every
day. Since the days of Operation Desert Storm, we have been globally
and continuously engaged in combat. We will continue to show the same
ingenuity, courage and resolve and achieve success in our three most
important challenges: winning the global war on terrorism; developing
and caring for our airmen; and maintaining, modernizing, and
recapitalizing our aircraft and equipment.
To ensure we have the right sized and shaped force to face the
challenges of the new century, the Air Force is transforming itself to
meet the threats of the future security environment by recapitalizing
our force to develop capabilities across a range of sovereign options
for our Nation's leaders. However, we must judiciously balance our
transformation with the ongoing global demands of the global war on
terrorism; hence, transforming the Air Force of the 21st century will
require reductions in our legacy force structures; bold, new thinking
to derive process efficiencies and development of innovative
organization structures to facilitate our recapitalization efforts.
Our people have been the key to our success. We will continue to
look for ways to maintain and improve their training, their personal
and professional development and their quality-of-life, so they may
continue to meet the commitments of today while preparing for the
challenges of tomorrow.
Force Shaping
For the past 18 months, the Air Force has reduced our Active-Duty
end strength to congressionally-authorized levels and taken action to
relieve some of our most stressed career fields. The 2004-2005 Force
Shaping Program allowed officers and enlisted personnel to separate
from Active-Duty service earlier than they would otherwise have been
eligible. In addition to voluntary force shaping measures, the Air
Force significantly reduced enlisted accessions in 2005 to help meet
our congressional mandate.
While we met our 2005 end strength requirement, we began 2006 with
a force imbalance: a shortage of enlisted personnel and an excess of
officer personnel, principally among those officers commissioned from
2000 to 2004. This imbalance created several unacceptable operational
and budgetary impacts. Consequently, we took several actions to ensure
our force is correctly sized and shaped to meet future challenges and
to reduce unprogrammed military pay costs. First, we increased our
enlisted accession target for 2006 to address the enlisted imbalance.
Second, we continued to encourage qualified officers, especially those
commissioned in 2000 and later, to consider voluntary options to accept
service in the Air National Guard, Air Force Reserve, civil service, or
as an interservice transfer to the Army.
Additionally, we are institutionalizing the force shaping authority
granted in the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2005
to restructure our junior officer force. Only after exhausting all
efforts to reduce officer end strength by voluntary means, we will
convene a Force Shaping Board in 2006 to consider the performance and
potential of all eligible officers commissioned in 2002 and 2003. This
board will be held annually thereafter, as required, to properly shape
and manage the officer corps to meet the emerging needs of the Air
Force. Essentially, the Force Shaping Board will select officers for
continued service in our Air Force. Current projections indicate that
we need about 7,800 of these eligible officers (2002 and 2003 year
groups) to continue on Active-Duty. Approximately 1,900 officers will
be subject to the force reduction. Exercising this authority is
difficult, but our guiding principle is simple--we must proactively
manage our force to ensure the Air Force is properly sized, shaped, and
organized to meet the global challenges of today and tomorrow. To this
end, we will continue to look at legislation necessary to properly
shape our total force of Active-Duty, civilian employees, Air National
Guard and Air Force Reserve airmen.
Balancing the Total Force
In addition to maintaining and shaping the Active-Duty Force, we
must continue to focus on the balance of forces and specialties between
Regular, Air National Guard and Reserve components, as well as our
civilian employees and contractor partners--the Total Force. We are
diligently examining the capabilities we need to provide to the
warfighter and to operate and train at home. We continue to realign
manpower to our most stressed areas and are watchful for any new areas
that show signs of strain.
As we look to the future in implementing Base Realignment and
Closure (BRAC) and Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR) decisions, we must
ensure a seamless transition to new structures and missions while
preserving the unique capabilities resident in our Regular Air Force,
Air National Guard and Reserve communities. Examining functions for
competitive sourcing opportunities or conversion to civilian
performance will continue to be one of our many tools for striking the
correct balance of missions across the Total Force.
Force Development
The Air Force's Force Development construct is a Total Force
initiative that develops officers, enlisted members, and civilian
employees from the Regular Air Force, the Air National Guard and the
Air Force Reserve. The fundamental purpose of force development is to
produce leaders at all levels with the right capabilities to meet the
Air Force's operational needs by leveraging deliberate training,
education and experience opportunities.
To succeed internationally, as an Aerospace Expeditionary Force,
and in the global war on terrorism, it is essential to breakdown the
barriers of culture and language and set new patterns of thinking. This
necessitates understanding and successfully using knowledge of language
and culture to enhance mission success. Our goal is to rigorously
educate our force, as well as, provide additional learning
opportunities that will enable airmen to become internationally savvy.
In our continuums of learning and education, additional emphasis is
being placed on language and culture. Officers at the Air Force Academy
and Reserve Officer Training Corps (ROTC) will receive a foundation in
a foreign language. As our officer and noncommissioned officer (NCO)
Corps progress through their career they will receive additional
education to develop cultural understanding and awareness as a
foundation for building relationships. For example, at our intermediate
level education we are instituting courses to develop regional cultural
awareness and study of a corresponding language such as Spanish,
French, Arabic, or Chinese. At our senior level education we will
continue that depth of knowledge emphasizing cross-cultural
communication and negotiation skills as a foundation for planning and
executing military operations.
In addition, today's dynamic security environment and expeditionary
nature of air and space operations require a cadre of Air Force
professionals with a deeper international insight, foreign language
proficiency, and cultural understanding. The International Affairs
Specialist Program is a force development initiative that offers airmen
the opportunity to fully develop these key military competencies.
Officers will receive more in-depth formal training and education with
an appropriate follow-on assignment. Many officers will do this as a
well-managed, single-career broadening opportunity to gain
international political-military affairs experience. But, for some this
will be a more demanding developmental opportunity creating a true
regional expert possessing professional language skills. These officers
will be carefully managed to remain viable and competitive. To ensure
all these efforts are synchronized in our development of the force, I
established a Foreign Language and Culture office under the Air Force
Senior Language Authority within the Directorate of Manpower and
Personnel.
To operationalize force development, the Air Force Personnel Center
created a division dedicated to supporting corporate and career field
development team needs. Development teams have now been incorporated
into the officer assignment process and they now guide assignment of
all officer career fields. Additionally, development teams recommend
officers for special selection boards and developmental education
opportunities.
The Air Force is also deliberately developing our enlisted airmen
through a combined series of educational and training opportunities. We
are exploring new and exciting avenues to expand our process beyond the
current system in place today. Each tier of the enlisted force will see
changes to enlisted development. Airmen (E-1 to E-4) will be introduced
to the enlisted development plan, increasing their knowledge and
solidifying future tactical leadership roles. The NCO tier will be
encouraged and identified to explore career-broadening experiences and
continuing with developmental education. Our Senior NCO tier will see
the most dramatic changes as we explore the use of development teams in
conjunction with assignment teams to give career vectoring and
strategic level assignments. Institutionalizing the practice of
development as a part of enlisted Air Force culture is paramount for
supervisors, commanders, and senior leaders.
On the civilian side, the Air Force is making significant progress
in civilian force development as we align policy, processes and systems
to deliberately develop and manage our civilian workforce. We have
identified and mapped over 97 percent of all Air Force civilian
positions to career fields and have 15 Career Field Management Teams in
place with 3 additional management teams forming this year.
Additionally, we manage various civilian developmental opportunities
and programs, with our career-broadening program providing several
centrally funded positions, specifically tailored to provide career-
broadening opportunities and professionally enriching experiences.
Recruiting/Retention
After intentionally reducing total accessions in 2005, the Air
Force is working to get the right mix of officer and enlisted airmen as
we move to a leaner, more lethal and more agile force. We will align
the respective ranks to get the right person, in the right job, at the
right time to meet the Air Force mission requirements in support of the
global war on terrorism, the Joint Force and the Air Force's
expeditionary posture.
A key element for success is our ability to continue to offer
bonuses and incentives where we have traditionally experienced
shortfalls. Congressional support for these programs, along with
increases in pay and benefits and quality-of-life initiatives, has
greatly helped us retain the skilled airmen we need to defend our
Nation.
Personnel Services Delivery
To achieve the Secretary of Defense's objective to shift resources
``from bureaucracy to battlefield,'' we are overhauling Air Force
personnel services. Our personnel services delivery initiative
dramatically modernizes the processes, organizations and technologies
through which the Air Force supports our airmen and their commanders.
Our goal is to deliver higher-quality personnel services with
greater access, speed, accuracy, reliability, and efficiency. The Air
Force has been able to program the resulting manpower savings to other
compelling needs over the next 6 years. This initiative enhances our
ability to acquire, train, educate, deliver, employ, and empower airmen
with the needed skills, knowledge, and experience to accomplish Air
Force missions.
National Security Personnel System
Our civilian workforce will undergo a significant transformation
with implementation of the Department of Defense (DOD) National
Security Personnel System (NSPS). NSPS is a simplified and more
flexible civilian personnel management system that will improve the way
we hire, assign, compensate, and reward our civilian employees. This
modern and agile management system will be responsive to the national
security environment, preserve employee protections and benefits, and
maintain the core values of the civil service.
NSPS design and development has been a broad-based, participative
process to include employees, supervisors and managers, unions,
employee advocacy groups and various public interest groups. We plan to
implement these human resource and performance management provisions in
three phases called ``spirals.'' NSPS is the most comprehensive new
Federal personnel management system in more than 50 years, and it's a
key component in the DOD's achievement of a performance-based, results-
oriented Total Force.
Caring for Airmen
Combat capability begins and ends with healthy, motivated, trained,
and equipped airmen. We must remain committed to providing our entire
Air Force team with world class programs, facilities and morale-
enhancing activities. Our ``Fit to Fight'' program ensures airmen
remain ready to execute our expeditionary mission at a moment's notice,
and our food service operations further complement an Air Force healthy
lifestyle.
Through various investment strategies in both dormitories and
military family housing, we are providing superior living spaces for
our single airmen and quality, affordable homes for our airmen who
support families. Our focus on providing quality childcare facilities
and programs, on and off installations, enables our people to stay
focused on the mission, confident that their children are receiving
affordable, quality care. The Air Force is a family, and our clubs and
recreation programs foster and strengthen those community bonds,
promoting high morale and an esprit de corps vital to all our
endeavors.
Additionally, we are equally committed to ensuring that all airmen
in every mission area operate with infrastructure that is modern, safe
and efficient, no matter what the mission entails--from depot
recapitalization to the bed down of new weapon systems. Moreover, we
must ensure airmen worldwide have the world class training, tools and
developmental opportunities that best posture them to perform with
excellence. We also continually strive to provide opportunities and
support services that further enable them to serve their Nation in a
way that leaves them personally fulfilled, contributes to family
health, and provides America with a more stable, retained, and capable
fighting force.
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. Admiral Harvey.
STATEMENT OF VADM JOHN C. HARVEY, JR., USN, CHIEF OF NAVAL
PERSONNEL, UNITED STATES NAVY
Admiral Harvey. Good morning, sir. Thank you for this
opportunity to appear before you and make these comments.
I've learned that it's always a good idea to follow the
example of General Hagenbeck; and so, I will also suspend a lot
of what I had looked forward to talking about, in order to
leave more time for your questions.
One of the things I want to say is that, as we reshape and
adapt the U.S. Navy, as we are in a very big way now, to defeat
the emerging threat, we shall continue to be the preeminent
naval fighting force in the world. At the very heart of this
Navy, at the core of its strength is our people, Active and
Reserve, military and civilian, the most fundamental elements
of our readiness and strength. They are making significant
sacrifices, as you alluded to, sir, to protect this Nation and
prosecute this global war on terrorism, and these patriotic and
professional Americans continue to perform brilliantly for us,
and you have every reason to be proud of them.
We are extremely grateful for your commitment, and the
commitment of this committee, to the men and women of the U.S.
Navy and to the programs that make them the premier maritime
fighting force, and that sustain them and their families. On
behalf of all our sailors and our civil servants and their
families, I'd like to thank you and your committee for your
continued and unwavering support.
Thank you very much, sir.
[The prepared statement of Admiral Harvey follows:]
Prepared Statement by VADM John C. Harvey, Jr., USN
introduction--a changing world
Chairman Graham, Senator Nelson, distinguished members of the
Personnel Subcommittee, thank you for providing me with this
opportunity to appear before you today.
Our Navy is adapting rapidly to the new challenge of a very changed
world. We are transforming from the largely blue water force of the
Cold War to a much more broadly and jointly engaged force. Our sailors
today are pursuing everywhere the enemy in the global war on terrorism.
While we man the ships and aircraft of a matchless fleet in every one
of the world's oceans, we are also fighting on the mountaintops of
Afghanistan, in the deserts of Iraq, in the Horn of Africa and
increasingly near shore, on rivers and inland waterways. We can also be
found providing humanitarian relief to Tsunami victims in Indonesia and
Southeast Asia, earthquake victims in Pakistan, mudslide victims in the
Philippines, and to flood victims on our own Gulf Coast. The pace of
our missions has changed. We no longer operate under a peacetime tempo,
but rather with a wartime sense of urgency. Our enemies are not
predictable--they rely on surprise, confusion and uncertainty. We can
no longer be reactive to threats, but must be proactive and focused on
capabilities we can apply to rapidly changing situations. We must be
combat ready--every day.
Navy operations are requiring us to get the most we can out of our
available resources--to deliver ever-increasing capability from an
increasingly talented and educated force. At the same time, our market
for this talent is changing--getting more competitive. The increasing
pace of technological change, globalization, and demographic changes
will significantly impact the pool of talent from which we draw the
Navy's workforce. We will need to successfully compete in a more
dynamic labor market, with a smaller, more diversified population.
To meet Navy workforce demands in the 21st century, we must take a
broader view--we must take a Total Force approach. To be successful in
delivering the Navy workforce of the 21st century and beyond we must
start planning now. We are positioning ourselves to deliver a more
responsive Navy workforce with new skills, improved training and better
preparation to increasingly deliver a wide range of capabilities
precisely where needed. Navy is meeting the dynamic national defense
needs by creating a strategy for our people that addresses the total
Navy workforce--Active, Reserve, civil service, and contractors, and is
capability-based--i.e., defined by the work and workforce required to
carry out Navy and joint missions. We are building this long-term
strategy through integration, collaboration, and coordination of all
the Manpower Personnel Training and Education (MPT&E) organization. We
are capitalizing on Navy's Enterprise approach, and using our initial
efforts as the single manpower resource sponsor as a launching point
for our new capabilities-based approach. We will deliver this strategy
by significantly changing the way we do business, and implementing new
Sea Warrior systems that enable more flexible and responsive
development and deployment of the total Navy workforce. Underlying the
capability-based approach, and necessary to support our new sea warrior
systems is a newly merged Manpower, Personnel, Training and Education
Organization.
Strategy for Our People
The strategy for our people provides the guidance and tools to
assess, train, distribute, and develop our manpower to become a
mission-focused force that meets the warfighting requirements of the
Navy. It gives us a roadmap--with objectives, desired effects, and
specific tasking that, when executed, will transform the MPT&E domain.
The goal is to be postured better to determine, based on the Department
of Defense (DOD) and Department of the Navy (DON) strategic guidance
and operational needs, the future force--capabilities, number, size,
and mix. The goal of a transformed MPT&E is to define and deliver the
required Navy workforce capabilities at best value in an uncertain
future. Specifically, a transformed MPT&E domain will deliver:
A Workforce Responsive To The Joint Mission: Based on
national defense strategies. Derived from, and responsive to,
the needs of joint warfighters as described in DOD guidance.
A Total Force: Address the Total Force--Active and
Reserve military, civil service and contractor. Provide for a
flexible mix of manpower options to meet warfighting needs
while managing risk.
Cost Effectiveness: This ability to balance across the
total workforce permits the Navy to deliver its future
workforce at best value, within fiscal constraints and
realities.
Single Manpower Resource Sponsor
One of the first steps in moving toward a new approach for MPT&E
was to review the ``glideslope.'' Previous estimations of current and
future manpower needs focused on identifying the lowest possible
execution end strength limit--determining the right number for the
current mission. It was based on managing ``the numbers.'' As we move
to a capabilities-based approach, we will focus on determining the
right workforce (number, skills, and mix) based on current and future
missions--based on an analysis of the work and work management,
balanced with cost and operational risk. We examined and analyzed the
Navy's shipbuilding and aircraft procurement plans. We reviewed the
Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR) and understand its implications on
Navy missions and force structure. We have explored sea/shore rotation
options. We understand and now incorporate these drivers into the
definition and development of our workforce requirements and
compensation needs. Figure 1 describes the past and future approaches.
Future definitions of MPT&E requirements and resource needs will be
based on significant collaboration with the Navy Enterprises, which use
DOD and DON strategic guidance to define their warfighting capabilities
and, subsequently, their workforce needs. The Enterprise construct
gives us a good start in gaining understanding of missions,
requirements, and capabilities. Using current billet baselines, we will
validate the Enterprise domains and the associated work using a value
chain assessment. The Navy Enterprises will be asked to define new
capability requirements and asked where we can take risk or divest
functions and workload, allowing the Navy to identify ``puts and
takes'' (billets needed and offsets). From this information we can
build forward-looking, capability-based, affordable demand plans for
recruiting, retention, and training.
Sea Warrior
Sea Warrior evolved over several years from three separate efforts
to transform the manpower, personnel, and training domains (Figure 2).
These separate efforts were merged into a single program, and the
projects integrated to provide cohesive, coordinated products. Sea
Warrior comprises the training, education, and career-management
systems that provide for the growth and development of our people and
enhance their contribution to joint warfighting ability. Sea Warrior
delivers sailors greater career management and enables them to take a
more active role in furthering their careers through education and
training opportunities. The goal is to create a Navy in which the Total
Force--Active, Reserve, civil service, and contractors--are optimally
accessed, trained and assigned so they can contribute their fullest to
mission accomplishment.
This year we deliver the initial functionality of Sea Warrior
(known as Spiral 1). Sea Warrior Spiral 1 fiscal year 2006 deliverables
consists of four systems that provide our sailors with better
information to plan their Navy careers. My Course provides an
individualized roadmap of the training needed to meet the requirements
of a desired position. Life-Long Learning is the longer-term view of
meeting the sailor's professional and personal education and training
goals. Certifications and qualifications, along with the Five Vector
Model Advancement Index, provide sailors online assistance to bridge
navy and civilian credentialing, as well as additional career planning
tools.
changing demand signals . . . new and non-traditional missions
Expeditionary Combat Command
We established the Navy Expeditionary Combat Command (NECC) in
recognition of the need to establish combat capability in the non-blue
water regions adjacent to the littoral. Some of these new missions
(such as Riverine Warfare and Civil Affairs) will be enduring while
others (such as Detainee Operations) may be transitory in nature. NECC
will provide the oversight of the unique training and equipping these
challenging missions will require.
Individual Augmentations (Iraq, Afghanistan, Horn of Africa)
The Navy has been proactive in assuming nontraditional missions in
order to take maximum advantage of the superb capabilities inherent in
our force. As a result, Navy augmentation to ground forces in the
Central Command (CENTCOM) area of responsibility has grown from
approximately 2,000 in December 2003 to over 10,000 today. Navy is
leaning forward to assume even more combat, combat support and combat
service support missions. For sailors in today's Navy it is not a
question of whether they will do an augmentation tour but when.
Increased Interaction with Global Partners and Allies
Given the changes in the strategic landscape since September 11,
the diversity of post-Cold War cultures we now interact with, and the
unique security challenges of the 21st century, our success depends in
large part on our ability to understand both adversaries and partners
around the globe. Development and improvement of our foreign language
skills, regional expertise, and awareness of foreign cultures is
essential to conducting successful operations.
Accordingly, Navy is developing a Language, Regional Expertise and
Culture (LREC) Strategy tailored to our mission. This strategy
acknowledges language skill and regional expertise as key warfare
enablers and provides overarching guidance for their development in the
force. A core element of this effort is the reinvigoration of Navy's
Foreign Area Officer (FAO) Program. FAOs are a professional cadre of
officers with regional expertise and language skills who provide
support to fleets, component commanders, combatant commanders, and
joint staffs. We are also closely examining Navy's Personnel Exchange
Program (PEP) with the intent of better distributing PEP members
according to Navy component commander regional engagement strategies to
enhance interoperability and mutual understanding with emerging partner
nations.
changing market
As Navy's technology becomes increasingly sophisticated and the
world in which we deploy becomes increasingly complex, we need more
capable and better-educated sailors. To enlist the very high quality
recruits necessary for today's Navy, we are competing head to head with
business in a robust economy to attract the best and brightest of
America's youth.
size and shape of the force
Recruiting and Retaining the Right Force
Our future Navy must be shaped to best support the global war on
terrorism while still preserving our ability to prevail in major combat
operations. Our force must be sized properly and shaped to meet the
uncertain and dynamic security environment.
One Force
Navy has worked aggressively to integrate our Active and Reserve
components into a single, seamless force, which will support a more
operational and flexible unit structure. Together, as one team, we are
providing all of the capabilities and skills required by Navy. Our
experienced Navy reservists augment the Active Force with the right
numbers of personnel, in the right skills and at the right time to meet
mission demands. For example, we directly integrate our Fleet
Replacement Units (FRU) with Active component units. The FRU supports
the Fleet Response Plan by providing Reserve component sailors who are
already trained to operate the same equipment and thus enables a smooth
transition to mobilization and/or deployment. We also reduce training
costs by having all sailors train on the same equipment. Over 38
percent of Construction Battalion (Seabees) personnel deployed to Iraq
are reservists and 791 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 is
providing direct support to ground forces engaging the enemy.
Reserve sailors are also contributing to operational support while
on drills (IDT), annual training, Active-Duty for training (ADT), and
Active-Duty for special work (ADSW). During the past year, these
sailors provided over 15,000 man-years of support to the fleet. This
support is the equivalent of 18 Naval Construction Battalions or two
Carrier Battle Groups.
Active Component End Strength
Navy has reduced active end strength steadily since 2003 using a
controlled, measured approach to shape and balance the skill mix within
the force to maximize warfighting readiness. Several initiatives have
played a key role in allowing us to reduce active military manpower.
These initiatives include optimal manning and substitution of civilian
personnel in certain formerly military positions. We continuously
assess the optimal mix of military manpower, procurement, and
operations and maintenance required in light of evolving technology,
missions, and Navy warfighting capabilities. We are positioning
ourselves to take on new or increased roles in mission areas such as
riverine operations, Naval Expeditionary Security Force and Special
Operations; we have focused significant efforts to recruit the right
individuals, significantly reduce post-enlistment attrition, and retain
highly qualified and motivated sailors. The fiscal year 2007
President's budget supports, and the Defense Authorization Request
seeks, a Navy Active-Duty strength authorization of 340,700. (Figure 3)
Reserve Component End Strength Request
The Navy Reserve Zero-Based Review identified those capabilities
best provided by Reserve component members to support Navy missions on
a periodic and predictable basis. Accordingly, Reserve component end
strength for fiscal year 2007 is requested to be 71,300.
Achieving the Right Force Mix
Three components are key to achieving and affording the right force
mix within the end strength numbers requested. First--recruiting the
numbers and quality of personnel to fully man needed skill sets;
second--retaining personnel whose skill sets and experience are in
demand; and third--incentivizing the voluntary separation of personnel
whose skill sets are in excess or for which a need is no longer
foreseen.
Conversion of Military Positions to Civilian Performance
Navy is intent on shaping our workforce so the military can focus
on military work. Conversion of former military positions to civilian
positions allows us to better align the military personnel to
warfighting functions. The programmed conversions target non
warfighting functions previously staffed and performed by military
personnel. Programmed conversions include: transfer of U.S.S. vessels
to Military Sealift Command (civilian mariners); medical; legal
services; training support; and headquarters administrative functions.
recruiting
Active Enlisted Navy Recruiting
With the judicious application of recruiting incentives authorized
by Congress, fiscal year 2005 marked the seventh consecutive year we
achieved overall Active-Duty accession mission. It is very important to
note that we met our Active-Duty accession goal while maintaining high
recruit quality standards.
We have been successful in our active enlisted recruiting. Over the
last 5 years, the quality of Navy accessions has increased
significantly. In 2001, 90 percent of accessions were High School
Diploma Graduates (HSDG), 63.3 percent scored in the Test Score
Categories (TSC) I-IIIA, and 4.7 percent had some college. In fiscal
year 2005, we met 100 percent of our Active enlisted accession goal,
with 95 percent HSDG and 70 percent in TSC I to IIIA. Eleven percent of
accessions had some college. In addition to overall quality goals, we
met TSC I-IIIA goals for all diversity groups for the first time in
history and increased the TSC I-IIIA percentage of every diversity
group over the previous year. This improved quality has contributed to
reductions in first-term attrition and changes in training regimen that
reduced training time and improved fleet readiness. Our emphasis on
quality continues.
It is becoming increasingly clear that we are competing in a far
more challenging environment where unemployment is predicted to
continue at low levels and where we are experiencing a significantly
reduced propensity for America's youth to enlist in the Armed Forces.
Future Active and Reserve recruiting success will require continued and
perhaps enhanced authority for tools such as Enlistment Bonuses.
We continue to fall short of goals in recruiting for certain highly
demanding and specialized communities, specifically Special Operations
(SPECOPs) and Naval Special Warfare (SPECWAR). These special programs,
with some of the most demanding training in the world, require
exceptionally bright and physically fit individuals. The health of
these communities is very important to the Navy's success in the global
war on terrorism and requires us to place special emphasis both on
recruiting and on fleet accessions. As a Navy we have taken the
following measures to improve the enlisted SEAL and Special Warfare
Combatant Crewman manning from their 83 percent and 79 percent levels
(respectively):
Established a SEAL Rating program which will ship
recruits directly to Basic Underwater Demolition School after
Recruit Training Command Basic Training.
Established a SEAL recruiting goal for each Navy
Recruiting District (NRD).
Designated a SEAL coordinator in each NRD to monitor
all SEAL recruits in the Delayed Entry Program (DEP). In the
near future we will also hire former Special Warfare and
Special Operations personnel as contractors to assist districts
in selection, testing, education and mentoring of new recruits
for Naval Special Warfare programs.
Directed Commander Navy Recruiting Command NRDs to
administer the Physical Standards Test prior to shipping the
recruiting with a SEAL Challenge contract to RTC by March 2006.
Similar initiatives have also been implemented to address
shortfalls in our very demanding programs for enlisted Explosive
Ordnance Disposal and Fleet Diver communities.
Another area of great challenge for us is Reserve Enlisted
Recruiting.
Reserve Enlisted Recruiting
Recruiting for the Navy Reserve is fundamentally different from
recruiting for Active-Duty. Whereas for most Active-Duty recruits the
Navy will provide the first real job and the start of a career, those
entering the Navy Reserve are either continuing service after leaving
Active-Duty or enlisting for a part-time commitment.
In fiscal year 2005 Navy only achieved 85 percent of goal for
Reserve enlisted recruits. While fiscal year 2006 attainment is ahead
of the pace from fiscal year 2005, we are still not on track to make
goal for this year. Much of the shortfall for fiscal year 2005 and
fiscal year 2006 was in those ratings, which directly support global
war on terrorism. These ratings include Seabees, Hospital Corpsmen,
Master at Arms and Information Specialists. These ratings are
particularly challenging to fill because sailors with prior naval
service primarily populate them. The issue here is two-fold. First, is
high Active-Duty retention and the consequently low supply of eligible
recruits with the specific rating experience. Second, some sailors in
these ratings saw high operational tempo (OPTEMPO) during their Active
service and are now hesitant to join the Reserves and face the
possibility of further mobilization.
To address our Reserve recruiting challenges and to promote
continued success in recruiting the Active Force, Navy initiated a
process in fiscal year 2003 that is leading us to a single recruiting
force and command responsible for supplying all our manpower needs. We
have now nearly completed the consolidation of Active and Reserve
infrastructure and recruiting forces. In the near future, the six
Reserve area commands that oversaw Reserve recruiting and two of the
four Active regions will be closed, leaving two regions in charge of
both Active and Reserve recruiting. We have determined the most
efficient design for the recruiting infrastructure and the headquarters
workforce and will reduce the number of NRDs conducting mission
operations. Through the 2005 Base Realignment and Closure process, 5
NRDs are slated for closure, with their territory being realigned to
the remaining 26 districts. Our recruiting command realignment will be
complete by June 2006.
We are also increasing the amount of enlistment bonuses for both
prior service and non-prior service Reserve accessions. Congress raised
the legislative cap from $10,000 to $20,000 for this important program
that will be key to enhancing the attractiveness of service in the
Reserves for those currently in our targeted ratings.
Other measures being taken to address our Reserve recruiting
shortfall include implementation of expanded authorities provided by
Congress in the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for Fiscal
Year 2006. These include: authority to pay Reserve Affiliation Bonuses
in lump sum, enhanced high-priority unit assignment pay; and increases
in the amount of the Reserve Montgomery G.I. Bill. Navy is also
applying force-shaping tools to attract non-rated Reserve sailors to
undermanned ratings.
National Call to Service
Another measure being taken to address our accession shortfall in
the Navy Reserve is our increased use of the National Call to Service
(NCS) Act enacted by Congress in the NDAA for Fiscal Year 2003. This
program, which combines service in the Active and Reserve components,
is enjoying considerable success and is helping to mitigate some of the
prior-service shortage in ratings that are critical to the prosecution
of global war on terrorism. Under this program, a recruit enlists for
an Active-Duty commitment of 15 months after training. At the end of
the commitment, the individual can either extend on Active-Duty or
commit to 2 years of drilling in the Selected Reserve. Navy has been
particularly aggressive in recruiting Masters at Arms and Hospital
Corpsmen for this program and the first of those recruited will begin
drilling in the Reserves this year. Navy's success in attracting
recruits for this program is growing steadily. We took in 998 recruits
in 13 ratings in fiscal year 2004, 1866 recruits in 23 ratings in
fiscal year 2005 and this year we have a goal of 2,340 recruits in 45
different ratings.
Continuum of Service
The direct link between Active-Duty commitment and Reserve
commitment in NCS is a model worth emulating. We are developing the
concept of a continuum of service with a transition at the end of
Active-Duty obligation to drilling with the Selected Reserve. By
beginning the recruiting process while the sailor is still on Active-
Duty, we significantly improve our chances of follow on affiliation
with the Reserves.
New Enlisted Recruiting Initiatives
An area where our focus on quality is evident is our increasing
emphasis on education. Additional education after high school is almost
a requirement for success today. The market's desire for college
education creates competition for the best and brightest, but also
provides an opportunity for the Navy to capitalize on the many
education benefits we offer. Navy is working this issue by targeting
more recruits who already have college and by expanding programs that
will help our sailors to further their education. In order to attract a
broader, brighter and more diverse market of applicants, Navy is
implementing a number of new recruiting initiatives:
College First
To meet the desire of America's youth for college education, as
well as to prepare our recruits to meet Navy's increasingly demanding
performance requirements, Navy has implemented the College First
Program that was authorized by the NDAA for Fiscal Year 2005. Qualified
recruits, who have committed to join the Navy and are in our DEP, can
now start college and receive a stipend from the Navy. This program
will help them earn credits toward a degree and should also result in
lower attrition from the recruiting and recruit training pipelines.
Enlisted Bonus Cap Increase in Fiscal Year 2006
The importance of meeting SPECOPS/SPECWAR goals with our current
very high tempo of operations cannot be overemphasized. These programs
are exceptionally challenging and require special incentives to attract
the right people. Congress raised the Enlistment Bonus cap from $20,000
to $40,000 and this will significantly improve our ability to attract
the best recruits to these very demanding programs.
Improving Diversity
The Navy diversity strategy is aimed at creating and maintaining
our Navy as a team whose people are treated with dignity and respect,
are encouraged to lead and feel empowered to reach their full
potential. The changing composition of the American workforce, with
increased participation by women and minorities, will have significant
impact upon the military. The changing demographics over the next two
decades mean that we must work now to establish processes and programs
to ensure that we have access to the full range of talent in our
Nation. Navy has embarked on a force-wide diversity campaign plan to
improve diversity up, down and across our organization. Specific
initiatives are aligned under four focus areas of recruiting, growth
and development, organizational alignment and communications. The
intent of the plan is to operationalize diversity as a frontline issue
by involving all Navy leadership and their commands in this effort,
rather than delegating the issue to the Manpower, Personnel, Training,
and Education Organization. We are attempting to understand why we have
diversity shortfalls in some communities, ratings and occupations, and
how we can best improve and sustain representation in those areas. We
also want to leverage our current diversity and build a culture which
values ``diversity of thought'' at all levels. There are many
initiatives tied to this effort. Nationwide ``Navy Weeks'' will
increase our community outreach, to highlight Navy opportunities to
potential recruits and get the Navy message to a larger segment of the
population. Recruiting command is energizing programs to partner and
network with diverse centers of influence to provide exposure to
specific communities we are attempting to attract. We are improving our
growth and development processes so we can ensure all of our sailors
and civilians are growing equally and effectively and to maximize their
talents in support of our mission. Diversity efforts are aimed at
improving our retention processes so we can retain the top quality
talent in whom we have invested. Lastly, we are continuing to stress in
our communications that a diverse organization is a more effective
organization, essential to current and future readiness. Executing the
diversity strategy will be a long-term process; we are taking big steps
each year as we streamline and improve all of the efforts that help us
leverage our diverse Total Force.
``Heritage Recruiting''
The increased involvement in Nation building, development, and
humanitarian relief efforts requires sailors with additional skill
sets. The ability to speak other languages and understand cultural
norms and values is very important. Navy recruiting is partnering with
other Service Recruiting Commands to gather data on potential markets
for heritage language speakers to supplement those traditionally
assigned to intelligence gathering communities and other ratings likely
to have contact with indigenous people.
To expand foreign language and cultural expertise capability and
capacity in the total force, particularly in areas considered
strategic, the Navy is implementing language-related accession and
heritage-community recruiting goals. Tapping the strength of the
Nation's rich diversity, the Heritage Language Program is designed to
recruit native-level speakers of languages and dialects deemed critical
to the global war on terrorism. To the extent practical, we will place
these valuable assets in occupational specialties where their languages
and dialects can be employed.
Increased Recruiting of Women for Technical Ratings
Representation of women in the Navy is important across all ratings
to ensure women have appropriate promotion and leadership
opportunities. Since fiscal year 2004, Chief of Naval Operations (CNO)
Guidance has driven Navy recruiting to increase the number of women
entering non-traditional and sea intensive ratings. Initiatives to
support this effort include increasing the number of female recruiters
and developing better marketing plans.
Active-Duty Officer Recruiting
Navy fills its Active-Duty officer ranks from several sources,
including the Naval Academy, Navy Reserve Officer Training Corps
(NROTC), Officer Candidate School, and Officer Indoctrination School.
Navy Recruiting Command has the mission for the latter three. Navy
attained 84 percent of Active-Duty officer goals in fiscal year 2005
with shortages mostly in medical programs. The latter continue to be
very challenging to recruit for because of high levels of compensation
in the private sector and because of demographic shifts among new
medical professionals towards higher numbers of women and older
students with families. Both groups have a lower propensity for
military service.
Reserve Officer Recruiting
The primary market for Reserve officers is Navy veterans. This
limits the size of the market, particularly in an era when Active-Duty
retention is very high. Consequently, Navy has not met its Reserve
officer recruiting goal since fiscal year 2002. For medical programs,
the same market and compensation issues challenging Active-Duty
recruiting inhibit the ability to meet Reserve mission. There are
additional objections which must be overcome; doctors with private
practices are concerned that a prolonged recall to Active-Duty will
cause them to lose patients and the compensation and benefits the Navy
offers do not always offset the perceived risk to their practices.
Compensation Strategy
The compensation strategy must complement and be aligned with the
strategy for our people and all associated sub-strategies (recruiting/
accessions, training and education, distribution, etc.). In an All-
Volunteer Force environment the primary function of the compensation
strategy must be to incentivize sailors to choose the behavior desired
to meet the Navy's current and future needs. Our ability to attract and
retain quality people is directly related to our ability to promote
voluntarism in a challenging and dynamic environment. It follows the
system must be market-based--flexible and responsive enough to address
both expected and unexpected changes.
To be an ``employer of choice'' in an All-Volunteer Force
environment means compensation must effectively function, i.e.,
compete, against the backdrop of the broader national (and often
global) economy. The compensation policies that support this strategy
must be rational and holistic, encompassing both tangible and
intangible forms of compensation. They should support a system that is
competitive, equitable, flexible, and sufficiently responsive to be
effective in an ever changing operational and market environment. Sound
implementation of the strategy will ensure cost-efficient stewardship
of the commitments made by our personnel and the American taxpayers.
Overall, today's military compensation does succeed and is
generally competitive in the market place. It is a product not of
deliberate design, but rather more than 200 years of evolution. Since
pays and entitlements are founded in statute and implemented through
DOD-wide policy and regulation, change often comes slowly and
incrementally. The current compensation system is best characterized as
evolutionary, not revolutionary.
The men and women who serve are with us not through the coercion of
conscription, but through voluntary decisions to enter and remain in
military service. It is the innate ability, training, experience and
motivation of our men and women that are the primary reasons for the
Navy's superb capabilities. The compensation offered to both Active and
Reserve members, coupled with patriotism and the willingness to serve
are the most important factors affecting our ability to attract and
retain qualified people.
force shaping and retention
The elements necessary to achieve a properly sized and manned force
are retaining personnel whose skill sets and experience are in demand
and incentivizing the separation of personnel whose skill sets are in
excess or for which a need is no longer foreseen. Our goal is to build
a manpower, personnel, training, and education organization that can
deliver the right sailor; with the right skills, experience, and
training; to the right place, at the right time, for the best value.
Achieving this goal requires a robust array of force shaping tools to
carry out efficient force realignment within fiscal constraints and to
remain an ``Employer of Choice'' in a dynamic, competitive marketplace.
Congress's support has resulted in improving, enhancing, and adding to
our force shaping tool kit. Improvements to Selective Reenlistment
Bonus (SRB), Assignment Incentive Pay (AIP), nuclear officer bonuses,
and Reserve component bonuses are all appreciated. ``Authority enacted
by Congress in the NDAA for Fiscal Year 2006 which provided incentives
for targeted voluntary separations was an especially welcome addition
to our toolkit.''
Navy has employed a very carefully controlled, measured approach to
the use of the above listed authorities. We use these force shaping
authorities sparingly and as precision tools rather than as blunt force
instruments. We also employ a progressive and cost effective approach
when determining which ``tools'' to use:
Retaining personnel in the skills we need,
Shifting personnel from overmanned to undermanned
skills through retraining and conversion,
Transferring from Navy's Active component to valid
Reserve component requirements, and
Encouraging interservice transfers.
Under no circumstance should 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, adversely impacting
our readiness. Retraining and converting personnel from overmanned
skills to undermanned skills is our primary approach for retaining
experienced personnel while simultaneously improving the balance of the
force.
We are finding significant savings--and, indeed, significant
efficiencies--right now by better aligning our personnel skill and
experience mix with current fleet requirements.
In some cases, retraining and conversion are neither feasible nor
cost-effective. Only after exhausting all logical retention options do
we then consider encouraging sailors whose experience levels and skills
are ``in excess'' to voluntarily separate from the Service. To
accomplish the latter, Navy has employed available force shaping tools
to the fullest extent practicable: approving waivers for portions of
minimum Active-Duty service requirements; authorizing 1-year waivers of
the requirement to serve 3 years in pay grades O-5 and O-6 to be
eligible to retire; employing our Perform-to-Serve Program for enlisted
members in their first term; authorizing sailors who have made the
decision to voluntarily leave the Navy to do so slightly ahead of the
end of their current enlistments; and establishing High Year Tenure
limits.
Perform to Serve
Three years ago, Navy introduced the Perform-to-Serve Program to
align our Navy personnel inventory and skill sets by means of a
centrally managed reenlistment program and to instill competition in
the retention process. Perform-to-Serve encourages sailors to reenlist
in ratings that offer more advancement opportunity. Perform-to-Serve
features a centralized reenlistment and extension reservation system,
which gives sailors other avenues to pursue success. Designed primarily
with fleet input and 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 in which 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.
Since inception, more than 3,300 sailors have been guided to
undermanned ratings, and more than 52,000 have been approved for in-
rate reenlistment. Our Perform-to-Serve and early transition programs
are part of our deliberate, controlled, and responsible force-shaping
strategy.
Navy Success in Retaining and Utilizing the Right People/Skills
Retaining the best and brightest sailors has always been a Navy
core objective and key to mission success. We retain the right people
by offering rewarding opportunities for professional growth,
development, and leadership. Navy has experienced significant
reenlistment improvement since a 20-year low in fiscal year 1999,
reaching a peak at the end of fiscal year 2003.
Targeted special pays continue to have the strongest impact on
reenlistments. Maintaining SRB funding is essential to sustained
retention of critical skills. One specific area of challenge is Zone B
retention (a category comprised of sailors with between 6 and 10 years
service) in technically oriented ratings. Congress raised the
legislative cap from $60,000 to $90,000 for Zone B, allowing selected
ratings to increase their SRB multiples to target shortfalls.
Reduced Undesirable Attrition
Since 1999, we have made significant reductions in enlisted
attrition. Specifically, we reduced Zone A attrition by nearly 37
percent (Zone A is comprised of sailors who have served for up to 6
years). We've also reduced attrition in Zones B (6-10 years) and C (10-
15 years) by more than 50 percent.
This past year, leaders throughout our Navy successfully attacked
the number one cause for Zone A attrition: illegal drug use. Despite a
9-percent increase in Navy-wide drug use testing, the number of
individuals who tested and turned up positive has decreased by 20
percent since 2003. The result is attrition due to illegal drug use is
no longer the leading cause for enlisted attrition. Current leading
contributors to attrition are fraudulent enlistments into the Navy and
medical disqualifications. We are exploring ways to reduce attrition in
these areas as well.
With enlisted attrition near all time lows, we are benefiting from
the highest quality workforce the Navy has ever had.
Assignment Incentive Pay
An integral part of our ``Strategy for our People,'' Navy's AIP
program is enhancing combat readiness by permitting market forces to
efficiently distribute sailors where they are most needed. The success
of AIP in attracting volunteers to difficult-to-fill geographic
locations and jobs has led to the progressive elimination of non-
monetary, but nonetheless costly, incentives such as awarding sea duty
credit for assignment to hard-to-fill overseas shore duty billets. The
result has been a growth in the available population of sailors
eligible for assignment to sea duty without a concurrent increase in
end strength. Navy will ultimately be able to allocate almost 10,000
additional sailors to sea duty who would previously have been locked
into a shore duty assignment following an overseas tour of duty ashore.
This will provide future readiness benefits in the form of better at-
sea manning and a more efficient use of sailors' acquired fleet
experience. More importantly, challenging duty assignments can be
filled without forced assignments.
The numbers of applications for AIP continue to grow as this
adaptable and highly flexible authority allows us to address unique
assignment and distribution challenges in a market-based manner by
emphasizing and rewarding volunteerism. Today, 18-months after
implementation of Navy's AIP program, its success is unequivocal. The
``fill rate'' of AIP jobs is almost ten percent higher than the Navy-
wide rate, while the average bid since inception is $362 per month.
Perhaps there is no better example of the success of AIP and its
ability to leverage volunteerism and the forces of the market place
than its use in 2005 to respond to an emergent global war on terrorism
requirement. In early May 2005, 259 Master-at-Arms sailors were needed
to report to the detainee operations detachment in Guantanamo Bay,
Cuba, for 12-month unaccompanied tours. By mid-May, Navy assignment
officers had only been able to recruit 42 volunteers. AIP was
subsequently implemented to attract volunteers to these assignments;
223 sailors volunteered with AIP as an incentive in just a 6-day
assignment window. Of those, 40 of the 42 sailors who had previously
volunteered based on receiving non-monetary ``sea duty credit'' toward
a future ship-board tour, opted instead to bid for a billet with AIP
and forego the non-monetary (and ultimately more expensive to the Navy)
sea duty credit.
The AIP bid system is also currently used to incentivize extensions
among personnel in designated continuity billets in dependent-
restricted Bahrain and to attract volunteers for subsequent longer 18-
month assignments. Bahrain is also the location of the first Navy
application of AIP for officer assignments. Its use there will afford
us an opportunity to evaluate the impact of market-based incentives in
addressing future officer manning and distribution challenges.
With congressional support, we now have the authority to make lump-
sum AIP payments, and an expanded payment cap of $3,000 per month that
allows us to set and adjust the incentive to best match the nature of
the assignment and the available labor pool. This expanded authority
will significantly improve our ability to apply a valuable assignment
tool to manning challenges and emergent requirements arising from the
global war on terrorism.
Selective Reenlistment Bonuses
The SRB is without question our most successful and effective
retention and force-shaping tool. It enables us to retain the right
number of high quality sailors with the right skills and experience.
While we have enjoyed much success in our retention efforts of recent
years, we must not presume we can rest on these accomplishments or
surrender to the notion that the tools, which made such successes
possible, are no longer needed. SRB authority is sometimes questioned
because of the funding required to support it. SRB directly supports
Navy's emerging strategy for our people and enables us to selectively
retain the sailors we need as we transform to a lean, high-tech, high
capability, mission-centric force. More importantly, SRB affords Navy
the ability to compete in a domestic labor market that is increasingly
demanding of skilled, technically proficient, highly trainable, and
adaptable personnel.
The Navy is at a crucial juncture in the transformation of our
workforce. In the future we will recruit fewer generalists, and instead
seek a predominantly technical and more experienced force. To that end,
our SRB strategy has shifted from targeting general skill sets in zones
A and B (17 months to 10 years) to focusing on specific skill sets
across all zones (17 months to 14 years). Navy Enlisted Community
Managers (ECMs) have applied increasing levels of analytical rigor to
predicting and monitoring reenlistment requirements at a very granular
skill level and by individual years of service [also called Length of
Service Cells]. By monitoring actual reenlistment behavior in
comparison to requirements, the ECMs review clear and unambiguous data
flagging SRB performance and pointing to areas meriting increase or
decrease. This ensures precious SRB dollars are applied only when and
where needed based on requirements and outcome.
Congress raised the SRB cap from $60,000 to $90,000; we will ensure
award level increases are applied in a prudent and fiscally responsible
manner. This cap increase will initially allow us to adequately
incentivize experienced nuclear-trained personnel to reenlist. We will
later apply it to other skills as retention trends dictate. We save
over $100,000 in training costs and retain 10 to 14 years of invaluable
nuclear power plant experience for each one of these individuals SRB
allows us to reenlist. Navy-wide, we also cannot laterally hire
experienced technicians as Oracle or Microsoft can, but must grow from
recruits and retain as journeymen from an internal labor market.
Failure to fully fund the SRB program would create a long-term
degradation in readiness. Congress' continued support for this vital
program is necessary; we need fully funded SRB at the President's
fiscal year 2007 requested budget levels of $179.7 million for
anniversary payments and $159.8 million for new payments.
Targeted Separation Incentives
With the enactment of the NDAA for Fiscal Year 2006, Congress
provided a targeted voluntary separation incentive to help shape our
force in the short-term while allowing us to maintain a positive tone
that will not detract from recruiting and retention of talented
professionals over the long-term. The addition of this authority goes a
long way to filling the previously existing gap in our force-shaping
toolkit, i.e., the lack of incentives to selectively target voluntary
separations. Voluntary Separation Pay, while limited in its application
through December 2008 to officers with more than 6 but less than 12
years of service, enhances our ability to properly shape the force,
aids us in reducing officer excesses and ultimately saves the taxpayer
money. We are aggressively working to field this new tool and reap the
readiness benefits of its use.
With the continuing support of Congress--and reliance on the
talents of America's men and women who choose to serve--the Navy will
continue to build a force that is properly sized, balanced, and priced
for tomorrow.
Foreign Language Proficiency Bonus
To incentivize the identification, development, and sustainment of
proficiency in foreign languages, especially those considered
strategic, we will award a Foreign Language Proficiency Bonus (FLPB) to
the Total Force (Active, Reserve, and civilians) to the maximum extent
allowable by law and consistent with current DOD policies. Navy
instructions relative to FLPB are being updated to reflect both higher
award levels and expanded eligibility.
officer community management
The officer community is trained and prepared to continue leading
Navy Forces in support of the global war on terrorism. We are
experiencing improved retention rates across most officer communities.
This is attributable to the highly effective special and incentive pays
enacted by Congress. These bonuses are essential to our ability to
recruit and retain our officers.
Special Operations
At perhaps no other time in our Navy's history have the skills of
our Special Operations officers and technicians played such a vital
role in mission accomplishment. Since the events of September 11, 2001,
the demand for their skills in Explosive Ordnance Disposal (EOD) Anti-
terrorism and Force Protection has skyrocketed. Our Officer accessions
are aligned to fill our EOD detachment officer in charge demands and
require approximately 38 officers per year (fiscal years 2006/2007)
accessed through a variety of sources including direct accessions as
well as lateral transfers. Retention of SPECOPS officers is measured by
the continuation of officers serving in years 6 through 11 of
commissioned service. In fiscal year 2005, we retained 48 percent of
our senior lieutenants and control grade officers, two percent
shortfall from the goal. To address this shortfall we recently
implemented a Critical Skill Retention Bonus (CSRB) of up to $75,000 to
improve retention of EOD Lieutenants. Our Special Operations community
is heavily involved in providing the operational and tactical
leadership to our newly established Riverine Forces, the NECC and the
Joint Improvised Explosive Device (IED) Defeat Organization.
Naval Special Warfare Officer Community
The Naval Special Warfare Officer (NSW) Community is manned at 95
percent of assigned billets. SEAL Officer accessions are currently
averaging five applicants for every opening and new accessions are on
track to meet increasing Officer Department Head requirement (SEAL
Platoon commander) at the sixth year of commissioned service (YCS 6).
The community now requires 34 department heads per year (76 percent
retention rate across 6-11 YCS) based on increased growth in pay grades
O-4 thru O-6. Fiscal year 2005 retention was 62 percent. Nonetheless,
we currently face a number of manpower and personnel challenges at the
O-4 and O-5 level. NSW currently has a shortage of 50 lieutenant
commanders and 8 commanders. These shortages primarily result from the
effects of Navy downsizing of all Officer accessions in the early
1990s. The Navy has used Naval Special Warfare Officer Continuation Pay
since 1999 to successfully retain officers with 6-14 Years of
Commissioned Service (YOCS). The Navy is evaluating options for closing
the remaining gaps.
Seabee and Civil Engineer Corps
Seabee and Civil Engineer Corps communities are healthy and fully
engaged in supporting global war on terrorism operational requirements.
In the aggregate the Seabee community is 95 percent manned and the
Civil Engineer Corps is 98 percent manned. Current Seabee attrition,
retention and reenlistment behavior are trending in line with or better
than average Navy levels while the Civil Engineer Corps has seen an
increase in attrition. We continue to predict and forecast that
additional incentive pays may be necessary to sustain current retention
and reenlistment behavior based upon the current high OPTEMPO endured
by our Seabees and Civil Engineer Corps officers. The Naval
Construction Force Reserve Seabees and Civil Engineer Corps officers
have experienced significant manning shortages and accession
challenges. Reserve Seabee accessions have significantly missed goals
for the past 3 years. The health of our Reserve component Seabees,
Civil Engineer Corps and Naval Construction Force is imperative to the
Navy's global war on terrorism support. The Navy MPT&E Enterprise is
working on this challenge and has developed plans to guide this focused
effort.
Next I'd like to discuss selected other officer communities:
Surface Warfare Officer Community
The Surface Warfare community's initial accession plan is designed
to yield sufficient officers to meet the demand for department heads
with about 7 years of cumulative service; in fiscal year 2006 we will
bring in approximately 750 new Surface Warfare Officers (SWOs). This
year Navy implemented a junior Surface Warfare CSRB to help meet
community requirements for trained and experienced department heads
(currently 275 per year). This program, in conjunction with the Surface
Warfare Officer's Continuation Pay (SWOCP), targets officers reaching
their first retention decision milestone and has been a very successful
tool to persuade them to remain on Active-Duty through completion of
mid-grade department head tours. The community is generally well-manned
now except for a shortage of control grade officers. That shortage is
being remedied with the help of a CSRB authorized by Congress.
Continued CSRB support is key to long-term retention and proper shaping
of this community.
Submarine Warfare Officer Community
As a direct result of improved junior officer retention, accession
requirements have been reduced from 440 to 346 between fiscal year 2004
and fiscal year 2006. Although overall accession goals have been met
for the past 6 years, significant challenges remain in recruiting high
quality candidates into this technically demanding warfare community.
The 5-year average retention rate for submarine junior officers has
improved from 29 percent in fiscal year 2000 to 39 percent in fiscal
year 2006 as a direct result of targeted Nuclear Officer Incentive Pay
(NOIP) and Continuation Pay rate increases authorized since fiscal year
2001. Despite these significant improvements, retention has only fully
met requirements once in the past 6 years. NOIP has proven to be an
extremely effective tool over its more than 35-year history and is
largely responsible for improving submarine officer retention. NOIP is
widely viewed as DOD's model retention incentive program. It remains
the surest, most cost-effective means of sustaining required retention
and meeting fleet readiness requirements for high-quality, highly-
trained officers.
Aviation Community
The fiscal year 2006 requirement for pilots and naval flight
officers is 380. This reduction from previous years is due to reduced
training attrition and fleet requirements. Fiscal year 2005 aviation
retention was 47.8 percent through department head tours (at 12 years
of commissioned service), a slight decrease from fiscal year 2004 but
still well above the historical average of 40 percent. Retention has
started to rise through the first quarter of fiscal year 2006 and
currently stands at 51.8 percent. The excellent aviation retention
figures can be attributed in large part to 5 consecutive years of
congressional authorization for Aviation Career Continuation Pay
(ACCP). 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.
Medical Communities
Navy medicine has been actively executing military-to-civilian
conversions in fiscal year 2005, as directed by the Office of the
Secretary of Defense. In addition, many of our medical personnel are
directly involved in the global war on terrorism, and we are faced with
several challenges in recruiting and retention. Specific community
issues are as follows:
Medical Corps
As of December 2005, the Medical Corps dipped below end strength
targets for the first time since 1998, with acute shortages in
subspecialties critical to support wartime requirements and hospital
operations. On the recruiting side, the Health Professions Scholarship
Program, the primary student pipeline for medical corps officers, made
84 percent of goal during fiscal year 2004 and only made 56 percent of
goal in fiscal year 2005. Early indications are fiscal year 2006
attainment will again fall far short of goal; Navy is considering an
initiative for an HPSP accession bonus to attract applicants. Decreased
accessions have not been able to make up for increased loss rates in
retention among all specialties. Increased medical special pay rates
have been offered for fiscal year 2006 but do not seem to be having a
significant impact on increasing retention at this point.
Dental Corps
Dental Corps is significantly under end strength in the range of 5-
13 years commissioned service. Dental accessions continue to be
problematic. Retention rates for Dental Corps officers, reaching the
end of their initial obligation, have steadily declined over the past 8
years. The Dental Corps is projected to lose 144 officers in fiscal
year 2006, or 13 percent of the dental force. Residency training
opportunities and significant increases in the Fiscal Year 2006 Dental
Officer Multi-year Retention Bonus are being used to try to retain
dental officers for long-term service. We are considering establishing
a CSRB, under existing statutory authority, to help reduce junior
officer losses after completion of their initial obligation. Initiative
has been submitted and funding is available for this CSRB.
Medical Service Corps
The Medical Service Corps accesses to vacancies in subspecialties,
and direct accessions are market-driven. Last year the Medical Service
Corps fell short of their direct accession goal by 30 percent, directly
impacting ability to meet current mission requirements. Retention of
specialized professionals such as clinical psychologists, pharmacists,
and podiatrists has been the greatest challenge. Licensed clinical
psychologists have experienced an increasingly heavy OPTEMPO and the
resulting loss rates are signified. Health Professions Loan Repayment
Program has been implemented as an accession and retention tool to
attract and retain critical specialties with some success.
Additionally, the community is requesting authority for CSRBs to retain
officers in critically undermanned specialties.
Nurse Corps
National nursing shortages and competition with other Services have
resulted in shortfalls in Navy Nurse Corps accessions over the last 2
years. To counter this, in 2006 we have increased levels for both the
Nurse Accession Bonus and the Nurse Candidate Program. Retention of
Nurse Corps officers also poses a significant challenge. Retention
rates after initial obligation range from 60-72 percent and decrease
even further beyond 5 years of service. The Health Professions Loan
Repayment Program is being used to attract and retain Nurse Corps
officers and is drawing significant interest. The Nurse Corps community
is also studying options for a CSRB in specific surgical
subspecialties.
Joint Officer Development and Management
The future of national and international security rests with
interoperability and cooperation among the Services, interagency,
international partners and nongovernmental organizations. Naval forces
bring to the fight unique maritime and expeditionary prowess. The Navy-
Marine Corps Team will continue to enhance its joint warfighting
readiness with expeditionary agility, flexibility, and lethality, while
working closely with these interagency, international, and
nongovernmental organizations to promote peace, stability, and U.S.
interests. Navy seeks fully qualified and inherently joint leadership
forces that are skilled joint warfighters and strategically minded
critical thinkers. We will plan for, prepare, and assign high quality
officer and senior enlisted personnel to joint positions to enhance
joint warfighting readiness. We will develop leaders with professional
qualifications and skills needed in the joint environment to achieve
their full potential, so that national and joint decisionmakers seek
out Navy Joint warfighters as trusted advisors and key staff members,
and all national and theater campaign strategies, plans, operations,
and activities fully address maritime considerations and utilize the
strengths of the maritime force. The Navy fully supports the Chairman's
Vision for Joint Officer Development and DOD's Strategic Plan for Joint
Officer Management and Joint Officer Development.
Civilian Community Management
National Security Personnel System (NSPS) will provide new civil
service rules for the over 700,000 DOD civilian workers. It will
strengthen our ability to accomplish the mission in an ever-changing
national security environment. NSPS accelerates the Department's
efforts to create a Total Force, operating as one cohesive unit, with
each performing the work most suitable to their skills. DON needs a
human resources system that appropriately recognizes and rewards
employee performance and the contributions they make to the DOD
mission. NSPS will give us better tools to attract and retain the best
employees.
revolution in training
The key to our operational prowess is a properly trained, educated,
and ready force. In 2002, the Navy launched the Revolution in Training
(RIT) to revitalize training and education to deliver the right skills,
to the right sailors, at the right time and at the best cost. The RIT
continues and will ultimately deliver individual assessment
capabilities, simulation, and adaptive learning technologies to produce
a dynamic and responsive individual training system. It also provides
the foundation for a fully integrated manpower, personnel, training,
and education system. The overarching integration will be accomplished
through Sea Warrior, which encompasses the Navy's training, education,
and career-management systems. The RIT has three underlying concepts
embedded in its approach: the Human Performance Systems Model (HPSM),
the Science of Learning (SL) and the Integrated Learning Environment
(ILE).
Human Performance Systems Model
A ``systems approach,'' HPSM is a cyclical model that defines
organization and individual performance requirements, establishes how
best to achieve this performance, develops the necessary tools or
products to enable this performance, implements the solution set, and
provides feedback based on an evaluation of the outcomes. HPSM may best
be described as a systematic method for finding cost-effective ways to
enable people to perform their jobs better by focusing on selecting the
right interventions based on root cause and true requirements.
Science of Learning
The SL will transform the Navy's training and education
environments by applying the latest advances in technology and
educational psychology to the learning process. It will move Navy
training and education from a lecture, listen, learn format to a more
active learning process through which sailors will receive feedback
necessary to improve their performance.
Integrated Learning Environment
The ILE is the means by which we will provide individually
tailored, high quality learning and electronic performance aids in
order to allow the best fit between the worker and the work to be
performed.
professional military education
Education is a key enabler in developing the competencies,
professional knowledge, and critical thinking skills to deliver combat-
ready naval forces to meet joint warfighting requirements of the Navy.
In July 2004, we established the Professional Military Education
Continuum to provide the framework for life-long learning that enables
mission accomplishment and provides for personal and professional
development. The continuum integrates Advanced Education (beyond the
secondary level), Navy-specific Professional Military Education, Joint
Professional Military Education (JPME) and leadership development. It
is focused on ensuring future leaders have the knowledge base to think
through uncertainty; drive innovation; fully exploit advanced
technologies, systems and platforms; understand the culture,
environment and language of the battle space; conduct operations as a
coherently joint force; and practice effects-based thinking and
operations. It applies to all sailors. Specific education opportunities
to provide learning solutions sequenced to meet growing and changing
roles and requirements throughout a career are being phased in across
multiple years.
We are sharpening our focus on requirements linked to competencies
and capabilities to better prepare more capable sailors for joint
warfighting. We are also focused on integrating education achievements
into a career development system to ensure the ability to plan and
track growth, and measure competency attainment.
Flexible Learning Options
Internet or computer-based delivery of course material remains an
important focus of our effort to make educational material readily
available to all of our people both ashore and afloat. The Naval
Postgraduate School, Naval War College, and Center for Naval Leadership
are endeavoring to increase non-resident opportunities to enable
education anytime, anywhere to accommodate busy careers that do not
always allow time for resident education. Naval Postgraduate School
distance learning options include select degree programs; non-degree
certificate programs that provide a concentrated focus in a specific
field, for example: space systems, information systems and operations,
and anti-submarine warfare; and individual courses. Naval War College
is employing web-enabled, CD-ROM and Fleet Concentration Area Seminar
programs to provide maritime focused Joint Professional Military
Education at a distance. Naval War College JPME courses have been
embedded into many of the degree programs at Naval Postgraduate School.
The Center for Naval Leadership continues to develop online
opportunities for all sailors to complete Leadership Education as a
part of their career development. Our content is dynamic and reflects
the most current leadership theories and principles.
While we continue to promote non-resident learning opportunities
for our force, our fiscal year 2007 budget also requests funds to allow
us to increase the number of officers we will send in-residence to
Naval Postgraduate School for technical, analytical, and regional area
studies programs. The latter supports our FAO program, which promotes
graduate degrees in regional area studies.
The Navy College Program continues to provide opportunities for
sailors to earn college degrees while on Active-Duty. Partnerships with
colleges and universities leverage academic credit recommended for Navy
training and experience and offer rating related associate and
bachelors degrees through distance learning. The Navy College Program
for Afloat College Education makes it possible for sailors to pursue
courses at sea and in remote locations at no tuition cost to
themselves.
Joint Professional Military Education
In the fiscal year 2007 budget, we expand resident service college
opportunities to enhance Navy's ability to provide unique and
complementary warfighting from the sea to Joint Force Commanders. The
expansion enables Navy to ensure the appropriate service composition
requirements for certification of senior service college instruction of
JPME Phase II as authorized by the Ronald W. Reagan NDAA for Fiscal
Year 2005. Additionally, the expansion supports the Navy's new
requirement for completion of JPME Phase I for Unrestricted Line
Officer Commander Command beginning with Command Screen Boards in 2008.
Culture of Effects-Based Thinkers
In keeping with The Strategy for Our People, we are in the process
of moving towards a capabilities-based and competency-focused learning
continuum whose education programs will result in measurable mission
capability while enabling personal and professional development. A key
area we are addressing is the development of a culture of effects-based
thinkers and operators who evaluate effect as a measure of execution by
focusing on desired outcomes and root causes, measuring results, and
making appropriate adjustments. Updated Naval Postgraduate School,
Naval War College, and executive learning program curricula provide
essential learning building blocks while we continue to expand and
sequence course offerings to ensure a full continuum of the appropriate
learning.
sailor quality-of-life
Commitment to personal and family readiness is fundamental to
sustaining a combat-ready naval force. Our success in the Nation's
defense depends on the entire Navy community--Active, Reserve,
civilian, and their families. The frequent deployments of our highly
mobile force places considerable stress upon our sailors and their
families. Our deployed servicemembers characteristically enjoy high
morale and pride. They value the opportunity to use their training in
real world missions and realize a sense of accomplishment that
contributes to positive attitudes and is reflected in their decisions
to reenlist in the Navy. At the same time, however, the family
separation and high OPTEMPO place great stress upon them and their
families. Our challenge is clear. We must provide effective, responsive
programs and services to our sailors and their families to mitigate the
negative factors.
Predatory Lending
An issue that is becoming a significant concern to Navy leadership:
Navy leadership is very concerned over the serious problem of predatory
lending practices and the impact on financial and personal readiness of
sailors and families. Predatory lending occurs when a lender takes
unfair advantage of a borrower through deception, fraud or loans
containing extremely high interest rates or fees. Our junior sailors
and families are particularly vulnerable as they find themselves short
of money between paydays to pay essential expenses such as rent,
groceries, utility bills, unexpected expenses, and car payments. For
example in our research we have found personal predatory loans with
interest rates as high as 2,146 percent, 1,288 percent, and 782
percent.
The use of these ``bridge'' loans, with exorbitant interest rates,
leads to a downward cycle of more borrowing and increased indebtedness.
Not only does it result in continued financial hardship and damage to
credit but it also seriously impacts unit morale and personal and
family readiness. The CNO has challenged leadership to develop and
aggressively implement a plan to improve consumer education and
personal financial counseling for military personnel in order to
increase awareness of the practice and risks and to assist in recovery
for those who have fallen into this downward financial spiral.
State laws vary widely in their oversight and control of commercial
lending practices. This is a complicated challenge to personal
readiness that deserves the attention of a diverse group of experts
including financial industry professionals, legislators, and State
government officials. We seek your support in encouraging a coalition
of leadership in government, the commercial sector, nonprofit agencies
and the military services to curtail and constrain predatory lending
practices. I am prepared to partner with Congress in seeking means to
effectively address this serious problem.
Task Force Navy Family
The lives of more than 88,000 Navy personnel, retirees, and
immediate family members were severely disrupted by Hurricanes Katrina
and Rita. Task Force Navy Family leveraged existing agencies and local
community support centers to assist our personnel. While we still have
cases outstanding, we have transitioned the Task Force to Commander,
Navy Installations Command for follow-up. This effort to respond to the
crisis in ``our own backyard'' has been a reminder of the importance we
place on the family and has also provided several lessons learned we
could employ in case of future catastrophic events.
Personal and Family Readiness Initiative
Commander, Navy Installations Command and I recently established a
Personal and Family Readiness Program Board of Directors. Actionable
issues are identified, analyzed by a Family Readiness Program Advisory
Council and implemented by the Board of Directors. I am enthusiastic
about the significant opportunity to identify real needs and workable
solutions to improve quality-of-service and life issues for our Navy
family.
Child Development and Youth Programs
Sailors and their families continue to rank the need for Child and
Youth Programs (CYP) very high. This program is now an integral support
system for mission readiness and deployments. To help 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 to licensed civilian
community childcare programs. To meet the needs of shift workers and
watch standers, we piloted several programs; including the addition of
around-the-clock in-home care providers, as well as two new child
development group homes. Following the success of those pilot programs,
we are expanding those initiatives at several additional sites.
The DOD goal is to provide CYP spaces to meet 80 percent of the
potential need for ages 0 to 12 by fiscal year 2007. The Navy potential
need has been calculated as 65,858 spaces. Navy CYP achieved 69 percent
of that potential need in fiscal year 2005 and with added spaces will
reach 71 percent in fiscal year 2006. The CYP waiting list in fiscal
year 2005 was 7,908, up 19 percent since fiscal year 2003. The new
Youth Program DOD Instruction directs the implementation of performance
standards and eventual DOD certification similar to the current
requirements for children under 12. This requirement will add to the
overall future funding requirements for Navy CYP. Also in fiscal year
2005, we achieved 100 percent DOD certification and 96 percent
accreditation of our child development centers by the National
Association for the Education of Young Children. Our objective for
fiscal year 2006 is to ensure all Navy child development centers and
school age care programs are accredited. This tells our Navy families
their children are receiving top quality care that equals or exceeds
the highest national standards.
Caring for Our People
Navy maintains a longstanding and proud tradition of ``taking care
of our own'' by providing prompt and compassionate care to sailors and
their families in times of crisis. In the past, we have measured our
success by how quickly we could certify benefits and entitlements and
by how expeditiously we could transport families to the bedsides of
their seriously ill or injured sailors. These traditional metrics,
while still important, are insufficient and do not fully address what
our families need and deserve. Through careful research and
collaboration with the Department of Veterans' Affairs, Social Security
Administration, and the other Services, we have identified additional
areas of focus. We have set ourselves goals to improve our casualty
reporting process and to provide better and more personal oversight of
casualty cases. We also endeavor to maintain our benefits certification
efficiency and to improve case management effectiveness.
Traumatic Servicemembers' Group Life Insurance
We are extremely grateful for your efforts in enacting the
Traumatic Servicemembers' Group Life Insurance (TSGLI) program, which
is essential to our ability to provide appropriate and well-deserved
support for our severely injured personnel. Navy implemented TSGLI in
December 2005, and it is providing much needed financial support to our
wounded heroes and their families as they deal with expenses incurred
during convalescence.
Safe Harbor Program
This past summer, Navy established the ``Safe Harbor'' program,
designed to have senior staff personally visit and assist our seriously
injured sailors and their families. Our commitment is to a seamless
transition from arrival at a continental United States (CONUS) medical
treatment facility, throughout medical treatment, and then in
subsequent rehabilitation and recovery. Since instituting this program,
we have contacted every sailor who has been seriously injured since
September 11, 2001. Twenty-six of them asked to have their names placed
on our Active follow-up list and are periodically contacted. When
Hurricane Katrina struck, we identified and contacted all seriously
injured sailors who were residents in the affected area to offer them
assistance and attend to their needs and those of their families. Since
then, we have established a toll-free number and set up a Web site to
further speed access to information and facilitate contact with our
program office personnel. We are committed to maintaining personal
links with our seriously injured sailors, sustaining effective follow
up programs and doing everything in our power to advance the quality of
their care and the support to their families.
Care of All Returning Sailors and their Families
Navy has long been in the business of preparing sailors and family
members with pre-, mid-, and post-deployment briefings and services. In
view of the recent research on the needs of our returning
servicemembers and their families, as well as CNO's commitment to
personal and family readiness, we have fine tuned those programs and
services to ease return from deployment or mobilization. We have met
increased demand for our return and reunion programs in which Fleet and
Family Support Center teams embark upon returning ships, in transit, to
provide educational briefings, workshops, and consultation for our
personnel. These programs focus on re-establishment of personal and
family relationships, understanding behavioral and developmental stages
of children, effective parenting strategies and financial management.
Command leaders are trained to identify post-deployment stress symptoms
and refer personnel for treatment.
Sexual Assault Victim Intervention
Sexual assault prevention, victim assistance, and treatment are top
priority efforts throughout the Navy and our Sexual Assault Victim
Intervention (SAVI) program has been recognized as a model for over a
decade. We enforce a zero tolerance policy while continually striving
to improve support for victims.
Navy contributed significantly to the work of the DOD Care for
Victims of Sexual Assault Task Force and fully supports enhancements
enacted in the Ronald W. Reagan NDAA for Fiscal Year 2005. This past
year, we aggressively implemented DOD's joint service policy changes
based on Task Force recommendations. Navy has adopted revised
definitions, provided additional Sexual Assault Response and Prevention
specialists in the field, upgraded command and victim advocate
training, improved reporting and leadership awareness, strengthened the
effectiveness of the program through implementation of confidential
reporting procedures, and implemented a case management approach to
improve sexual assault response and prevention capabilities.
Transition Assistance Management Program
The Navy Transition Assistance Management Program (TAMP)
coordinates post-military employment assistance workshops, veterans'
benefit seminars, and disability entitlements briefings at 65 shore-
based sites worldwide and aboard ships at sea. These specialized
classes assist our sailors and their family members as they prepare to
transition to civilian life or formulate decisions to remain on Active-
Duty. In fiscal year 2005, we expanded Veterans' Affairs benefit
counseling to our deployed personnel operating in Navy Region Southwest
Asia and developed a web-based training curriculum for command career
counselors to improve pre-separation counseling. We also implemented
military life-cycle career development seminars for first-term and mid-
career sailors and placed increased emphasis on developing and
providing assistance to our demobilizing Reserve component and war-
wounded sailors.
Culture of Fitness--Fit for Duty, Fit for Life--Cornerstone of Personal
Readiness
The Navy fitness program provides members of the Navy community
ready access to high quality fitness programs, equipment, and
facilities dedicated to meeting their total fitness needs. Morale,
Welfare, and Recreation (MWR) maintains 145 fitness centers, more than
200 indoor basketball courts, over 300 racquetball courts, 150 swimming
pools, and thousands of outdoor sports facilities, including softball/
football/soccer fields, tennis/volleyball courts and running tracks.
MWR fitness incorporates all elements of personal and group fitness
activities such as cardio and weight training, intramural (team and
individual) sports, group exercise (e.g., aerobics, step, martial arts,
yoga) classes, personal training, group and individual fitness testing
and programming, aquatic activities, swimming, and special events
(e.g., runs, tri/biathlons, track meets, swim meets). In fiscal year
2005, Navy MWR centrally funded and procured over 868 pieces of fitness
equipment for 54 Operational Support Centers. This action completed an
initiative that outfitted all 134 Navy Reserve Centers with fitness
equipment to enable personnel to maintain proper fitness levels and
adopt healthy lifestyle changes.
MWR Fleet Readiness
The MWR Fleet Readiness Program remains the cornerstone of MWR. We
continue to use a variety of funding and equipment initiatives to
ensure that the fleet has the MWR support it needs. We used allocations
and supplemental funding to enhance our fitness and recreation support
to deployed forces at sea and ashore. In fiscal year 2005, we began
expanding our Civilian Afloat Program that provides recreation and
fitness professionals, who live and work onboard our aircraft carriers,
amphibious assault ships and submarine tenders, to enhance shipboard
habitability and promote positive use of off-duty time. Feedback from
the fleet remains very positive as reflected in customer surveys and
reports from commanding officers.
We also developed and conducted an Importance-Performance Program
Assessment to measure the overall effectiveness of the Fleet Readiness
Program by providing an understanding of what sailors perceive to be
the most and least important components of service delivery and service
performance. Over 10,000 sailors participated in this valuable program
assessment for Afloat Recreation, Fitness and Liberty programs. This
data will serve as our baseline in establishing various performance
metrics as we move forward with our ``Focus on the Fleet'' initiatives.
The top rated MWR program and service for fleet sailors over the
past several years remains access to electronic mail (e-mail) and
Internet connectivity. The Library Multimedia Resource Center (LMRC) on
each ship is the delivery point for this service. We completed the
total fleet LMRC replacement and upgrade in fiscal year 2005 with the
purchase and distribution of an additional 1,950 laptops and other
related equipments.
Navy Movie Program
The Navy Movie program supports one of the most popular
recreational activities for Active-Duty personnel and their families,
with attendance figures of 2.7 million patrons ashore and 23 million
viewing hours afloat. We distributed 192 movie titles to 800 Navy fleet
and shore sites, Marine Corps, Coast Guard, National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration, Military Sealift Command, and Department of
State locations. This consisted of 150,000 videotapes, 5,500 35mm
prints, 30 early tape releases to forward-deployed ships, and 30 first-
run features to CONUS base theaters, 2 weeks after the U.S. premiere.
The Navy Movie program conducted 13 free sneak previews at CONUS base
theaters, attended by 110,000 sailors and family members. The movie
program continues to evolve to stay current with technology changes. In
a cooperative effort with the Naval Media Center, we have established
digital format requirements to replace analog tapes, and will begin
deploying them later this year.
conclusion
As we reshape and adapt the U.S. Navy to defeat emerging threats,
it continues to be the predominant naval force in the world. At the
very heart of that Navy, people, Active and Reserve, military and
civilian, remain our greatest strength and the most fundamental element
of our readiness and success. They, and their families, are making
daily sacrifices to protect this Nation and to prosecute the global war
on terrorism. These patriotic and professional Americans continue to
perform brilliantly and you have every reason to be proud of them.
We often think of the 21st century as the future. It is not. It is
today. The sailors, civil servants, and contractors that will support
joint missions in the future are entering the workforce and Navy today.
What we do today--the decisions we make, the constraints we live
under--will determine what we are capable of in the future.
If we are to succeed in defining, developing and delivering the
workforce required in the future, we must examine today's practices and
make necessary changes now. For example, in order to continue to
respond effectively to new and increased mission areas, we will analyze
our manpower requirements to determine if we need to move to a
different officer/enlisted mix or a more senior mix within the officer
or enlisted structure. This analysis will include evaluating and
analyzing the impact of current Defense Officer Personnel Management
Act control grade ceilings and considering the need for relief from
these constraints.
We will continue to look at our compensation strategy to ensure it
is the right compensation strategy for 2020-2025 given our changing
demographics. A compensation system for that timeframe must acknowledge
that our future lies with the All-Volunteer Force, and must therefore
emphasize volunteerism. We must shift our focus to competency,
performance and skill-based compensation and away from longevity and
rank. We need to refocus away from deferred compensation and instead
optimize the current compensation in a manner that creates a ``push''
to a full career (as opposed to the current cliff-vested retirement's
``pull'' to full career). Major bonus programs should remain separate
and intact in the near term (e.g. SRB, community-specific bonuses) with
a long-term eye toward rational consolidation into a select number of
broad, flexible authorities applied with agility in response to
``market conditions.''
We must devise ``on ramps and off ramps'' to facilitate smooth
transition between Active-Duty, Reserve duty, and civil service. We
need to compensate the total workforce we want in peace & wartime. Our
future compensation strategy must incentivize voluntary acquisition and
effective utilization of skills/competencies for a diverse workforce,
while enhancing service flexibility and discretion vis-a-vis statutory
ceilings to provide room for future growth ahead of the power curve in
a rapidly changing environment. Such a system must also incentivize
voluntary transitions/separation of careerists and support the
Service's ability to pilot and demonstrate new business practices.
We are grateful for your commitment to the men and women of the
U.S. Navy and to the programs that make them the premier maritime
fighting force and sustains them and their families. On behalf of all
Navy sailors and civil servants, and their families, I'd like to thank
Congress for its continuing and unwavering support.
Senator Graham. General Osman.
STATEMENT OF LT. GEN. H.P. OSMAN, USMC, DEPUTY COMMANDANT FOR
MANPOWER AND RESERVE AFFAIRS, UNITED STATES MARINE CORPS
General Osman. Chairman Graham, Senator Nelson, I, also,
thank you for the opportunity to appear before this
subcommittee today to bring you some good news about your
marines.
Since 1967, when I joined the Marine Corps, I've had an
opportunity to work with and observe marines from a number of
generations--World War II, Korea, Vietnam, certainly the first
batch of All-Volunteers, and, of course, the marines that have
deployed to the Middle East over the past 20-plus years. I have
to tell you that I've never seen a finer marine than the marine
that we have today. He's a true volunteer. He believes in what
he's doing. He has a sense of dedication and a level of
professionalism that often belies his youth. He has a genuine
love for his Nation, for his Corps, and for his fellow marine.
This truly sets him apart, in my eyes.
My written statement is pretty positive, because things are
good. Certainly we have some challenges. There are some things
we want to address. Things aren't perfect, but they are very
good. I credit this to that wonderful young marine that we have
today, to the support that we've given to his family, which is
very important, to the way we've been able to integrate our
Active and Reserve components into truly a Total Force, and,
finally, for the great support that Congress has given us, in
the form of the right legislation, in the form of budgets and
supplementals that allow us to operate today, and, finally, for
your strong moral support. We couldn't do it without you.
Thank you very much, gentlemen. I look forward to your
questions.
[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.
introduction
We remain a Corps of Marines at war with over 39,000 marines
deployed to dozens of countries around the globe. Your marines are
performing magnificently in no small part due to your support and the
realization that they have the support of the American people. The
young men and women who fill our ranks today recognize the global,
protracted, and lethal nature of the challenges facing our Nation, and
their dedicated service and sacrifice rivals that of any generation
preceding them.
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 United States Marine Corps (USMC) 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. Thank you for your efforts to ensure that your marines
and their families are poised to continue to respond to the Nation's
call in the manner Americans expect of them.
The 25,000 marines and sailors under the command of II Marine
Expeditionary Force (MEF) in the Al Anbar Province, Iraq and those
marines assigned to transition teams have made significant progress in
their efforts to develop capable, credible Iraqi Security Forces. In
setting the conditions for the historic constitutional referendum and
national elections, they have also distinguished themselves with valor
and distinction in places like Fallujah, Ramadi, and the Euphrates
River Valley. In Afghanistan, we have 1,200 marines and sailors
continuing to provide support to the increasingly capable Afghan
National Army. As part of the Combined Joint Task Force-76 (CJTF-76), a
marine infantry battalion has conducted operations against the Taliban
and Anti-Coalition Militia in the north-eastern portion of the country.
Marine officers and senior enlisted leaders continue to train, mentor,
and operate with their Afghan counterparts as part of Task Force
Phoenix.
The success of our marines in the current fight is the result of
time-tested methods. Today, we continue to recruit quality Americans
who are infused into a culture that requires them to think
independently and act aggressively in chaotic and unpredictable
environments where information is neither complete nor certain. We
rigorously train these young marines to perform under adverse
circumstances, and to accept greater responsibility as part of a team.
We educate our marines and their leaders to prepare their minds for the
intellectual component of the clash of wills and chaos inherent to
combat. Our fundamental tenet--every marine a rifleman--continues to
serve as the foundation for all our training, and provides the common
core that defines every marine. I know you share my pride in the young
men and women we are fortunate to have in our Corps of Marines.
Your marines have proven equally capable of responding in support
of humanitarian operations. In the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina and
following the earthquake in Pakistan, marines were quickly on the
scene. In response to Katrina, 2,650 marines and sailors, from our
Active and Reserve components deployed to conduct search and rescue,
humanitarian relief, and disaster recovery operations in Louisiana and
Mississippi. Survivors were rescued, streets were cleared, food and
water was distributed, transportation provided, and medical care
administered in six separate locations. Our contribution totaled 815
helicopter sorties which transported 1.1 million tons of cargo and
5,248 survivors. We conducted 446 rescue missions, rescuing 1,467
people. After the devastating earthquake in Pakistan, your marines
deployed to the cities of Shinkiari and Muzaffarabad providing a
hospital, helicopter support teams, and air traffic control in support
of the CJTF. The marines and sailors treated more than 11,600 patients.
The Nation is receiving a superb return on its investment in the
world's finest expeditionary force. Nearly one in three marines of our
operating forces is today forward deployed or forward based protecting
America's interests. This contribution remains distinctly out of
proportion to the 4 percent share of the Department of Defense (DOD)
budget the Marine Corps typically receives.
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 they are
receiving the opportunity to do that.
Warfighting Initiatives
On 28 October 2005, the Secretary of Defense approved a Marine
component within Special Operations Command (MARSOC). The new Marine
component will provide approximately 2,600 USMC/Navy billets within
U.S. Special Operations Command (SOCOM), led by a Marine major general.
The MARSOC will provide additional capability to SOCOM by adding forces
that will conduct direct action, special reconnaissance,
counterterrorism, and foreign internal defense. MARSOC will include
organic fires integration, combat support, and logistics capabilities.
Additionally, Marine Corps Special Operations Forces linked to the
Marine Expeditionary Unit will provide a scalable worldwide maritime
special operations force presence for SOCOM. The current plan provides
the MARSOC to SOCOM with an initial operational capability during the
spring of 2006 and a full operational capability by 2010.
In 2004, we conducted an extensive force structure review
recommending approximately 15,000 structure changes to improve the
Marine Corps' ability to meet the long-term needs of the global war on
terrorism and the emerging requirements of the 21st century. This
effort was end strength and structure neutral--offsets to balance these
increases in capabilities come from military to civilian conversions
and the disestablishment and reorganization of less critical
capabilities. For example, we are assigning each artillery regiment a
secondary mission to conduct civil military operations (CMO). To do
this, each regiment will be augmented by a Reserve civil affairs
capability. By assigning a secondary CMO mission to artillery units, we
have augmented our high-demand/low density civil affairs capability
while retaining much needed artillery units.
This spring, we will be conducting an even more comprehensive
initiative to determine what capabilities we must have in your Marine
Corps of the future and in what capacity. We are conducting this review
to ensure we are fully prepared for irregular warfare and as we adjust
to the establishment of MARSOC, our decision to man infantry battalions
at 100 percent, and the potential reduction of authorized end strength.
End Strength
The Marine Corps greatly appreciates the increase in end strength
to 179,000 as authorized in the National Defense Authorization Act
(NDAA) for Fiscal Year 2006. If appropriated, we will use this
additional end strength to help implement our force structure
initiatives, to support the global war on terrorism. Currently, our
program of record requires that we internally fund any end strength in
excess of 175,000 marines. We are resourcing these additional costs
through supplemental funding.
Military-to-Civilian Conversions
The Marine Corps continues to pursue sensible military-to-civilian
conversions in support of Marine Corps warfighting initiatives. These
conversions increase the number of marines in the operating force and
help reduce stress on the force. Funding remains a critical issue to
the success of this initiative; cuts in both the Appropriations Bill
for Fiscal Year 2005 (35 million) and Appropriations Bill for Fiscal
Year 2006 (20 million) has decreased our ability to execute our planned
fiscal year 2005 conversion program and will reduce our planned fiscal
year 2006 conversions.
Funding
The President's fiscal year 2007 budget provides for a Total Force
of 175,000 Active-Duty marines, 39,600 Reserve marines, and
approximately 14,000 appropriated fund civilian marines. Approximately,
61 percent of Marine Corps Total Obligation Authority is targeted
toward military pay, retired pay accrual, Basic Allowance for Housing,
defense health care, Basic Allowance for Subsistence, Permanent Change
of Station relocations, and special 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 Bonus. 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
2007, we are requesting $55.4 million, up from $53.1 million in fiscal
year 2006. 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 derived great
results from our SRB efforts in the infantry Military Occupational
Specialties (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.
Congress' continued support of our SRB program is critical to the
continued health of your Marine Corps.
Compensation
The Marine Corps appreciates the efforts by this subcommittee to
raise the standard of living for our marines. Being a Marine is both
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 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 appropriate
increases in basic pay and to ensure a sound comprehensive compensation
and entitlements structure greatly assists efforts to recruit and
retain the quality Americans you expect in your Corps. As the Defense
Advisory Committee on Military Compensation concludes its review, we
look forward to a complete and thorough analysis of their
recommendations during the Quadrennial Review of Military Compensation.
recruiting
Active Component
In fiscal year 2005, the Marine Corps achieved 100.1 percent of the
enlisted shipping (accession) objective. Nearly 96 percent of those
shipped to recruit training were Tier 1 high school diploma graduates,
above the DOD and Marine Corps standards of 90 percent and 95 percent,
respectively. In addition, 70 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. As of 31 January 2006, we
have shipped (accessed) 9,836 marines which represents 102 percent of
our shipping mission. We fully anticipate meeting our annual mission.
With regard to our self-imposed contracting mission, we are ahead of
our current plan for the year and expect to meet our objectives.
Concerning officers, we accessed 1,425 in fiscal year 2005, 100 percent
of mission, and we are on course to make our officer accession mission
in fiscal year 2006.
Reserve Component
The Marine Corps similarly achieved its fiscal year 2005 Reserve
enlisted recruiting goals with the accession of 5,927 non-prior service
marines and 2,259 prior service marines. As of 31 January 2006, we have
accessed 1,668 non-prior service and 800 prior service marines, which
reflects 28 percent and 39 percent of our annual mission, respectively.
Again, we project to meet our Reserve recruiting goals this year.
Officer recruiting and retention for our Selected Marine Corps Reserve
units is traditionally our greatest challenge, and remains the same
this year. The challenge continues to exist primarily due to the low
attrition rate for company grade officers from the Active Force. We
recruit Reserve officers exclusively from the ranks of those who have
first served a tour as an Active-Duty marine officer. We continue to
explore methods to increase the Reserve participation of company grade
officers to include the use of increased command focus on Reserve
participation upon leaving Active-Duty and Reserve officer programs for
qualified enlisted marines. Your support of legislation to authorize
the payment of the Reserve officer affiliation bonus has helped in this
effort.
Accomplishing the Mission
The Marine Corps' recruiting environment continues to be highly
competitive and challenging. Low unemployment, lower propensity to
enlist and higher costs in advertising continue to foster the need for
innovation in marketing the Marine Corps. We continue to market
intangible benefits by projecting the Marine Corps message of ``tough,
smart, elite warrior,'' focused on the ``transformation'' that a young
man or woman makes to become a marine. 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. We continue
to attempt to inform and influence the parents of potential applicants.
Parents continue to have the greatest influence on young men and women
in their decision to serve their country, and it is important that we
educate them on the benefits of serving in the Marine Corps.
Our message is reinforced through marketing and advertising
programs--paid media, leads for recruiters, and effective recruiter
support materials. 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.
Finally, a very important factor in our success lies in ensuring
clear and direct responsibility and oversight. The Commanding Generals
of our Marine Corps recruiting regions are ``dual-hatted'' as the
Commanding Generals of our training depots, responsible for obtaining
the right high quality individual and seeing them through initial
training until they earn the title marine. Consistent with this, our
recruiters' commitment to recruiting quality recruits is reinforced by
the fact that they are held accountable for recruits' successful
completion of ``boot camp.''
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
As we continue our fight on the global war on terrorism, we
recognize that achieving our enlisted retention goals is of national
importance for the Marine Corps, our senior civilian and military
leaders, and the American people. History has proven that the enlisted
leadership in our Noncommissioned Officer (NCO) and Staff NCO ranks is
the cornerstone to our Marine Corps' combat effectiveness on today's
battlefield.
The Marine Corps is a youthful service by design and retaining the
highest quality marines to lead our force remains of paramount
importance. Within our 160,260 Active-Duty enlisted force, 107,545
marines are on their first enlistment. Sustaining our career force
requires that we reenlist approximately 25 percent of our first-term
marine population. In fiscal year 2005, we reenlisted 6,159 first-term
marines with a 96.0 percent MOS match and achieved our first-term goal
for the 13th consecutive year. 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 2005, we
met our career reenlistment goals for the fourth consecutive year.
Concerning our Reserve Force, we satisfied our manpower requirements by
retaining 80 percent in fiscal year 2005; the fifth consecutive year
above our pre-September 11 historic norm of 70.7 percent.
The Marine Corps' appeal for today's marines remains the
``intangible'' benefits of leadership, esprit de corps, and camaraderie
from claiming the title `U.S. Marine' and is the singular reason why we
continue to experience retention success in our Marine Corps. We are
off to another strong start this fiscal year. As of February 10, 2006,
I am pleased to report that we have attained 84.3 percent of the First
Term Alignment Plan's goal of reenlisting 5,887 marines while
sustaining a 99 percent MOS match. This impressive MOS match ensures
that we are keeping the ``best and brightest'' while prudently placing
the right skilled marines in the right job. We have also achieved a
higher reenlistment rate for first-term infantry marines this fiscal
year by reenlisting 86.2 percent of our goal thus far, as compared to
81.3 percent at this point in fiscal year 2005. The Marine Corps is
also on track to achieve its career force target of 6,250 marines for
fiscal year 2006; we have already reenlisted 3,355 (53.7 percent)
marines with a corresponding MOS match of 98 percent for our career
force, ahead of last year's successful pace.
The Selective Reenlistment Bonus Program (SRBP) continues to shape
and complement our reenlistment efforts; it helps us keep our
critically skilled marines. Surveys of marines nearing the end of their
first enlistment, and Center for Naval Analyses studies, continue to
bear out that the SRBP and duty station options add impetus to the
intangibles of being a `U.S. Marine.' Thus, we increased the SRBP from
51.1 million in fiscal year 2005 to 53.1 million in fiscal year 2006,
with a supplemental request for another $31.5 million. To date, we have
paid over $62.5 million in SRBs, with an average payment of $15,354.
This program remains a powerful influence for the undecided who witness
another marine's reenlistment and receipt of his or her SRB in a ``lump
sum.'' With the added benefit of the Thrift Savings Program, our
marines can now confidently invest their SRBP funds for future
financial security. The Marine Corps takes great pride in prudent
stewardship of the resources Congress has allocated to the critical
SRBP.
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 91.3 percent for fiscal year 2005, which is
above our historical average. Current officer retention forecasts
indicate healthy continuation rates for the officer force as a whole.
Reserve officer retention in fiscal year 2005, was 79.5 percent,
slightly above the pre-September 11 historical average of 77 percent.
For the current year, Reserve officer retention has thus far remained
above historical norms. It is important to note that despite high
retention in the Active component, which reduces the number of officers
transitioning (thus accessions) into the Selected Marine Corps Reserve,
our Reserve Force continues to meet its operational requirements.
Several initiatives are being reviewed to significantly close the gap
between Reserve officer requirements and manning, specifically in the
junior officer ranks.
marine corps reserve
This year marks the fourth year that our Reserve component has
augmented and reinforced our Active component in support of the global
war on terrorism. Thanks to strong congressional support, the Marine
Corps has staffed, trained and equipped its Reserve to respond to
crises around the world. Our Reserve component possesses capabilities
to fight across the full spectrum of conflicts to support our Marine
Air Ground Task Forces. To date, over 36,000 Reserve marines have
served on Active-Duty since September 11, 2001. The Marine Corps
Reserve continues to recruit and retain quality men and women willing
to serve in our military and help our Nation fight the global war on
terrorism. These men and women do so while maintaining their
commitments to their families, their communities and their civilian
careers.
More than 7,000 Reserve marines are currently on Active-Duty with
over 5,500 in cohesive Reserve ground, aviation and combat support
units and nearly 1,600 serving as individual augments in both marine
and joint commands. Seventy one percent of all mobilized reservists
deploy to the Central Command area of operations. To support ongoing
mission requirements for Operation Iraqi Freedom (OIF), the Marine
Corps Reserve provides approximately 10 percent of our Total Force
commitment. The progression of the current mobilization reinforces the
point that our Reserve Force is a limited resource that must be
carefully managed to ensure optimum employment over a protracted
conflict. In addition to supporting the overseas global war on
terrorism mission, our Reserve marines are positioned throughout the
country ready to support homeland defense if required or assist with
civil-military missions such as disaster relief efforts as shown in the
wake of Hurricanes Katrina and Rita.
As mentioned, recruiting and retention remain a significant
interest as the Marine Corps Reserve continues its support for the
global war on terrorism. The funding increases and flexibility inherent
in the Reserve incentives you provided in the NDAA for Fiscal Year 2006
are an invaluable asset to assist in our continued recruitment and
retention mission. The approved legislation assists our efforts to
encourage Reserve affiliation by officers transitioning from Active-
Duty. The generous increase in affiliation bonus and the broadening of
eligibility to include those officers who have prior enlisted service
in the Reserve are greatly appreciated. The increased bonus not only
generates greater interest in Reserve affiliation, but also provides
financial assistance during the critical period of transition from
Active-Duty to Reserve service.
Health care remains an essential part of mobilization readiness for
our Reserve component. The new health care benefits that Congress
authorized this fiscal year will help ensure that our Selected Marine
Corps Reserve members, and their families, have access to affordable
health care as they do their part to prosecute the global war on
terrorism. Increased access and flexibility to health care for these
families assists in alleviating one of the most burdensome challenges
facing families of deploying Reserve marines.
The long-term success and sustainability of our Reserve Forces is
directly related to our ability to prepare and employ our forces in
ways that best manage limited assets while meeting the expectations and
needs of individual marines and their families. 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.
In order to meet the operational needs of the global war on
terrorism, the Marine Corps continues to make changes to Active and
Reserve structure and capabilities. We conducted a top-to-bottom review
of our Individual Mobilization Augmentee (IMA) program during the
spring of 2005 as part of our force rebalancing efforts. As a result,
we increased overall IMA manning levels by nearly 1,200 paid billets--
matching paychecks to previously unmanned structure. The preponderance
of manning increases were applied to commands possessing unique high
demand-low density skill set requirements, such as military
intelligence or communications and information systems. We view our IMA
marines as force multipliers--augmenting Active component staffs and
commands with trained, skilled, and experienced marines--and we will
continue to actively and effective employee all members of our Total
Force when and where needed to meet mission requirements.
In regard to the Individual Ready Reserve (IRR), the Marine Corps'
present policy is to only activate members who have volunteered for
duty. The current number of activated IRR volunteers is 820. The two
primary means of recruiting IRR volunteers for Individual Augmentee
billets are through the use of Reserve Duty On-Line and the
Mobilization Command Call Center. Currently, there are 1,324 individual
augment billets being filled by individual mobilization augmentees,
Individual Ready Reserves, and retired recall or retired retained
marines. These marines have been critical to successfully meet these
individual augment requirements.
civilian marines
Civilian marines are integral to the Marine Corps Total Force
concept. We have approximately 25,000 civilian marines, of which
approximately 14,000 are appropriated fund employees and 11,000 are
non-appropriated fund employees. Our civilian marines fill key billets
aboard Marine Corps bases and stations, 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
road map 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 DOD 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 execute our first phase of implementation, with a tentative
conversion date of October 2006. In the Marine Corps we will lead from
the top and have our Marine Corps Headquarters civilian personnel
included in our first phase.
information technology
We continue to transform our manpower processes by exploiting the
unique benefits of the Marine Corps Total Force System (MCTFS), our
fully integrated personnel, pay, and manpower system. The MCTFS
seamlessly serves our Active, Reserve, and retired members, both
officer and enlisted; provides total visibility of the mobilization and
demobilization process of our marines; and ensures proper and timely
payments are made throughout the process. MCTFS provides one system,
one record, regardless of an individual's mobilization status.
MCTFS is addressing three key deficiencies currently existing in
DOD:
Financial visibility/traceability--Positioning the
Marine Corps for an unqualified audit opinion in fiscal year
2007, a DOD strategic goal;
Manpower recruiting and retention goals--Pay marines
on time and accurately, while supporting manpower models for
recruiting; and
Information Technology Management--Supporting the
Department's stated IT goal of ``making information readily
available and in a useable format.''
MCTFS is a key enabler of the Marine Corps Financial Improvement
Initiative. Sixty-one percent of the Marine Corps budget is calculated,
obligated, and accounted for by MCTFS. Intrinsic to MCTFS is full
traceability of all of these expenditures to the source of input. MCTFS
contains robust business logic that seamlessly links personnel and pay
events. According to the Defense Finance and Accounting Service's
``Bare Facts'' report, MCTFS has an accuracy rate of 100 percent for
our Active component and 99.73 percent for our Reserve component so far
in fiscal year 2006.
With MCTFS as the backbone, the Marine Corps developed the Total
Force Administration System (TFAS), a virtual administration center.
TFAS's enterprise architecture and software, business processes,
organizational arrangements, and the defined roles of the commanders
and individual marines all combine to efficiently reduce and/or
eliminate highly labor intensive and redundant administrative
processes. During 2005, individual marines and their leaders leveraged
MCTFS' capabilities using TFAS via Marine OnLine, a Web-based
application that automatically processes more than 1.3 million
transactions, including over 60 percent of our annual leave events. In
December alone, more than 26,000 marines processed their leave via
TFAS/Marine OnLine. This capability eliminated the need for 26,000
individual pieces of paper to be manually routed from requesters, to
one or more approvers, to an administrative clerk's desk, and to then
be manually entered into MCTFS. Coupling MCTFS integrated business
logic with Marine OnLine's web-based capabilities increases the amount
of time marine leaders can to devote to warfighting. Routine
administrative tasks are being virtually eliminated, decreasing the
requirement for administrators. TFAS is the catalyst for realignment of
more than 1,700 administrative billets to other critical occupational
fields.
MCTFS' integrated environment directly feeds our Operational Data
Store Enterprise and Total Force Data Warehouse, a shared data
environment of current and historical individual and aggregate data.
Our manpower performance indicators then present this data in a
flexible, easy to read, graphical format to operational commanders and
headquarters planners via the Internet. We program continued technology
investments that build on these integrated capabilities, ultimately
providing greater effectiveness and efficiencies to allow us to
continue decreasing marine administrative support and redirect
structure to warfighting capabilities. Proper management of our
manpower requirements and processes requires continued investment in
modern technologies; we remain committed to these prudent investments.
military health care benefit
The DOD military health care benefit is important, and a benefit we
must properly sustain. To sustain this outstanding benefit, the issue
of the rising costs of the military health care benefit needs to be
addressed. Despite past management actions, these alone will not stem
the rising cost of the military health benefit. Costs have doubled in
the past 5 years and projections indicate that they will jump to over
12 percent of the total DOD budget by 2015 (vs. 4.5 percent in 1990).
We support DOD's efforts concerning military health care and want
to work closely with Congress to sustain this outstanding health
benefit for the men and women of our Armed Forces and our retired
community. It is critically important that we place the health benefit
program on a sound fiscal foundation for the long term, so that we can
sustain the vital needs of our military to recruit, train, equip, and
protect our servicemembers who daily support our national security
responsibilities throughout the world.
taking care of marines and their families
We remain committed to providing for our marines and their families
in a manner befitting their unwavering dedication and sacrifice. As an
expeditionary force, the personal and family readiness of marines and
their families has always been integral to mission readiness. Today,
some of our marines are on their third deployment to Operation Enduring
Freedom (OEF)/OIF. Separation from loved ones can be a challenging
experience and tests the endurance of marines and their families. While
away for a 7-month deployment, significant life events may occur on
both the battle and home fronts. During the same cycle, a marine may
experience the joy and wonder of parenthood and the loss and sympathy
associated with the death of a fellow marine or family member at home.
The stress of combat and increased operational tempo may also be
experienced. Marine spouses certainly experience the responsibilities
associated with ``keeping the home fire burning.'' Our marines and
their families must be ready, therefore, for separation and the
inherent requirements to sustain and succeed in the mission. As our
warfighting skills are advanced and honed, so too must be our personal
and family readiness skills, regardless of the number of times
deployed. We have made transformational advances in providing for the
personal and family readiness of marines and their families and believe
these changes are making a positive contribution to their preparedness.
Organization and Program Delivery
Separation from loved ones necessitates clear communication, a plan
for discharge of responsibilities, such as family care plans, payment
of bills, a review of benefits and beneficiaries, and other
miscellaneous but important actions. To address these issues and
information requirements, we provide marines and families a continuum
of support throughout the deployment cycle by way of the Marine Corps
Community Services (MCCS).
MCCS was first established in 1999 and enables the leveraging of
all community services programs for common achievement of goals. The
melding of our exchange operations, Morale, Welfare, and Recreation
(MWR) programs, and personal and family readiness programs is a model
that has provided incredible support to our marines and their families.
As a former operational commander and significant user of the programs,
I believed MCCS was the right model for the marines in the field, as
well as being the ideal tool to assist commanders in support of marines
and their families. As the Deputy Commandant for Manpower and Reserve
Affairs, I have observed the continued evolution of MCCS and seen the
energy and dedication of base and station commanders and their staffs
as they seek to provide needed support. MCCS is right for the Marine
Corps and has proven to be beneficial for customers and leaders alike.
At home stations of marines and their families, MCCS offers more than
80 programs that make our bases and stations responsive and livable
communities. In the process, MCCS programs are helping marines and
their families pursue healthy lifestyles, lifelong learning,
responsible citizenship, family readiness, quick acclimation (whether a
result of relocation or transition), and providing valued goods and
services to support basic necessities and other desired merchandise.
This home station support is the base of MCCS capabilities that is then
scaled for deployment with marines, while still supporting the needs of
those who remain behind. Regardless of environment, MCCS is focused on
enhancing the personal and family readiness of marines and their
families.
Deployment Support
At the pre-deployment phase, marines and spouses receive briefs on
a wide range of issues from coping skills, including the potential of
traumatic combat experiences and stress; to financial matters; to
safety. These briefs help to ensure smooth household operation while
the marine is away.
Marines are proud of their accomplishments in OEF/OIF and morale
remains high among these selfless warfighters. They are appreciative of
the touches of home they receive while in theater, and we endeavor to
see that deployed marines, especially those at remote sites, enjoy a
measure of recreation and relaxation. Working with the Army and Air
Force Exchange Service, the Marine Corps Exchange (MCX) offers warriors
items such as health and comfort products, DVDs, magazines, and snack
foods. MCX services are available at the main camps 7 days a week. We
also have Tactical Field Exchanges at various locations. Moreover, we
have placed a high priority on our Warrior Express Service Teams, who
regularly travel to marines at the outlying remote sites to ensure they
have access to MCX items. To keep marines in steady contact with home,
there is in-theater phone service and mail service. We also continue to
offer our Internet-based mail service, ``MotoMail.'' MotoMail has been
highly successful and its popularity continues to grow--the service has
generated nearly one million letters since its inception in December
2004. MotoMail services are currently offered at 11 camps in OIF. As a
result of its success, we plan to extend it to additional deployed
environments.
Successfully providing for our families allows us to maintain our
warrior ethos and operate effectively in the current high operational
tempo, wartime environment. There is a direct correlation between
mission readiness and family sustainment. Marines concentrate on their
mission because they know their families at home have the resources and
support necessary to tackle and triumph over issues that may arise
during deployment. Our resources, tools, and support mechanisms are
readily available and easily accessible to help marines manage
separation issues, multiple deployments, and other associated
challenges.
Especially today, the Key Volunteer Network (KVN) and Lifestyle
Insights, Networking, Knowledge and Skills (L.I.N.K.S.) programs are
particularly relevant. The KVN supports the spouses of deployed marines
by providing official communication from the Command about the welfare
of the unit and other key status or information. Beyond providing a
source for accurate and reliable information, KVN also offers referral
services and fosters a sense of community within the unit. L.I.N.K.S.
is a mentoring program that helps spouses adapt to the military
lifestyle and understand Marine Corps history, our traditions, and
language. Spouses who participate in L.I.N.K.S. gain important
knowledge from seasoned spouses, veritable pros, on surviving and
flourishing during separation periods. Participants also learn about
benefits and services such as health, housing, and compensation, and
available community services. For our Reserve families, we are updating
and streamlining our KVN and L.I.N.K.S. training guides to more
appropriately reflect their needs, based upon their separated
locations. Under a recent enhancement, Reserve unit Key Volunteers can
contact MCCS/Military OneSource and request a ``Know Your
Neighborhood'' report on all available community support resources to
be used as part of the ``Local Resources'' portion of KVN education. We
will continue to grow and improve KVN and L.I.N.K.S. programs.
Strengthening Personal and Family Readiness
Combat/Operational Stress Control
The nature of today's battlefield is uncertain and chaotic and the
Marine Corps will continue to recruit and retain the right men and
women to thrive in this environment. We educate marines and their
leaders to prepare their minds for the intellectual component of the
clash of wills and chaos inherent to combat. Part of this preparation
is effectively addressing the potential effects of combat/operational
stress both before and after it may occur. Since the Marine Corps
crossed the line of departure into Iraq in March 2003, we have
continuously developed and improved our operational stress control
programs based upon lessons learned.
Though we provide many prevention and treatment programs, we know
that their success is dependent upon marines confidently availing
themselves of the support offered. As such, we consistently encourage
use of our many easily accessible resources. We also emphasize that
stress heals more quickly and completely if it is identified early and
managed properly. We are vigilant in watching our young and vigorous
members for signs of distress and endeavor to effectively manage
operational stress at every level. We provide pre-deployment training,
assistance when the stress is occurring, a multi-tiered deployment
health assessment process, and post-combat monitoring and assistance to
identify mental health issues early so those affected will have the
best chance of healing completely.
To coordinate our combat/operational stress control (COSC) efforts,
we have established a COSC section in our Manpower and Reserve Affairs
Department. The objectives of the Marine Corps' COSC program are to
provide the tools to prevent, identify, and treat combat/operational
stress injuries in warfighters and their family members before, during,
and after deployment.
To assist during the pre-deployment phase, marine officers and
staff NCOs are trained to prevent, identify, and manage stress
injuries. Moreover, marines are trained on the stressors to be expected
and how to monitor and manage personal stress levels.
In January 2004, we launched the Operational Stress Control and
Readiness (OSCAR) program. OSCAR embeds mental health professionals
with ground units, and has been successful in helping marines deal with
the acute stress of combat. It keeps marines with low-level problems at
their assigned duties and allows those with more severe conditions to
immediately receive appropriate treatment. OSCAR also plays a role in
pre-deployment, as personnel train with the units they will support
during the deployment. This builds two-way trust and familiarly. In
addition to OSCAR, there are mentorship programs and treatment services
by Chaplains in theater. We also have briefs for marine leaders on
homecoming and how to identify, and refer for help, marines with
persistent operational stress injuries. For families during
deployments, KVN and L.I.N.K.S. (discussed previously) provide valuable
support and resources. Our families can also avail themselves of
various programs offered by MCCS, and Military/MCCS OneSource.
To ensure smooth homecomings, we launched the Warrior Transition
and Return and Reunion Programs. These programs, launched in 2003, help
marines and their families readjust when the combat marine reintegrates
to home life. Beyond training marines for homecoming, family members
also receive briefs, including information on reuniting with their
marine spouses, and how to know whether their spouse is experiencing a
stress problem that requires attention.
We are beginning to screen all returning marines and sailors for a
variety of potential mental health problems after they have been back
home for 90-180 days, and those who screened positive are evaluated and
treated. Marines experiencing a severe form of stress are referred to
medical professionals for diagnosis.
To ensure COSC training participation, we have a system using the
Marine Corps Total Force System for unit-level tracking by individual
marines during pre-deployment, re-deployment, and post-deployment.
Finally, we are very proud of the recent activation of a new Web-
based information and referral tool, the ``Leaders Guide to Managing
Marines in Distress.'' The guide gives marine leaders the ability to
help marines at the point of greatest positive impact: marine-to-
marine. It offers leaders at all levels information to resolve high-
risk problems faced by marines that could be detrimental to personal
and unit readiness. The faster and more effectively these problems are
solved, the more time the individual and unit will have to focus on the
mission. The guide is separated into six major categories: deployment,
family, personal, harassment, substance use, and emotional. Within
these categories, there are 16 main problem areas that include an
overview of the problem, risk factors, why marines may not seek help,
prevention strategies, resources, and Marine Corps guidance. The guide
can be accessed at http://www.usmc-mccs.org/leadersguide.
Marine Corps Critical Incident Stress Response
In the case of mass casualties experienced by a command/unit, the
Marine Corps' critical incident stress management trained teams provide
crisis management briefings to family members and friends of the
command/unit. During crisis management briefings, Marine Corps
personnel, Chaplains, and Managed Health Network (MHN) counselors are
available to provide information and answer questions concerning the
casualties. MHN is an Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD)-
contracted support surge operation mechanism that allows us to provide
augmentation counselors for our base counseling centers and primary
support at sites around the country to address catastrophic
requirements.
Child Care
We work to help the youngest members of the Marine Corps family
adjust to being separated from a deployed parent by providing children-
specific deployment briefs. For children who are experiencing
difficulties adjusting to deployments, we offer the Operation Hero
Program. This program targets children from 6 to 12 years and provides
after-school tutoring and mentoring assistance in small groups with
certified teachers. We also have initiatives that target care and
support for children of activated reservists who are geographically
separated. For example, we have established partnerships with the Boys
and Girls Clubs of America, the Early Head Start/Zero to Three Program,
and the National Association for Child Care Resource and Referral
Agencies.
Especially when a parent is deployed, emergency child care needs
may arise. Using DOD funds, the Marine Corps implemented the Enhanced
Extended Child Care initiative, provided through family child care
homes. Examples of situations where the services are provided are: when
family members have been hospitalized; for attendance at bereavement
ceremonies; respite for family members during deployments; and
unexpected duty or duty hours.
Suicide Prevention
For the Marine Corps, one suicide is too many, and we remain
steadfast in our dedication to prevention and the early identification
of problems that could potentially contribute to suicide. All marines
receive annual suicide awareness training to support early
identification of problems. We also provide ready access to counseling
support and crisis intervention services. More recently, we have
updated Marine Corps-specific videos on suicide prevention. In
addition, the Leaders Guide to Managing Marines in Distress includes
extensive information on suicide prevention. As with any prevention
program, its effectiveness is dependent upon on proper usage. With this
in mind, we are fostering a climate in which marines feel compelled to
convince their fellow marines that seeking help is a sign of good
judgment and for the betterment of personal and mission readiness.
As for a possible correlation between deployments and the high
operational tempo, we closely monitor our suicide cases to determine
whether OEF/OIF operations are having an impact on our rates. Our
analysis shows no correlation between marines with a history of
deployments and suicide rates.
Domestic Abuse
We have observed that spouse and child abuse continues to decline
for the Marine Corps. In fiscal year 2001, there were 1,358
substantiated cases of spouse abuse. In fiscal year 2005, the number
dropped to 995 substantiated cases. Similarly, substantiated child
abuse cases declined from 821 in fiscal year 2001 to 448 in fiscal year
2005. An analysis of this data indicates that abuse does not increase
as marines deploy. Our prevention efforts and care for victims remain
strong and effective. We focus on early intervention, education for new
parents, and for our victims, our Victim Advocate Program is available
around-the-clock.
Sexual Assault
For the Marine Corps, we have always had a zero tolerance policy
when it comes to sexual assault. Beyond punishing offenders, we place a
high priority on prevention and protecting and supporting victims.
We are in complete compliance with the mandates of the DOD's Joint
Task Force for Sexual Assault Prevention and Response. We have
established a Sexual Assault Prevention Office, which serves as the
single point of contact for all sexual assault matters, including
victim support and care, reporting, training, and protective measures.
We thoroughly educate marines on this issue and have instituted
extensive sexual assault awareness training for all entry-level
officers and enlisted members. We have also established procedures to
protect a victim's privacy and right to select unrestricted or
restricted reporting. For in-theater incidents, we have trained
Uniformed Victim Advocates who stand ready to provide support and care.
Transition Assistance
Our Transition Assistance Management Program (TAMP) provides
resources and assistance to enable separating marines and their
families to make a successful and seamless transition from military to
civilian life. TAMP provides information and assistance on various
transition topics, including: employment, education and training
benefits, determining health and life insurance requirements, financial
planning, the benefits of affiliating with the Marine Corps Reserves,
and veteran's benefits and entitlements. For our injured marines, we
provide TAMP services at a time and location to best suit their needs,
whether at bedside at a military treatment facility or their home. In
cases where the marine is not in a condition to receive transition
information, but the family members are, assistance and services are
provided to the family member.
Transition services are available to all marines and their family
members who are within 12 months of separation or within 24 months of
retirement. On a space-available basis, separated marines can attend
workshops up to 180 days after their date of separation. Pre-separation
counseling and the Transition Assistance Program workshops are
mandatory for all separating marines. Other services include:
Career Coaching Employment and training assistance
Individual Transition Plan Career assessment
Financial Planning Instruction in resume preparation,
cover letter, and job applications
Job analysis, search techniques, preparation and
interview techniques
Federal employment application information
Information on Federal, State, and local programs
providing assistance
Veteran's benefits
Disabled Transition Assistance Program
Casualty Assistance
Marine Corps casualty assistance is viewed as a fulfillment of duty
and commitment to take care of marines and their families. Our trained
Casualty Assistance Calls Officers (CACOs) receive training that is
always supported by ongoing online assistance and the continuous 24/7
availability of the Marine Corps Headquarters Casualty Section. Our
training is regularly refined based upon lessons learned. We have
approximately 5,000 trained CACOs across the country to help our
survivors by providing consistent and measured engagement during the
entire casualty process and beyond. They provide death notification,
help to coordinate funeral arrangements (including travel), and serve
as the primary point of contact to connect survivors with benefits
agencies, such as the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), the Social
Security Administration, and TRICARE. When survivors relocate, CACO
assignments are geographically transferred to continue support of the
survivor as needed or desired. In these cases, there is a ``warm
handoff'' between CACOs. For our survivors requiring extended support,
CACOs connect families to a long-term survivor case manager. The case
manager makes personal contact with our survivors to reassure them that
support will be provided for as long as it is needed.
As with all we do, we will continue to seek ways to improve how we
take care of marines and families into the future.
Marine-for-Life--Injured Support
Built on the philosophy ``Once a Marine, Always a Marine'' and
fulfilling our obligation to ``take care of our own,'' the Marine-For-
Life program offers support to approximately 27,000 honorably
discharged marines transitioning from Active service back to civilian
life each year.
Leveraging the organizational network and strengths of the Marine-
For-Life Program, we implemented an Injured Support Program during
January 2005 to assist combat injured marines, sailors serving with
marines, and their families. The program essentially seeks to bridge
the gap that can exist between military medical care and the VA--
providing continuity of support through transition and assistance for
several years afterwards.
The program recently assigned two full-time Marine Corps liaison
officers to the Seamless Transition Office at the VA. These liaison
officers interface between the Veterans Health Administration, the
Veterans Benefits Administration, and the Marine Corps on individual
cases to facilitate cooperative solutions to transition issues.
Additionally, the Injured Support Program conducts direct outreach
to injured marines and sailors via phone and site visits to the
National Naval Medical Center, Walter Reed, and Brooke Army Medical
Centers. On average, 30 percent of our seriously injured marines
requested and received some type of assistance.
Lastly, the program continues to work closely with OSD on Marine
Corps-related injury cases. Information sharing between the program and
OSD contributes to developing capabilities for the Military Severely
Injured Center.
conclusion
As we continue to fight the global war on terrorism, our Services
will be required to meet many commitments, both at home and abroad. We
must remember that 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.
Personnel costs are a major portion of the DOD and Service budgets, and
our challenge is to effectively and properly balance personnel,
readiness, and modernization costs to provide mission capable forces.
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. Senator Nelson.
Senator Ben Nelson. Secretary Chu, the Quadrennial Defense
Review (QDR) concludes that, ``The Reserve component must be
operationalized so that select reservists and units are more
accessible and more readily deployable than today.'' Then it
further provides that DOD will, ``pursue authorities for
increased access to Reserve component to increase the period
authorized for presidential Reserve call-up from 270 to 365
days.''
Now, it's unclear to me why we would want to increase the
authority from 270 days to essentially a year. For operations
where 270 days is not sufficient, the President already has
partial mobilization authority to declare a national emergency
and to order National Guard and Reserve personnel to Active-
Duty for up to 24 consecutive months. Maybe you can help me
understand why the Department feels it's important to increase
this presidential Reserve call-up authority to a year, and why
is the President's current partial mobilization authority not
sufficient, even though it can go up to 2 years?
Secretary Chu. Thank you, sir. I'd be delighted to.
As you point out, under a declaration of a national
emergency, the President has broad authority, broader than is
being proposed, with this change. We do want to look ahead,
however, to a period in which there might not be a declaration
of a national emergency. It might not be appropriate to issue
such a declaration. But we would still like the President to
have authority for access to Reserve components. As you
appreciate, Congress gave him that authority under the so-
called Presidential Reserve Call-up section of the statute. It
is limited to 270 days. It is the authority the country used
during the 1990s for the Balkans deployments.
Our conclusion is, that's a bit too short. Obviously, this
is a balance, in terms of requesting the expanded authority. We
find that our Reserve community is comfortable with a 1-year
period of service. That is understood by people as reasonable.
Within a 1-year period, if we had access for that length of
time, we could have preparation and return steps accomplished
in 2 or 3 months, which would give you a deployed time closer
to 9 to 10 months, versus the 6 or so that's feasible under the
270 days.
We'd like this additional authority. It's not actually
applicable, at the moment, because we are under a declaration
of a national emergency, but it's an important hedge for the
future. I think it's a significant change we'd like your
support for.
We'd also like support, as the QDR indicates, for authority
of the President explicitly to mobilize for natural disasters,
which is not an authority he currently possesses.
Senator Ben Nelson. With respect to end strength, General
Osman, the currently released QDR proposes to stabilize the
Marine Corps end strength at 175,000 Active and 39,000 Reserve
component personnel by fiscal year 2011. The Commandant,
however, has recently publicly stated that he's not sure the
Marine Corps end strength should be reduced below 180,000
marines. Did the Marine Corps provide input to the QDR
regarding that desired end strength for the Marine Corps? If
so, what did the Marine Corps itself request? Has anything
changed since this input was provided?
General Osman. Sir, our current end strength is about
180,000. We have been authorized an end strength of 179,000.
The Secretary of Defense has the authority to float the end
strength, and we've taken advantage of that, to bring us up to
180,000. At this time, we feel like that is the end strength we
need in order to execute operations as they are today. Needless
to say, as things change, then obviously the requirement for
the end strength may change.
You probably know that the Commandant is commissioning a
capabilities assessment group that has begun deliberations--it
will take about 3 months--to take a very hard look at the
Marine Corps, Active and Reserve, a Total Force look, to see
what the Marine Corps would look like as we began a downward
slope that would take us down to an end strength of 175,000. Of
course, this would include the new Marine Special Operations
Command (MARSOC) that recently stood up, which has a membership
of about 2,500 marines. Within that 175,000, include the 2,500
for the MARSOC. We'll take a hard look operationally at how
we'll have to tailor the force in order to reach that.
At this particular point in time, the Commandant's focus,
however, of course, is on current operations. As long as we
continue to receive the supplementals we receive that allow us
to have an end strength of 180,000, that is what we need in
order to continue to execute operations as they are today.
Senator Ben Nelson. Dr. Chu, is the reduction based on an
expectation that the 175,000 is adequate, or is this an effort
to reduce the cost, or a budget-cutting proposal, or something
else?
Secretary Chu. I think it's something else, sir. As I
indicated in my opening remarks, the Department understands
that we have to keep a good control of operating costs of the
enterprise, or there will not be room within the likely total
budget for the Department for the reinvestment in new equipment
that is essential to our future success. So, we have set, as
objectives for the Department, that, by the close of the
current program period, which is fiscal year 2011, the Army and
the Marine Corps would be able, through a variety of changes in
the way we do business--military/civilian conversions,
reconsideration of how we produce various capabilities, et
cetera--to come back to strength levels that you have
described, 175,000 for the Marine Corps, and 482,400 for the
United States Army.
As General Osman testified, as circumstances change, our
answers to these questions may change over time, but that is
the trajectory on which we have set ourselves. We think that's
a prudent trajectory in order to protect the future
capabilities of the Department when you take all factors into
account. It really is a strategic choice on the part of the
Department.
Senator Ben Nelson. So, the choice is to consider other
requirements with regard to the budgeting process, even though
that may reduce the end strength below what the Commandant
believes is necessary to continue to do and perform at the
level they're performing at the present time?
Secretary Chu. I would say it a little bit differently. I
think the Commandant's statement goes to: what does he need
today in order to staff the capabilities and produce those
outcomes in the way we now do business? What we're looking for,
4-5 years from now, is a slightly different outcome in which we
get the same, or better, capabilities, but we do not need quite
as much Active-Duty manpower as is currently on the books.
The Marine Corps has already done that. The Marine Corps is
in the process of, out of the current strength levels, creating
two additional infantry battalions, two additional long-range
reconnaissance companies, et cetera. The Army is doing
something similar with its move to a modular structure in which
we're expanding by nine Active brigades within a strength level
that's not all that different from the one at which the Army
started.
During the transition period, as you move into new areas
and acquire new people with new skills, or take people in with
old skills and retrain them, then yes, there are going to be
more people on the books than we think is necessary, in the
long term. Some of the extra capacity will come, I acknowledge,
from expanding, at least at the margin, the civil workforce of
the Department--which is one of the reasons we're so eager to
get the National Security Personnel System (NSPS) into place--
and have civilians do some of the things that are now done by
military personnel, which, de facto, gives you more military
strength to devote to purely military objectives.
I'll take an example, in the lane of my office and my
colleagues here, in how we run the Military Entrance Processing
Stations. We had well over 1,000 military personnel in those
stations before we began this review. We've agreed to reduce
that to a few hundred. We can do it with a larger civilian
content. It does mean we have to change how we staff those
enterprises, how we deal with overtime, how we deal with
Saturday hours, and so on and so forth. Those are all solvable
problems. On the other hand, they cannot be solved overnight.
So, there is this transition period, in which you're going to
see higher strength levels than we believe we need to maintain
for the long term.
Senator Ben Nelson. Are we simply shifting end strength
from the Marine Corps to, let's say, civilian personnel, so
that the numbers are essentially the same in total strength,
without regard to whether they're civilian or Marine Corps
personnel?
Secretary Chu. Not necessarily. There might be fewer, in
the end, because part of this is what people in the private
sector like to call ``business process reinvention.'' Also, I
should emphasize that, on average, it's somewhat less expensive
to have a civilian staff member than a military staff member.
So, from the budgetary perspective, even if you were one for
one, on average you would have a lower operating cost than
would otherwise be the case. So, this is, again, a strategic
choice by the Secretary, and by the Department, to ensure that
we keep a good margin for the reinvestment in new equipment and
new capabilities we need for the future, and not consume the
entire budget in current operating costs.
Senator Ben Nelson. But without reducing end strength to
some lower, but dangerous, level?
Secretary Chu. We don't think it's dangerous, no, sir. It
will all be done after careful study and debate.
Senator Ben Nelson. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Graham. That was very interesting.
When we look at our force model, we look at how many people
we need and how we can have a higher-hitting weight with fewer
people is one of the things we're looking at. What do we
project, 2 years from now, the military footprint in Iraq to
be?
Secretary Chu. I think it would be a bit out of my lane to
offer projections on strength on the ground. I think, if I
could echo what the President and Secretary have said
repeatedly, we will be there in the numbers needed--no more, no
less, no longer, no shorter.
Senator Graham. I agree with that. What those numbers might
be, no one knows, so I would just make a cautionary statement
to bootstrap what Senator Nelson has said--as we go from
180,000 to 175,000 marines, I'll like my chances. That's a
pretty potent force. So, Dr. Chu, we're going to make sure that
the model of rotations and the footprint in Iraq has to be a
little more resolved before we can go too far down the road.
Now, as to the Navy and the Air Force, we're making fairly
massive reductions in force. Can you tell me, starting with the
Air Force, how we're going to do this without hurting morale
and readiness? What efforts are we making in both Services to
get people who are trained and military oriented to at least
consider the Army or the Marine Corps or the Reserves?
General Brady. Yes, sir. I'd be happy to address that.
Senator Graham. Could we do more along those lines?
General Brady. Sir, as I said, there are a couple of things
that we've looked at. I piggyback a little bit on Senator
Nelson's question about what drives this. As we look at our
force over the last 4 or 5 years, and we look at how many
people have deployed and what skill sets have deployed, we
start to look, as you point out, Senator Graham, at this tooth-
to-tail thing. Where are we putting our people? Are we focusing
on skills that go forward, and doing the rest of it as
efficiently as possible? We think we have potential for doing
that. We have about 22,000+ people in the Central Command
(CENTCOM) Area of Responsibility (AOR) today. We have about
half of our force, though--about 52 percent of the Active-
Duty--supporting a combatant commander around the world
somewhere today. So, we're heavily engaged. At the same time,
we have a lot of people who are not deployed, and we have
significant numbers of people who have not. As we look at that,
we start to look at how we can use our people a lot more
effectively. That includes things like retiring some legacy
systems--you've heard that, I'm sure--which gives us some
relief.
Senator Graham. What will be the total number you're
looking at reducing over the next 5 years?
General Brady. We're looking at full-time equivalents of
about 40,000.
Senator Graham. Does this consider the fact that we may
have two operational engagements at the same time?
General Brady. Yes, sir, I believe it does. In fact, we
have bounced this against the national strategy, and against
our war plans that we have. Quite frankly, the most demanding
scenario is the scenario of our Air Expeditionary Forces
(AEFs), of our five-time rotations. So, if we can do that, we
can handle almost anything--because that's what's deployed
times five, so we think we can do this.
Senator Graham. What percentage of your Reserve aircrews
have hit the 2-year maximum involuntary deployment?
General Brady. I'd have to get back to you with the exact
number, but it's principally in areas that the people you tend
to ride with when you go to the AOR.
[The information referred to follows:]
Nine percent of ANG C-17 aircrews and 32 percent of Reserve C-17
aircrews have hit their 2-year maximum mobilization ceiling.
Senator Graham. I know the 130s, but I'm curious about the
C-17s flying out of Charleston.
General Brady. It tends to be the C-130s, primarily, yes,
sir.
Senator Graham. The Reserve commander told me that
everybody in his unit, except for the new young guys and gals,
have already hit their 2-year point.
General Brady. We have a significant number. I can get you
the exact number of people who have reached their 2 years, but
I don't have it right with me.
[The information referred to follows:]
A C-17 crew is comprised of two 11As (Pilot) and one (or more if
necessary) 1A2s (Loadmaster). C-17 statistics for Charleston are as
follows:
11A (Pilot): Charleston has 209 assigned assets; 89 have
reached the 24-month mobilization ceiling--43 percent burned-
out.
1A2 (Loadmaster): Charleston has 140 assigned assets; 64 have
reached the 24-month mobilization ceiling--46 percent burned-
out.
Senator Graham. What if they all said tomorrow, ``I don't
want to fly anymore''?
General Brady. I think that that would be pretty
significant.
Senator Graham. That's not going to happen, but that would
be significant.
General Brady. The likelihood of that happening is zero,
though.
Senator Graham. I guess the question I'm trying to ask is:
What percentage of the air bridge going into theater is flown
by reservists?
General Brady. All the time, they would fly about 15
percent of it. Today, it's a bit higher than that, but again,
it depends on the weapons system involved. I would have to get
back to you.
Senator Graham. Say, C-17s. Get back to me on C-17s.
General Brady. Yes, sir, I will.
[The information referred to follows:]
Of the total number of global war on terror air bridge sorties
since September 11, 2001, 64 percent were flown by Active-Duty, 6
percent were flown by Air National Guard, and 30 percent were flown by
Air Force Reserve. A breakout by Mission Design Series follows:
Active-Duty
C-5: 55 percent
C-17: 70 percent
C-130: 50 percent
Air National Guard
C-5: 8 percent
C-17: 2 percent
C-130: 38 percent
Air Force Reserve
C-5: 37 percent
C-17: 28 percent
C-130: 12 percent
Senator Graham. Okay.
General Brady. I think something else that's important is
the Air Expeditionary Force (AEF) structure that we have allows
for shorter rotations, particularly of our very experienced
mobility crews. That allows us to do a lot. We only have about
3,600 people mobilized today, but we have twice that number of
volunteers. So, we have more than 6,000 guardsmen and
reservists. The rotation structure that we have allows that.
Senator Graham. What specialties would these 40,000 come
from? Would it be kind of across the board?
General Brady. It would be targeted, obviously, because
there are some areas that we're seeing--as the nature of the
global war on terrorism changes, we need more of some skills
than others. So, for example, you wouldn't see reductions in
security forces. You would see the need for more of tactical
air-control-party people, combat controllers, people who work
with the Army. As the Army develops its Future Combat System,
there'll be an increase in the requirement for us to have
people on the ground with the Army in the distributed
battlefield. At the same time that we see some reductions in
some areas, we'll see some increases in others. It's not a
salami slice, it'll be very tailored to the missions that we
have today and the missions that we can foresee tomorrow.
Senator Graham. You don't think this number will affect
morale and readiness, in terms of longer deployments, or mean
more stress for the people who are left behind?
General Brady. I don't think it will entail more stress. I
think, as we find more innovative ways to get a higher
percentage of our people into the fight, that helps a lot with
that. As we make some reductions, obviously their morale is an
issue that you have to consider, because our people have done
honorable work, and great work, and a high percentage of them
want to stay with us. For that reason, as we go through this we
need to find ways for them to serve. That gets to the other
part of your question, about how we're doing that. We have
aggressively looked at all of the alternatives for people to go
to the Guard and to the Reserve. The Federal Bureau of
Investigation (FBI) has looked at our people and other
Government agencies have looked at our people. We are joined at
the hip with General Hagenbeck and his folks. In fact, our
Chief has written a personal letter to a group of folks that we
are looking at for some reductions. Our Chief has sent a
personal letter to each one of them telling them what their
options are. Last week General Hagenbeck sent them all a
personal letter inviting them to go green.
We are in a joint fight. We realize that. The Army has the
names and addresses of everyone that's in a career field that
we think is vulnerable for reduction, and we'll continue to
work with them to make sure people know what their
opportunities are to continue to serve.
Senator Graham. Admiral?
Admiral Harvey. Yes, sir. What you see us doing, in the
last 2 years, is really a manifestation of work that began in
2000, when we undertook the revolution in training under
Admiral Clark's, then our Chief of Naval Operations,
leadership. We went out and identified work. Then we asked, how
do we get at that work? How do we take that work out of the
system, both on our ships and in our shore infrastructure? This
was a very important precursor, because the goal of this is not
to do more with less. That gets into the very point you make,
we're going to risk breaking the existing force. The goal is to
take the work out of this system with the new kinds of ships
and aircraft squadrons we're bringing online, and the new kinds
of infrastructure we're developing ashore. That gives us the
confidence to proceed as we are going, along with some civilian
substitution of those types of jobs that we can keep.
Senator Graham. Along those lines, like the C-130J, you do
away with a couple of crew members, right? You need fewer
people to fly the plane. Is that what's going on in the Navy,
you just need fewer people to man the shift?
Admiral Harvey. Oh, yes, sir, very much so. We're going
from a destroyer that takes 350 people now to a destroyer that
takes 260 people, and a littoral combat ship that will take 75
crewmen. We invest more in individuals, which gets us at the
retention issue. We are making a tremendous investment in their
capabilities at the same time we're able to draw down the
strength and, by the way, grow strength, in areas that
contribute directly to this--growing capabilities we need for
the war on terrorism, such as in the security, the Seabees, and
special warfare. It's a fine dynamic that's going on. What
encourages me is that when we set those rheostats for the
retention we want, we're still getting the output that we want.
We can have some control over that. That's really due, in large
part, to the force-shaping tools you've given us, that we're
exercising now, to enable a scalpel approach on how we go after
these capabilities we don't need, as opposed to a more brutal
approach where you do a lot of harm in the process.
Senator Graham. I have just one more question, and then
I'll let Senator Nelson take over here. Every business,
including DOD, needs to be run more efficiently. If you can
rearrange your force to have more capability, but fewer people,
that's good for the budget, that's good for everybody, and it's
good for those who are serving. But I don't want us to get so
driven by increased personnel costs--which are real--that we do
not understand that there may be more than one fight and that
this is a dangerous world that we're living in. I think I know
the Marine Corps well enough--that is a huge asset to this
country. It is no small thing. I'll just end with that thought.
Religious practices. I've gotten plenty of input in my
office here lately from the Chaplain Corps and other people
about this balance that we're trying to achieve in the
military, Secretary Chu, between allowing people to express
themselves religiously without stepping on people's feelings
and getting out of bounds when it comes to religious practices.
One of the things that the Air Force is looking at is new
guidelines, in terms of chaplain practices. I'll be up front
with you, there are a lot of chaplains that I've heard from
that, when they're called on to offer a prayer in a public
setting, that they're being told that they can't express that
they're praying, that ``this prayer is offered,'' ``I pray in
Jesus' name,'' just substitute the religion. To me, the reason
we have chaplains of different faiths is because we have
diversity in the force. If every chaplain's going to be a
widget, then we've lost that diversity. It's a fine line
between allowing individual religious expression and adopting a
particular religion.
I don't want any military member to feel like someone's
religion is being forced upon them. When it comes time for
someone to have a chance to express themselves in a religious
manner, which I think is very appropriate, our military men and
women need a place to go worship, if they choose to, and need
to exercise and practice their faith as they see fit, in an
appropriate way. Could you give me some ideas about where we're
headed down this road? I don't want to get to the point that we
destroy diversity in the name of political correctness, for
lack of a better word.
Secretary Chu. Sir, on the contrary, we celebrate
diversity, and we recognize that we have in our force members
of a wide range of faiths, and we want to be sure that the
chaplain resources are there to sustain those faiths as we go
forward. It's exactly as you suggest, sir. It's a matter of
balance. I think, on this issue of public prayer, it is
important to recognize there are different kinds of public
occasions. In particular, the Department is in the position of
advising that if an occasion is mandatory, where there is not
much choice about whether you attend, we have to be
particularly careful to recognize that there is a range of
faiths there, and choose our language and the thoughts we
express accordingly. The vast majority of our chaplains
understand that responsibility, and accept that responsibility.
Senator Graham. I would be interested to work with you on
that. That is a point of personal importance to me. I've been
around the military most of my life, and I want everyone to
feel comfortable. One of the ways you feel comfortable is to be
able to express yourself in an appropriate way.
I think we have a vote going on. Senator Nelson, I
appreciate your showing up. This is to be continued.
To all of you, thank you. Let's see if we can get our force
to where it needs to be with the ability to do the job for
America--save money, but also make sure that we're saving--and
taking stress off those who are doing the job.
Thank you very much.
Secretary Chu. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. We do have formal
statements for the record. I hope you'll accept them as part of
the committee's record.
Senator Graham. Absolutely.
Secretary Chu. Thank you, sir.
Senator Graham. I'd also like to insert into the record at
this time the statement of Dr. John A. Phillips, Superintendent
of Schools for Muscogee County, Georgia.
[The prepared statement of Dr. Phillips follows:]
Prepared Statement by Dr. John A. Phillips
Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee, I am Dr. John
Phillips, Superintendent of Schools for Muscogee County, Georgia. I am
extremely grateful for this opportunity to speak to you not just on
behalf of Muscogee County and the other school districts in the
Chattahoochee Valley near Fort Benning, but also on behalf of a
coalition of school districts from around the country, called the Seven
Rivers National Coalition, facing a similar problem. In short, several
major actions now underway within the Department of Defense (DOD) are
going to combine to bring far more school-aged children of our military
personnel into our school districts than we can possibly handle.
overview
Fort Benning is located along the Chattahoochee River outside
Columbus, Georgia. Given the size of the installation, the students of
Fort Benning personnel attend school districts in eight counties in
Georgia and Alabama: Muscogee, Chattahoochee, Harris, Marion, and
Talbot Counties in Georgia; and Phenix City, Lee and Russell Counties
in Alabama.
Meanwhile, I am also honored to represent today a number of school
districts around the country that serve children of military families
at installations expected to gain a large number of personnel over the
next few years. These installations include Fort Riley in Kansas, Fort
Lee in Virginia, Fort Bliss in Texas, Fort Carson in Colorado, Little
Rock Air Force Base in Arkansas, Fort Leonard Wood in Missouri, and
Fort Sill in Oklahoma. Appendix A lists each of these facilities and
the school districts that will be impacted by their local
installations' personnel gains. In all, over 45,000 school-aged
children of military personnel will be moving to these eight
installations during the next 4 years.
My remarks will focus primarily on the impact facing Muscogee
County and the other school districts surrounding Fort Benning.
However, all of these other school districts face similar challenges
over the coming years, and we are combining our efforts in the hope of
securing critically needed Federal funding to address this problem.
defense department actions
There is a storm gathering over Muscogee County and the other
school districts in the Chattahoochee Valley. As we watch it grow in
intensity and move toward us, it seems that we are facing the perfect
storm.
To be accurate, there are three storms converging on us. The first
is the recently completed base realignment and closure (BRAC). We are
all thrilled that Fort Benning emerged from the BRAC with a resounding
vote of confidence and a robust and expanding mission. Most
significantly, the Armor Center and School will move from Fort Knox to
Fort Benning, where it will join with the Infantry Center and School to
create a Maneuver Center of Excellence.
The second storm is the process of transformation that the Army--
indeed all of our Service branches--is undergoing. With the end of the
Cold War, our enemies have changed. So we are changing the profile and
composition of our defenses, and Fort Benning will play a major role in
this, as demonstrated by a significant increase in Brigade Combat
Teams.
Finally, the third storm facing us is global repositioning. The
DOD is bringing as many as 50,000 troops home from Europe and Korea,
and many of them are coming to Fort Benning.
These three actions will result in the arrival at Fort Benning of
roughly 5,500 new military personnel, and an additional 5,500 DOD
civilians and contractors over the next 4 years. These 11,000 new
federally-connected personnel at Fort Benning will enroll over 10,000
school-aged children into our local school districts.
I want to stress again how proud our community is to be serving
such an important role in our Nation's defense, and we welcome these
families. We have had the strongest of relationships for years with
Fort Benning and those who have served there. Our Nation could not have
placed its trust in better hands.
the problem
However, I also must tell you about the very real problems that
this surge of new students will cause. The largest challenge facing us,
and where we are requesting Federal assistance, is the need to
construct new schools and classrooms to accommodate this sudden influx
of students.
Simply stated, without significant new construction, we will have
nowhere to put these students. We will not only have to place many of
them in trailers, but they also will be forced to attend classes in
every available space we have. This means holding classes in the
cafeteria, in the media center, the auditorium, former teacher lounges,
and converted closets and storerooms. These locations are highly
substandard for teaching, and also lack technology connectivity. In
essence, those forced to learn in such an environment will clearly be
subject to ``second class'' status. Our students will also be denied
many extra-curricular activities because the space in which they are
ordinarily conducted will have been converted to classroom use.
Beyond classroom space, this surge in student enrollment will also
lead to a variety of other logistical concerns. Lunch periods will
likely need to begin as early as 9 a.m., and continue through late
afternoon, in order to accommodate all of the students. Furthermore,
the impact on the transportation system will require some students to
be picked up and arrive at school well before classes begin, and others
to depart school well after classes end.
We will also be forced to adopt double sessions at all levels--
elementary through high school. While such double sessions are not
unprecedented in some high schools around the country, they are almost
unheard of for elementary and middle school students.
All of these teaching, schedule, and transportation issues do not
just affect students, but are also tremendously disruptive to family
schedules. Needless to say, they also will have a damaging impact on
teacher morale, which will further impact our students' education.
In the meantime, their fathers or mothers may be serving their
third rotation in Iraq and Afghanistan. We owe them the assurance that
their children are receiving the best education we can give them. We
know that when military personnel prepare for each new assignment,
among their most immediate concerns are the availability of good
housing and good schools. These issues are critical for soldier morale,
and are increasingly important as the Army's divorce rate has soared in
the past 3 years and the Service faces increasing challenges in
recruitment and reenlistment.
We have made three series of visits to Washington to alert Federal
policymakers of the pending impact on our schools, and have met with a
very positive response . . . up to a point. No one we talked with
denies the size and sweep of what confronts us. They all understand
that our situation results from decisions taken by the Federal
Government. However, like us, they are overwhelmed by the cost of
addressing it . . . and no one has yet stepped forward to accept even
part of the responsibility. The costs are significant--our current
estimate of the costs of the new school and classroom construction
facing the Chattahoochee Valley alone approaches $350 million.
But as I mentioned at the start, this problem is bigger than us. We
have gone out and located the other school districts which serve
gaining installations and formed a loose coalition known as the Seven
Rivers National Coalition. I have enclosed other materials showing the
anticipated increases in Federally-connected school-aged children at
the school districts in the Seven Rivers Coalition (Appendix B).
local support
We are not just coming before you with the intention of dumping
this whole problem in your laps. We are gathering our information in
the most credible and professional way that we can. In fact, the Army
has approved our methodology and is encouraging other installations to
employ it. We want to be sure you are looking at apples-to-apples
numbers, because that is the only way you will truly appreciate what we
are facing.
More importantly, we are doing absolutely everything we can to
generate funding at the State and local level, and I would welcome the
opportunity to sit down with any of you and tell you more about that. I
am proud of our effort.
For instance, we generally receive funds from the State of Georgia
for Capital Outlay Projects. However, these funds are insufficient to
address even our ongoing renovation and modification needs. As a
result, our school districts have also approved Special Purpose Local
Option Sales Taxes to fund our existing needs.
We realize that our revenue base will increase somewhat because of
the soldiers and their families coming into our area. In addition, we
also will continue to receive Federal Impact Aid through the Department
of Education for all of our federally-connected students, and these
payments will increase as the number of federally-connected students in
our districts increase. However, we have statistical models
demonstrating that these revenue increases do not come close to solving
our problem.
For instance, while many of these military families live off-base,
their homes in the community do not add significantly to the property
tax base. The biggest property tax revenue sources are large, expensive
homes (which military families generally do not inhabit) and, more
importantly, local businesses. While Fort Benning will certainly
expand, its operations are exempt from taxes and thus do not contribute
to the local tax revenue. Meanwhile, the operating cost of each student
in our school district is roughly $6,600. Yet, we generally receive
only $225-$250 per student in Federal Impact Aid, and much of this
funding takes 1 to 2 years to arrive. As a result, the Impact Aid does
not even approach our ongoing costs of educating these students, and
certainly would not provide any funding for construction of new
classrooms.
I would also like to point out that there is a precedent for
Federal help right here within Muscogee County. During World War II,
the Korean War, and the Vietnam War, Fort Benning was subject to
similar dramatic increases in personnel. During these periods, the
Federal Government partnered with the Muscogee County School District
to build a total of 15 new schools and make additions at 8 others to
accommodate the increased number of school-aged children of Fort
Benning personnel.
Let me also stress that we are seeking Federal assistance only to
handle this sudden influx of students directly connected to these
military actions. I don't want to leave the impression that we are
using this unique situation as a way to secure Federal funding for our
other problems. As I noted, we are already taking other steps to
address our existing problems.
conclusion
In closing, let me say that the people of our area are more than
willing to step up to this challenge. We are proud to have the future
of these young people in our hands. You will find that we will do our
part and more in dealing with this situation.
But in order to fulfill this mission, we need to have help from the
Federal Government in building new schools and classrooms to house
these students. Unfortunately, the clock is ticking, and the armor-
piercing issue is simple. If we are to maintain a strong, voluntary
Armed Forces, we must provide a quality-of-life for our military
families which they so richly deserve. Without Federal assistance, it
is not within our reach. Again, I thank you for your attention and for
the opportunity to come before you today.
Senator Graham. We are adjourned.
[Questions for the record with answers supplied follow:]
Questions Submitted by Senator Lindsey O. Graham
national security personnel system
1. Senator Graham. Secretary Chu, on February 27, Judge Emmet
Sullivan of the United States District Court ruled that the DOD's
implementation of the National Security Personnel System (NSPS) does
not meet the letter of the law concerning the guarantee of collective
bargaining rights, independent review of labor decisions, and fair
treatment of employees who appeal disciplinary actions. What is the
status of NSPS implementation as a result of this decision? Please
provide revised implementation plans and new milestones.
Secretary Chu. The DOD and Office of Personnel Management (OPM) are
working with the Department of Justice to determine the next steps
regarding the February 27th District Court decision that enjoins
implementing parts of NSPS. The affected portions of the NSPS final
regulations are Subpart G, Adverse Actions; Subpart H, Appeals; and
Subpart I, Labor-Management Relations.
The lawsuit did not challenge NSPS's performance management,
compensation and classification, staffing, and workforce shaping
provisions. Beginning in late April, the Department intends to
implement these provisions to 11,000 employees in Spiral 1.1
organizations. The Department is reviewing its options for deployment
of Spirals 1.2 and 1.3, planned for later this year and early in 2007,
respectively.
NSPS contributes to overall DOD transformation. Accordingly, the
ability to recruit, shape, and sustain the civilian workforce to meet
the mission will continue to drive NSPS's strategy.
increase in tricare fees
2. Senator Graham. Secretary Chu, Secretary Rumsfeld testified that
a major factor in DOD's growing health care costs is ``private
employers . . . increasingly are asking military retirees on their
payrolls to use TRICARE to avoid having to pay insurance premiums for
those employees.'' Has your office initiated any investigation into
this practice among defense contractors?
Secretary Chu. We are surveying the Web sites of some of our major
contractors to determine if they include special health benefit
offerings to their employees who are eligible for TRICARE. This cursory
review indicates that Northrop Grumman, Raytheon, BAE Systems, and L3
Communications are among the companies offering such programs, and that
Boeing has proposed it to certain unionized employees.
To understand the implications, consider this quote from a military
beneficiary on an Internet forum, discussing health benefits for post-
military employment: ``Actually my TRICARE supplement is through my
employer. Instead of taking their single insurance which costs them
$483 a month, they provide me with the TRICARE supplement offered by
ASI which only costs them $160 a month and covers my entire family.
They save $323 and I get 100 percent free (no co-pays, no deductibles)
insurance that allows me to go to whatever doctor I want, when I want,
with no referrals. Spent 2 weeks in the hospital a way back and my cost
share was zero. I get scripts filled at the base for free as well. It
is the best of all worlds.''
The overarching issue is the appropriateness of such offerings,
given the long-established premise that TRICARE (and its predecessor,
the Civilian Health and Medical Program of the Uniformed Services)
would be the secondary payor to health benefits provided by other
employers. We are seeing the same approach spread to employees of State
governments, including Alabama, Florida, Nebraska, North Carolina,
South Carolina, Texas, and Washington. Frequently this is characterized
as a win for the employee, for the State government, and for State
taxpayers. I would submit that the losers are the Federal taxpayers who
face ever-increasing expenses for TRICARE.
3. Senator Graham. Secretary Chu, is it not true that a DOD
contractor who charges the government for employee health benefits,
then urges employees to seek health care under TRICARE in order to
avoid paying for those benefits, would be gaining a double benefit, at
taxpayer expense?
Secretary Chu. The answer to that question depends on the nature of
the contract (e.g., fixed price or cost plus) and, if cost plus,
whether the contractor attempts to recover costs that it does not incur
(in other words, whether the contractor's reduced costs for health care
for these employees are reflected in its costing information and
payments to the government).
4. Senator Graham. Secretary Chu, given Secretary Rumsfeld's
testimony, do you agree that this is worth looking into and referring
to the Inspector General for investigation?
Secretary Chu. I do believe that the matter warrants further
investigation, to confirm that contractor's billings are appropriate
and to determine whether there are steps that should be taken to ensure
the proper relationship of TRICARE benefits to health benefits obtained
through post-retirement employment.
recruiting and retention of medical personnel
5. Senator Graham. Secretary Chu, General Hagenbeck, Admiral
Harvey, and General Brady, while recent investments in recruiting and
retention appear to be paying off, failure to achieve goals for medical
personnel is significant--and will be very difficult to overcome. For
example, for the Army and Navy in fiscal year 2005, 199 fully paid
health professions scholarships for medical students were ``left on the
table--unused'' due to failure to recruit young students interested in
military medical careers. We are facing a potential crisis in
recruitment of medical, dental, and nurse corps in the Active and
Reserve components, especially in the Army where medical requirements
have increased as a result of Army transformation and modularity.
Gentlemen, what do you plan to do about it and what additional
authorities, if any, do you need?
Secretary Chu. We are awaiting the most recent Health Manpower and
Personnel Data System (HMPDS) analysis. When that data analysis is
complete, we will make recommendations in changes to special pays to
target or increase incentives for critically short specialties.
For anesthesiologists and radiologists, we are still below the
congressional ceilings for special pays so they can be increased
without congressional action. Last year, Congress increased the special
pay authorization for certified registered nurse anesthetics (CRNAs)
and the Services have implemented those increases. We will assess the
impact based on the HMPDS data. Congress also provided an increase in
the Nurse Officer Accession Bonus which allows the Services to pay an
accession bonus to a nurse officer in an amount not to exceed $15,000
for a 4-year obligation. We are awaiting the HMPDS data to determine
the effect of this incentive. Retention of general dentists continues
to decline. We received authority in the NDAA for Fiscal Year 2006 to
offer oral and maxillofacial surgeons an Incentive Special Pay (ISP),
but we do not have a general dental ISP. There is a Dental Officer
Multiyear Retention Bonus (DOMRB), but that is only for dental
specialists. In the civilian sector, general dentists' pay has risen
faster than physicians' pay.
In terms of what congressional action is needed, we are not
requesting any at this time, but we may ask for additional authority in
the future. Special pay for physicians has some room for expansion. We
can increase the ISP and medical special pay for physicians and stay
within the congressional ceilings. We are awaiting the HMPDS data
analysis to determine the effect the CRNA special pays has had on
retention.
The Services are reviewing their options to address their need for
dentists. Use of the Critical Skills Retention Bonus (CSRB) is one
option under consideration. We have increased the DOMRB amounts for
several of the dental specialties. We will closely monitor retention
for all dentists. If needed, we will consider requesting an increase in
the DOMRB and also the opportunity to use it for general dentists. We
are also reviewing with the Services whether to request legislative
action to provide additional incentives for dentists.
The QDR has also proposed a pilot program to use larger incentives
to test accessing more fully trained providers needed for wartime
critical specialties. We are working with the Services to develop a
specific proposal.
General Hagenbeck. The Health Professions Scholarship Program
(HPSP) continues to provide us with the majority of our medical,
dental, and veterinary force. Currently we have over 1,500 active
participants and our recruitment efforts in fiscal year 2006 will take
us well over 1,600. In fiscal year 2005, we experienced challenges in
filling all of the available allocations. Our strategic focus is to
assist United States Army Recruiting Command (USAREC) in developing the
appropriate tools and incentives to accomplish their mission in the
recruitment of AMEDD officers for both the Active and Reserve Forces.
The Army is conducting a variety of initiatives to increase accessions
of medical professionals. The year, The Army Surgeon General initiated
a new program, entitled ``Peer to Peer,'' with the goal to increase
HPSP accessions. Medical Corps officers will directly support health
care recruiters during on-campus recruiting by addressing a group of
medical students, telling their Army story emphasizing why they joined
the Army and why they have remained in the Army. The Army Medical
Department is augmenting USAREC recruiting booths with Active-Duty
Medical Corps officers at national conventions this year. The Army is
also reviewing a pilot program to expedite the applicant process and
shorten the time from contacting the applicant to accession into the
Army. The Army is also working with our sister Services and the Office
of the Secretary of Defense (OSD) to maximize use of existing DOD
authorities to improve accessions of medical professionals. Increasing
current dollar amounts for existing loan repayment programs and
expanding loan repayment programs to additional specialties and the
Reserve components is one area we are pursuing. We need to revise tri-
service concurrence rules on accessions and retention incentives that
limit flexibility for meeting Army needs. Establishing health
professions accession bonus and a generic health professions bonus
would assist USAREC direct recruiting mission. We would like to adjust
the HPSP stipend to account for cost-of-living increases and allow HPSP
time to count towards basic pay computations.
Admiral Harvey. While the specific reasons that Health Professions
Scholarships went unused this past year are unclear, I am aware that
the Uniformed Services University of Health Sciences (USUHS) received
more applications than they had available opportunities. I am looking
to see whether we have an effective process in place for informing non-
select USUHS applicants of the availability of Health Professions
Scholarships. I am also evaluating the potential benefits associated
with conducting a pilot of the HPSP modeled on, and incorporating the
best practices of, our Judge Advocate General Corps accession programs,
to determine if this might enhance the incentive power of HPSP.
I am not yet able to identify additional legislative authorities
required. I am working first to maximize use of existing authorities
and to implement recruiting and retention incentives that are available
to me without new legislation. I will offer appropriate recommendations
on both policy and legislative initiatives to Navy and Defense
leadership in the next several weeks.
Some corrective actions are already underway. For example, Navy
Medicine has recently reallocated funds for the Health Professions Loan
Repayment Program to improve recruiting and retention across all
medical communities. I am also evaluating policy actions within
existing authority to establish critical skills accession bonuses for
Medical Corps and Dental Corps Health Professions Scholarship Students
and Direct Accession Dentists.
To address shortfalls within the Nurse Corps, I have increased
accession goals in our traditionally successful student pipeline
programs and am weighing further increases. This market has been a more
productive source than direct accessions. I am evaluating a CSRB for
this community to address continuation shortfalls among Navy nurses at
7-9 years of commissioned service. I am also evaluating the use of CSRB
for junior dentists with 3 to 8 years of service. Currently 61 percent
of Navy's junior dentists leave the Navy at their first career decision
point.
In concert with the recommendations of the Defense Advisory
Committee on Military Compensation and the impending 10th Quadrennial
Review of Military Compensation, I will continue to evaluate the need
for enhancements to incentives to attract and retain personnel with
critical health professions skills.
General Brady. In the past, the Air Force attempted to recruit the
majority of its medical, dental, and nurse corps officers from the
``fully qualified'' market of graduated medical professionals. This
hasn't met our requirements for many years. There are insufficient
accession incentives (i.e., bonuses and loan repayments) to bring these
fully trained professionals into the Air Force.
Our Air Force Recruiting Service, in close cooperation with our
Surgeon General, implemented the following changes to improve
recruiting: Dedicated a major portion of its 272 officer accession
recruiters to recruit health care providers, streamlined the
application and selection process, made assignments available prior to
the completion of a 2-6 month application process, and increased
outreach programs aimed to hospital and dental school teaching staff
such as Health Profession Educator Tours to expose these influencers to
Air Force Medicine firsthand.
We will also refocus on the student market and increase accession
bonuses in future years. We realize that increased funding of Health
Profession Scholarship Programs (medical and dental school) and
Financial Assistance Programs (medical and dental residency) to attract
these students will be required. If a shift to the student market is
not possible, significant improvement in accession incentives will be
necessary to attract the fully qualified market. We will also explore
the benefit of establishing adequate loan repayment programs for
medical, dental, and nurse corps applicants.
army deployment cycle support for families
6. Senator Graham. General Hagenbeck, in your statement you
acknowledge that the Army Deployment Cycle Support Program provides
needed services to members and their families--before, during, and
after mobilization. We agree, and yet the request for funding in fiscal
year 2007 is reduced by half. Would you please look into the reasons
for this reduction and provide assurances that there will be no erosion
in deployment support for military members and their families?
General Hagenbeck. The Army Deployment Cycle Support (DCS) cost
reduction is based on contract support cost, not funding reduction. The
DCS contract support for base year (May 2005 to April 2006) is
$1,029,806. Contract support for option year one (May 2006 to April
2007) is $1,034,737. The current DCS Program contract expires in
September 2007. Therefore, the projected contract cost for the
remaining 5 months from May to September 2007 (fiscal year 2007) is
$433,250. The projected lower cost for ``Option Year Two'' year is
based on a 5-month period of performance (May-September 2007) versus
the standard 12-month period for the prior 2 years.
medical care problems at naval hospital jacksonville
7. Senator Graham. Admiral Harvey, the Navy Times recently reported
that a military physician, who acknowledged negligence in a malpractice
claim at Naval Hospital, Jacksonville, Florida, involving 15 instances
of substandard care, has been reassigned to Cherry Point, North
Carolina, where she continues to treat military patients. Are you aware
of this situation and are you concerned that Navy medicine will be seen
as a haven for poor performing physicians as a result?
Admiral Harvey. Each adverse medical event is tragic for the
patient and for their family. Navy medicine provides excellent, high
quality care to thousands of beneficiaries every day, including at
Naval Hospital Jacksonville. As unfortunate as adverse medical events
are, not all bad outcomes are the result of physician error.
Navy medicine has detailed and robust quality assurance processes
that are designed to provide the highest quality-of-care, to prevent
adverse outcomes, to rapidly and thoroughly treat those who suffer an
untoward event, and to systematically address and resolve what we
identify as root causes of variation or substandard performance.
Quality Assurance (QA) processes include ensuring proper training,
credentialing, privileging, continuing education, and practice
performance and review for all physicians and other independent
practitioners. QA processes also include adverse event reviews,
including in the case referenced in the above question, that promote
timely identification and correction of process or system issues,
address any provider competency issues, identify trends, and determine
whether standards of care have been breached.
The provider referenced in this question underwent prolonged
deposition testimony in relation to a malpractice claim that had been
filed for care provided at Naval Hospital Jacksonville in 2002. During
that testimony (a short video clip of which was placed by the Florida
Times-Union on their public Web site), the provider indicated she had
not reviewed all of the patient's prior medical records, in part
because they were not readily locatable in the medical records
department, before scheduling the patient's surgery. The reference to
``15 instances of substandard care'' relates to testimony by
plaintiff's expert witness that alleged this number of failures to meet
the standard of care. Media reports have provided this number out of
context in a way that wrongly implies that the court found that there
was this number of instances of substandard care in the case and that
this provider admitted to 15 separate mistakes. We are providing
further specifics regarding the cases cited in Navy Times, including
Section 1102--protected QA information, to Senator Warner and to SASC
professional staff members in appropriate closed settings.
The care in this and other cases at Naval Hospital Jacksonville has
been thoroughly reviewed, including by external review agencies under
contract with Navy and DOD. No discernible negative trend in care has
been identified. Nevertheless, Naval Hospital Jacksonville and Navy
medicine will not rest in their efforts to eliminate adverse medical
outcomes. Further, no provider continues to practice in Navy medicine
unless privileging and QA reviews confirm that they meet high standards
for professional competence.
I remain confident in the high quality of the medical care we
provide and in the knowledge, training, experience, and professional
abilities of our providers.
military quality-of-life and family support
8. Senator Graham. Secretary Chu, General Hagenbeck, Admiral
Harvey, General Osman, and General Brady, we all know that the decision
to join or remain in military service often rests with the satisfaction
of the family with health care, housing, and other vital quality-of-
life programs. Yet this year the budget assumes significant increases
in out-of-pocket for TRICARE for military retirees. Morale, welfare,
and recreation (MWR) funding has declined in important areas. Last
year, Congress stepped in to reduce the longstanding deficit in child
care services, but there is still a shortfall of nearly 30,000 child
care spaces throughout DOD. Even in a time of constrained resources, we
cannot let support to families deteriorate. I ask each of you to
comment on these challenges, and explain why the budget does not
request more for these vital quality-of-life programs.
Secretary Chu. Senator, thank you for the opportunity to address
both the importance of quality-of-life programs and their funding. From
a departmental perspective, this committee has been extremely
supportive of the quality-of-life of our service men and women. This is
especially true in the areas of child care, support of severely injured
servicemembers, non-medical counseling, privatized housing, medical
care, and other important programs. Your support of our servicemembers
and their families has had a dramatic and beneficial impact on their
quality-of-life, morale, and readiness.
The DOD is trying to achieve equity across the Services in quality-
of-life program delivery. We have made progress in the Off-Duty
Voluntary Education/Tuition Assistance program.
The Army, Marine Corps, and Air Force achieved the DOD uniform
tuition assistance goal that funds up to 100 percent of out-of-pocket
costs for servicemembers attending college in their off-duty time.
In the MWR program, all Services are meeting the funding goal of 85
percent appropriated funding for Category A and 65 percent for Category
B activities. However, we are seeing a disparity in the funding per
capita for MWR which ranges from $466 to $833. The Department will
monitor this closely and we hope to close this gap and achieve equity
in the future.
To expand the availability of child care, the Department initiated
an emergency intervention strategy in 2005. By purchasing modular
facilities and renovating and expanding current facilities, we will
create 4,077 child care spaces at 35 locations in fiscal year 2006.
Authorizations for child care construction granted in the NDAA for
Fiscal Year 2006 will allow the DOD to continue to address the most
pressing child care needs.
General Hagenbeck. The Army recognized the challenges that
constrained resources and competing priorities place on balancing the
full spectrum of Army programs, including quality-of-life and family
support. The Army's base budget reflects the priorities necessary to
meet Army Campaign Plan priorities.
The Army's fiscal year 2007 budget request invests significant
resources for quality-of-life programs. This includes $67.7 million in
military construction funding for eight child development centers, as
well as $26.0 million for a single project that includes two
facilities: a physical fitness center and a child care center. The
request also includes $97.7 million in operations and maintenance
funding for family centers, $180.9 million for child care programs,
$58.5 million for youth programs, and $211.1 million for MWR programs.
The request also includes $1,271.8 million for Army family housing
to replace or renovate 1,622 homes, privatize 6,239 additional homes,
operate and sustain 45,500 Government-owned and leased homes, provide
housing services for the 67 percent of soldiers residing off post, and
manage over 76,600 privatized homes.
TRICARE is a comprehensive health benefit, and our retirees' cost-
shares have not increased in more than 10 years. In fact, real out-of-
pocket costs have decreased. Out of the fiscal year 2006 budget,
TRICARE makes up $19 billion, 8 percent of the DOD budget. DOD now
predicts that health care costs will consume 12 percent of the DOD
budget by 2015. This rate of growth is not sustainable within the
existing budget and action must be taken to ensure that health care
costs do not erode the Army's readiness and modernization programs. The
President's budget request includes actions to help stem this cost
growth and index fees to inflation. The Army believes these proposals
are a reasonable approach to protecting readiness and modernization
programs from health care inflation while sustaining a superior health
care benefit for our current and future retirees.
Admiral Harvey. In regards to MWR funding, Navy MWR funding has
declined from the high water mark set in fiscal year 2003 but the Navy
remains committed to quality MWR programs for sailors and their
families by providing the right level of service through the most
efficient delivery mechanism possible. The Navy has streamlined and
implemented business improvements, which will reduce overhead costs
before reducing program delivery to sailors.
The decline in MWR funding from fiscal year 2004 to fiscal year
2005 was ameliorated by two important Navy actions that helped maintain
a quality MWR program. First, through internal funding realignments,
appropriated funds (APF) support for MWR was increased for fiscal year
2005. Direct APF for fiscal year 2005 totaled almost $297 million, an
increase of over $28 million from the amount previously programmed.
Second, Navy used $18 million in non-appropriated funds (NAFs)
earmarked for capital improvements to fund operational expenses in
fiscal year 2005. This strategy greatly reduced the direct impact on
program delivery to sailors and their families at the cost of a short-
term reduction in capitalization.
Programmed appropriated fund support for MWR in fiscal year 2006
increased to over $300 million. As we continue to seek efficiencies in
back shop operations to protect program dollars, we have established
additional funding priorities to protect the core MWR programs to the
fullest extent possible. Included in these priorities are fitness,
afloat recreation and movies, single sailor, and child and youth
programs.
Our sailors and their families greatly appreciate your support for
our efforts to reduce the shortfall of child-care spaces. With your
continued support, several initiatives that we have underway will
provide facilities that will reduce our waiting list by about 625
spaces (about 8 percent) by fiscal year 2007. The Navy is currently
considering a variety of funding alternatives to support this growing
program in the out years.
The Navy will continue to provide funding for all core programs
that are supported by sailors along with supporting more robust program
delivery for deployed forces and outside the continental United States
sites due to the stresses involved at those sites.
General Osman. Marine Corps MWR funding has not declined. In fact,
MWR programs have benefited from an appropriated funding ramp that
began in fiscal year 1996 in order to meet OSD funding goals for MWR
Category A and B Programs of 85 percent and 65 percent, respectively.
Our fiscal year 2005 funding execution was 92 percent (for Category A)
and 71 percent (for Category B). MWR has not been the only quality-of-
life program to receive funding increases. Substantial resources have
been invested in all areas of quality-of-life to include pay and
compensation, housing, health care, community services, and
installation infrastructure.
In terms of the child care benefit, the Marine Corps is currently
exceeding DOD's potential need standard of 65 percent of need. At 70
percent (12,562 spaces), we continue to strive toward the fiscal year
2007 DOD target of 80 percent.
General Brady. The DOD's health care budget for fiscal year 2006 is
$38 billion, a 100 percent increase from the $19 billion budget in
fiscal 2001. Incremental changes to TRICARE's cost sharing are needed
to ensure the continuation of an affordable and comprehensive health
benefit for Active-Duty, National Guard, reservists, retirees, and
their families.
Military members are called upon to endure hardship and turbulence
over the course of a full and successful career that few other
Americans experience. Changes to their earned benefits, flowing as a
result of those sacrifices, should be carefully assessed, should
recognize the unique nature of military service, and must be done
fairly and equitably.
MWR activities are funded with a combination of taxpayer dollars,
APFs, and self-generated NAFs. APFs can be used in MWR programs;
Congress has directed the grouping of these activities in three
categories:
Category A (mission essential--receives 100 percent APF funding):
Activities that support the warfighter, such as fitness centers,
intramural sports, libraries, recreation centers, basic recreation, and
parks.
Category B (essential to community and family support--receives at
least 50 percent APF funding): Examples include child development,
youth programs, recreation pools, outdoor recreation, skills
development, bowling centers (12 lanes and under), marinas (without
resale), and tickets/travel services.
Category C (business activities--limited APF funding support, must
generate their own funding through profits): Contains activities that
have revenue-generating capability such as clubs, golf courses, bowling
(13 lanes or more), retail stores, snack bars, aero clubs, marinas
(with resale), and base restaurants.
Appropriated funds for Air Force MWR programs have shown consistent
growth over the years. Air Force leaders have listened to Congress
about what should be funded with APFs rather than NAFs. As a matter of
policy, we won't use NAFs where APFs are authorized.
Regarding child care, the Air Force currently has a 6,300-space
child care shortfall, and has a plan to eliminate this deficit by 2011.
An increase of 1,553 spaces through minor construction was funded in
fiscal year 2005 and an additional 774 spaces have been identified for
2006 as funds become available. Twelve military construction projects
in fiscal years 2008-2011 will add 3,000 more spaces, and another
funded initiative will provide an additional 1,000 spaces in on- and
off-base in-home care.
______
Questions Submitted by Senator Saxby Chambliss
education
9. Senator Chambliss. Secretary Chu, the Department of Defense
(DOD) is clearly undergoing a series of tremendous changes through Base
Realignment and Closure (BRAC), the DOD transformation initiative, and
the global re-basing initiative. These changes will have a dramatic
impact not only on our country's military installations, but also on
their neighboring civilian communities. In particular, people from
local school districts near Fort Benning have expressed great concern
about the ``perfect storm'' brewing that will result in a huge influx
of school-age children.
The National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for Fiscal Year 2006
includes a provision authorizing a limited amount of funding to assist
local educational agencies in adjusting to these changes in student
levels. In addition, the conference report for this act includes
language directing the Department to prepare a detailed report to the
House and Senate Armed Services Committees on this issue, including how
the Department will assist local education agencies in accommodating
these incoming students. Meanwhile, the House report on the fiscal year
2006 Labor/Health and Human Services/Education appropriations bill also
urges the Secretary of Education to consult with the DOD on the effect
these actions will have on the Impact Aid Program.
While these are important first steps, I believe the scope of this
problem may be much greater than it first appeared. In the
Chattahoochee Valley school districts surrounding Fort Benning, they
could receive a direct increase of more than 10,000 students over the
next few years just from these various defense initiatives, not to
mention expected indirect growth from these actions, as well as natural
community growth. This amount of growth in students as a result of a
BRAC realignment, to my knowledge, is unprecedented and to place the
fiscal burden for accommodating this growth completely on local
communities, many of which have a low to moderate tax base, is equally
problematic.
I recognize that the Department has been asked to prepare a
detailed report on this situation by July 6, 2006. However, I would
appreciate anything you can share with the committee at this point
regarding what general steps the Department is taking to assist local
educational agencies to accommodate the influx of students resulting
from these Department actions?
Secretary Chu. We are working with the Services to determine the
number of military dependent students and a timetable to help
communities plan for school expansion needs. Recently, the Army asked
each impacted installation to confirm or adjust the numbers previously
reported to ensure accuracy. Additionally, we are working closely with
the Department of Education and our DOD Office of Economic Adjustment
to coordinate our efforts to find ways of offering impacted communities
an array of successful strategies to help meet their needs. The DOD
Office of Economic Adjustment is hosting a meeting in May 2006, in
Atlanta, Georgia, for communities that are experiencing the impact of
BRAC. This forum will provide an opportunity to address these issues
and possible solutions.
10. Senator Chambliss. Secretary Chu, do you believe that the
funding thus far authorized by Congress will be sufficient to ensure
that students in impacted school districts receive an education
equivalent to that offered other students in non-impacted areas?
Secretary Chu. The authorized funds in the NDAA for Fiscal Year
2006 may be sufficient since they are for those schools with enrollment
changes during the school year 2003-2004. Impact Aid is funded after
the school year ends. Unfortunately, Impact Aid does not help the
transition of children in the actual year of impact.
11. Senator Chambliss. Secretary Chu, have previous BRAC rounds
resulted in the influx of military dependent students as large as this
round? If so, how was that growth dealt with by the Department and the
Federal Government?
Secretary Chu. No. Consequently, we have not had the opportunity to
experience the type of growth expected.
______
Questions Submitted by Senator Elizabeth Dole
military financial education program
12. Senator Dole. Secretary Chu, on February 16, the DOD launched
the Military Financial Education Program to help military personnel
manage their money better and protect them from unscrupulous financial
institutions. While I applaud this effort by the Department, I am still
concerned about predatory lending practices directed at members of the
Armed Forces and their families. Included in the NDAA for Fiscal Year
2006 is a provision that requires a report on predatory lending
(section 579). As a part of the report, will you be able to give an
assessment of the effects of the Military Financial Education Program?
Secretary Chu. We appreciate the opportunity to report back to you
on the prevalence and impact of predatory lending, as well as ongoing
and planned efforts to educate servicemembers and to deal with the
prevalence of these practices. We are currently in the process of
collecting data on installation-level initiatives to educate
servicemembers and their spouses. We look forward to sharing this
information with you in the coming months.
On February 16, I joined Members of Congress and the leadership of
the National Association of Securities Dealers (NASD) in launching the
NASD Foundation Financial Awareness and Education Initiative in support
of servicemembers and their families. Their effort adds to the support
provided by other nonprofit organizations and Federal agencies to
assist the military Services in making servicemembers and their
families more aware of financial concerns and educating them on
managing their money wisely.
The Department's efforts to increase awareness and understanding of
financial principles and the potential negative impact of predatory
lending is ongoing, and as we measure the amount of education being
provided, we are also measuring the percentage of servicemembers who
say on surveys they have used predatory lending products. We will be
able to report the percentage using these lending practices as part of
the report, but we believe it will be too soon to determine if
educational programs have affected their choices.
13. Senator Dole. Secretary Chu, how many ``hits'' has the online
resource center averaged per month?
Secretary Chu. The NASD Foundation sponsored Web site at
www.saveandinvest.org averaged 650,770 hits per month during the period
February 1 to March 21, 2006 (from inception to the present).
14. Senator Dole. Secretary Chu, how many servicemembers were
provided on-the-ground training?
Secretary Chu. The on-the-ground training phase of the NASD
Foundation partnership begins in April 2006. The first series of
sessions will be conducted in the Pacific, with scheduled programs
April 12-21, in Honolulu, Hawaii; Okinawa, Japan; and Yokosuka, Japan.
Educational events are also set for the U.S.S. Ronald Reagan in April
and Kings Bay, Georgia in June.
Our training campaign to ensure competency in personal finance,
enhance awareness, and enhance consumer protection is well underway.
The military Services and over 26 Federal agencies and nonprofit
organizations provide information to servicemembers and their families.
We are collecting data on installation-level initiatives to educate
servicemembers and their spouses. That information will be provided to
you in the coming months.
15. Senator Dole. Secretary Chu, how many on-base awareness
programs were conducted concerning predatory lending?
Secretary Chu. There have been several sessions conducted by the
military Services concerning predatory lending over the past 12 months.
We will provide a number as part of the section 579 report requirement.
There have been several financial fairs conducted at military
installations, which have included exhibitors and presentations that
included predatory lending. We have had assistance from organizations
such as the Federal Trade Commission, the National Association of
Consumer Advocates, members of the National Association for Credit
Counseling, the Center for Responsible Lending, the InCharge Institute,
and the Better Business Bureau to assist in these presentations.
Additionally, the military Services provide information about predatory
lending as part of their training on personal finances to junior
enlisted and officers as part of technical training or at their first
duty station.
16. Senator Dole. Secretary Chu, how effective is the public
outreach campaign?
Secretary Chu. The launch of the NASD Foundation program has been
considered very successful, considering the number of visits thus far
to their Web site. Another indication is the response from military
installations to host on-base educational programs.
In addition to the public outreach campaign sponsored by the NASD
Foundation, the American Savings Education Council has provided over 60
award winning public service announcements (PSAs), that have been
featured on American Forces Radio and Television Service, along with
``Military Money Minute'' radio spots provided by the InCharge
Institute and two seasons of the ``Moneywise'' television show provided
by Kelvin Boston and New River Media. We do not have direct measures
concerning the effectiveness of these PSAs; however the leading
indicators used by the Department to assess overall financial readiness
of the force have continued to improve over the past 4 years. When
asked how they assess their financial condition, the percentage of
junior enlisted servicemembers (financially most vulnerable) who
answered that they were finding it ``tough to make ends meet but
keeping your head above water,'' or ``in over your head,'' has
decreased from 26 percent in 2002 to 14 percent in 2006.
armed forces health longitudinal technology application
17. Senator Dole. Secretary Chu, the advances made in battlefield
medicine are contributing to an incredible survival rate for those
wounded in Iraq and Afghanistan. How will the Armed Forces Health
Longitudinal Technology Application (AHLTA) be integrated worldwide,
such as into our field hospital in Balad, Iraq, so we are able to
support our Armed Forces wherever they may be deployed in support of
the global war on terrorism?
Secretary Chu. The Theater Medical Information Program (TMIP),
intended for use in the theater environment, integrates components of
various medical information systems to ensure timely, interoperable
medical support for rapid mobilization, deployment, and sustainment of
theater forces during combat operations.
In support of Operation Iraqi Freedom, TMIP is currently deployed
to medical units in Iraq and Kuwait. Medical personnel use TMIP to
support health care operations, capture electronic patient encounter
information, and transfer health care information to the Joint Medical
Work Station (JMeWS). Records stored in JMeWS support command and
control and health surveillance. This information is securely
transmitted to the stateside AHLTA clinical data repository, where each
individual soldier's longitudinal electronic health record is
maintained. At the point of discharge from the Service, health data is
transmitted to the Veterans Health Administration.
18. Senator Dole. Secretary Chu, when do you expect AHLTA to be
fully integrated?
Secretary Chu. The implementation of AHLTA across the Military
Health System in support of our 9.2 million beneficiaries will be
completed in December 2006. Additional enhancements to AHLTA's
capabilities, to include electronic dental records, will continue
through 2011.
______
Questions Submitted by Senator Edward M. Kennedy
qualified pool of eligible youth for recruiting
19. Senator Kennedy. Secretary Chu, during testimony at the Senate
Armed Services Committee Army posture hearing, General Schoomaker,
Chief of Staff, United States Army, testified that only 3 of 10 males
age 17-24 are qualified to serve in the Army. This point came up during
an exchange with Senator Lieberman where General Schoomaker was
explaining that any proposed increase in Army end strength was an
academic discussion because the Army, including Guard and Reserve,
would be unable to recruit above the current goal of 170,000 per year
due to the limited pool of qualified youth.
This issue lies at the heart of our ability to affordably recruit
for our Armed Forces. It may speak to flaws in our national social and
educational policies for developing our Nation's youth. Of note, a New
York Times op-ed that same day highlighted the dangers, both to the
Service and to the individual, of lowering recruiting standards. This
confirms the importance of improving the qualifications of the youth
pool, as opposed to considering lowering recruiting standards. Does the
DOD concur with the Army's analysis?
20. Senator Kennedy. Secretary Chu, why are so few of our male
youth qualified to enlist?
21. Senator Kennedy. Secretary Chu, what are the trends?
22. Senator Kennedy. Secretary Chu, most importantly, what can be
done to improve the size of the pool over the long term without
lowering standards?
Secretary Chu. A number of independent studies have estimated the
size of the qualified pool of eligible youth and have arrived at
conclusions similar to those cited by the Army. The principal
disqualifying factor lies in the medical area, principally in physical
conditioning, as demonstrated by high body fat.
Obesity is becoming far more prevalent today. In 1980, 5 percent of
youth were obese; today, 15 percent are, with another 15 percent coming
close. Fully two-thirds of youth are overweight. It has been reported
that today only 20 percent of young men and women participate in
organized sports, far fewer than the 80 percent figure cited for 1970.
Also, many more youth today report disqualifying medical conditions
such as asthma or attention deficit disorder.
The Department is working hard to identify subsets of these groups
who might qualify by way of a waiver, despite their disqualifying
medical condition. In terms of asthma and attention deficit disorders,
we have updated and revised the enlistment standards in a medically
sound way to expand the number of young people eligible without
compromising safety and job performance. Likewise, we have identified
screens (including a form of the Harvard Step Test) that may be
employed to identify those who, while above current body fat standards,
are likely to successfully complete basic training.
Even so, it remains challenging for the military to recruit
sufficient numbers owing to a reluctance by key influencers (parents,
teachers, and coaches, for example) to recommend military service. We
must change the viewpoint of influencers to one that attaches far
greater value to the nobility to military service, and ask that
Congress join the Department in that pursuit. Our Joint Advertising and
Marketing Research and Studies program is directing all of its energies
to that end.
impact of tricare changes
23. Senator Kennedy. General Hagenbeck, during the Army posture
hearing there was considerable discussion about strain on the Army and
the potential need for increased end strength. At one point General
Schoomaker responded that even if the Army increased end strength, it
would be difficult to achieve in view of recruiting challenges. If this
is the case, then isn't it in our interest to make our best efforts to
retain the force, particularly the mid-grade noncommissioned officers
(NCOs) and officers so critical to leading the soldiers?
General Hagenbeck. The Army is retaining soldiers at exceptionally
high levels. Since 2002, we have exceeded our total Army retention
goals every year, culminating with 106 percent of our combined (AC,
USAR, and ARNG) overall Army goal in 2005. In a time of war and with
the pace of current operations, this is a significant indicator of the
quality of leadership within our ranks, the fact that soldiers believe
in what they are doing and value the traditions of service to the
Nation. 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 the retention of our soldiers, especially the
midgrade NCOs. Officer retention has taken on renewed interest not
because of an increase in officer loss rates, but because of a
significant force structure growth and modularity. The Army is short
roughly 3,500 Active component officers, most of which are senior
captains and majors. While the overall company grade loss rates are not
alarming, the Army is being proactive and is working several
initiatives to retain more of our best and brightest officers. These
initiatives include higher promotion rates, earlier promotion pin-on
points, expanded graduate school opportunities, branch and posting for
Active service, and officer critical skills retention bonus.
24. Senator Kennedy. General Hagenbeck, in that case, it would seem
that we would want to maintain the benefits that Congress has worked,
in a bipartisan manner, to establish. If we want to retain these
leaders, why is it appropriate to increase the TRICARE cost-share for
some retirees?
General Hagenbeck. Congress' and the DOD's decision to make no
upward adjustments in beneficiary out-of-pocket costs for over 11 years
was very helpful to military families. We believe now is the time to
begin to act in order to preserve the comprehensiveness of the military
health benefit for all categories of beneficiaries into the future. The
DOD designed the proposed cost-shares to ensure no out-of-pocket
increases for soldiers, minimal changes in pharmacy co-payments for
Active-Duty family members, and to renorm retiree cost-shares to 1995
levels. Further, the DOD agreed that we should tier retiree cost-shares
so junior enlisted retirees do not have to pay the same cost-shares as
officers. Delaying these adjustments will only force more extreme
increases in the future and have the potential to consume a larger
portion of the budget that is needed for modernization and readiness
programs.
25. Senator Kennedy. General Hagenbeck, don't you think the
soldiers who are making career decisions will see a change in their
retirement benefits as breaking the faith with them?
General Hagenbeck. A recent survey by the U.S. Army Research
Institute (ARI) suggests that retirement benefits and the continuation
of benefits may affect retention. Of the top six reasons for enlisted
soldiers thinking or planning on leaving the Army before retirement,
number six was retirement benefits. While the report indicates
retirement benefits as a factor that may affect retention, we have no
detailed data that quantifies the impact of changes in TRICARE cost-
shares on retention. The conclusion seems logical based upon this and
anecdotal evidence that suggests retirement benefits are important to
retention and any perceived erosion in benefits could, in fact,
negatively impact retention. To mitigate the negative impacts these
changes may have on retention, we have done a good job of educating
soldiers and retirees on the need for these changes. We believe we can
overcome the negative impacts of these proposals by demonstrating that
TRICARE will remain a superb health benefit for all soldiers, Active
and retired, and their families. Even after these changes, TRICARE will
remain a very affordable health care option for retirees. Without these
changes, we risk an erosion of the Department's ability to invest in
readiness, modernization, and training due to increased health care
costs.
equity of guard pay and allowances while on similar state and federal
duty
26. Senator Kennedy. General Hagenbeck, members of the
Massachusetts National Guard recently filed lawsuit seeking
compensation for out-of-pocket expenses they said they paid after being
called to duty. These soldiers indicate they were forced to pay for
transportation, lodging, and meals because they were called up on State
orders to protect U.S. military bases and water reservoirs from terror
attacks after September 11, 2001. Reportedly Guard members called up on
Federal orders had similar expenses paid for them by the government.
While this particular case affects the Massachusetts Guard, are there
similar issues in other States? Are there any policy changes that the
Army and National Guard should consider to prevent a repeat of this
situation?
General Hagenbeck. Each State has its own rules and regulations
regarding compensation for members of the National Guard called to
State Active-Duty. We cannot comment on those State entitlements.
For members of the National Guard called to Active-Duty in a title
10 or title 32 status, the DOD, Per Diem and Transportation Allowance
Committee, the Defense Finance and Accounting Service (DFAS), and each
of the Services promulgate policy used to determine appropriate
reimbursement for official travel-related expenses. Reimbursement for
transportation, lodging, and meals for soldiers called to Active-Duty
depends on the location of the soldier's residence at the time ordered
to Active-Duty, location of duty duration of duty and other factors.
Accordingly, some cases may arise in which two soldiers performing
similar duties at the same installation may be entitled to different
amounts of reimbursement for travel-related expenses.
The National Guard Bureau is reviewing this situation to help
achieve a solution. Additionally, the National Guard Bureau knows of no
similar instance in other States.
recruiting advertising
27. Senator Kennedy. Secretary Chu, as you are aware, Congress has
a history of providing additional funding to the President's budget
submission for the Joint Advertising Market Research and Studies
(JAMRS). We have supported the program with the understanding that
JAMRS is a key component of the Department's recruiting programs and
provides a corporate-level marketing campaign which builds advocacy
among parents, teachers, coaches, etc., who are the influencers of
youth. We have heard many good things about the program and wonder what
is your assessment?
Secretary Chu. The JAMRS program is vital to recruiting efforts.
JAMRS provides products and services that support the Active-Duty,
Guard, and Reserve recruiting efforts. It also offers the Department
invaluable outreach and insight into the adult influencers of youth who
may choose to enlist.
JAMRS research indicates adult influencers, particularly parents,
play an integral role in the decisions that youth make regarding their
future educational and career plans following high school and college.
Research also indicates the most important role that influencers play
in the enlistment process centers around their ability to have an open
and informed discussion about the military. It is important that the
Department reach these adult influencers with information that
accurately represents the benefits of military service. Congressional
support allows the JAMRS program to address this need through a variety
of targeted public outreach initiatives, driven by valid and timely
market research.
The JAMRS ``Today's Military, Get the Facts, Make it a Two-Way
Conversation'' campaign broadens the public's understanding by exposing
over one billion people to information about the military through
print, direct marketing, online, and television initiatives. Public
outreach creates over six million impressions in high profile national
media outlets. A 49 percent increase in Web site visitor-traffic
demonstrates the effectiveness of the campaign and the willingness of
the public to seek out more information about the military. JAMRS has
produced an educational DVD featuring a documentary that highlights
extraordinary servicemembers with extraordinary opportunities. The
documentary has gained acceptance to air in over 75 percent of the
United States. The DVD is also being shipped to 40,000 educators and
can be ordered online by schools across the Nation.
In today's increasingly difficult military recruiting environment,
the JAMRS mission is more critical than ever. Continued program funding
allows marketing research and communications programs to support joint
recruitment initiatives, minimizing duplication among the Services,
maximizing distribution channels, and broadening the public's
understanding of military service.
______
Questions Submitted by Senator Daniel K. Akaka
conversions
28. Senator Akaka. Secretary Chu, during congressional
consideration of the NSPS in 2003, the Department testified that NSPS
would aid in 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. You testified today that
over 20,000 positions have been converted to date.
Last year you testified that 703 positions were converted to the
private sector in fiscal year 2004. Can you tell me the nature of the
job or function that was converted to private sector performance and
how many of the converted positions for fiscal year 2005 have been
subject to competitive sourcing and are now being performed by the
private sector? Please detail the job or function that was converted to
private sector performance.
Secretary Chu. In previous testimony, we estimated that there were
approximately 320,000 positions that could be studied for possible
conversion. Since that time, the Department has conducted a series of
reviews to identify areas for conversions. In fiscal year 2004, a total
of 7,640 military billets were converted to DOD civilian or private
sector performance. 836 of these were accomplished through competitive
sourcing; 703 of these were converted to private sector performance.
The rest remained in-house.
Of the 1,790 Air Force military-to-civilian conversions in fiscal
year 2004, 595 were a result of competitive sourcing. Public-private
competitions for all these military billets were awarded to private
sector contractors. These competitions were predominantly in the
following functional areas: Computing Services and/or Data Base
Management; Expeditionary Force Operations; Telecommunication Centers;
and Management Headquarters--Communications, Computing, and Information
Services.
None of the Army's 4,281 or the Navy's 905 conversions for fiscal
year 2004 resulted from competitive sourcing. However, installation
security guard functions performed by 4,100 Army National Guardsmen
were converted to contract performance in fiscal year 2004, and the
guardsmen were subsequently demobilized.
Of the 664 military billets converted by the Marine Corps in fiscal
year 2004, 241 were a result of competitive sourcing. However,
competitions for only 108 of the military billets were awarded to
private sector contractors. Competitions for the rest of the billets
(133) were awarded to the government and the work was converted to DOD
civilian performance. Marine Corps competitions awarded to the private
sector involved the following functions: Range Operations, Motor
Vehicle Maintenance, Fuel Distribution, Real Property Management and
Grounds Maintenance.
In fiscal year 2005, the Army, Navy, and Marine Corps did not
convert any military billets through competitive sourcing. However, the
Air Force converted 335 billets to private sector performance through
competitive sourcing. These competitions were in the following
functional areas: Minor Construction, Maintenance, and Repair of
Buildings and Structures other than Family Housing; Expeditionary Force
Operations; Storage and Warehousing; and Distribution of Petroleum,
Oil, and Lubricant Products.
29. Senator Akaka. Secretary Chu, you also testified that the
Department plans to convert 10,000 positions in fiscal year 2006 and
fiscal year 2007. In total, this number falls far short of the 320,000
touted by the Department in 2003. Given that certain positions should
not be converted due to rotation and career progression needs, what is
the total number of military-to-civilian conversions that the
Department plans to make and what jobs or functions should not be
converted to civilian personnel?
Secretary Chu. The Department's military-to-civilian conversions
are a key part of the Department's efforts to ensure that the Total
Force is fiscally responsible and that military personnel are only used
to perform ``military essential'' activities. Additionally, these
conversions help to preclude the need for a permanent increase in
military end strength. In fiscal year 2004 and fiscal year 2005, over
20,600 military billets were converted to DOD civilian or private
sector performance. By fiscal year 2007, we expect the number of
conversions to exceed 31,000. In addition, the DOD components have
developed goals that, together with the number of conversions already
completed and programmed, could raise the number of conversions to over
61,000. As the Department implements its plans for Active/Reserve
rebalancing and BRAC, the number of military conversions could change
significantly. Also, as the NSPS is implemented, it will provide the
Department with greater flexibility in managing the civilian workforce
that will aid in the conversion of additional billets.
In previous testimony, we estimated that there were approximately
320,000 positions that could be studied for possible conversion. This
estimate included military billets in functions that were identified as
commercial in nature. Our analysis is verifying which of these billets
must remain military due to laws, treaties, executive orders, and
international agreements and which are required for readiness or
workforce management reasons. This includes military positions needed
for military career progression, rotation, wartime assignments, risk
mitigation, and other similar requirements. In addition, certain
inherently governmental responsibilities that require military-unique
knowledge and skills cannot be converted to either DOD civilian or
private sector performance. Decisions to convert military billets
depend on the merits of each situation with the 300,000+ positions
under review. As a result, the ``total number'' of conversions will
change from year to year as Defense priorities, threat levels, and
technologies change how the Department structures its workforce to
fight and win wars.
foreign language
30. Senator Akaka. Secretary Chu, I am pleased to see that the DOD
has taken great efforts to strengthen foreign language education,
particularly with the pilot K-16 Chinese program with the University of
Oregon. I understand that this program is being used as the national
model for the study of critical languages and is the basis of the
similar proposal in the National Security Language Initiative (NSLI).
What are the lessons learned from this pilot program?
Secretary Chu. The grant by the National Security Education Program
(NSEP) to the University of Oregon and Portland Public Schools was
awarded in August 2005 as part of the National Flagship Language
Initiative. This grant represented a first effort to build a national
model for an articulated K-16 program using Chinese for the pilot. It
is too early in the program implementation process to systematically
assemble ``lessons learned.'' Full implementation of programs in the
Portland elementary, middle, and high schools will begin in the fall of
2006 and the University of Oregon will admit its first pilot group of
high school graduates from Portland high schools this September. It is
clear, however, from our efforts to date, that a number of criteria are
critical to the success of this and future K-16 programs in the NSLI.
These include: (1) a clear plan for structuring a continuing and fully
articulated approach to language education from K-12 and beyond; (2)
ability to convey and communicate an approach that can be replicated in
other K-16 environments throughout the United States and for languages
other than Chinese; (3) demonstrated understanding of ongoing national
efforts to develop and implement national standards for foreign
language learning; (4) performance benchmarks at critical points in
students' progression through levels of instruction; (5) availability
of expertise in language pedagogy; and (6) clear demonstration and
evidence of active participation of school(s) and school district(s) in
the effort.
31. Senator Akaka. Secretary Chu, you testified about the
Department's work with other Federal agencies to develop the NSLI,
which is designed to expand the number of Americans mastering critical
languages at a younger age, increase the number of advance-level
speakers of foreign languages, and increase the number of foreign
language teachers and their resources. According to the White Paper
produced by the participants at the Department's National Language
Conference in 2004, the engagement of stakeholder groups and Federal,
State, and local governments in solving the Nation's language
deficiency is essential. Does the NSLI reflect input from stakeholders
and State and local government leaders and if not, what outreach is
planned to gain their support and suggestions?
Secretary Chu. The NSLI does indeed reflect extensive input from
stakeholders and State and local government leaders. The White Paper
which emerged from the DOD-sponsored National Language Conference
recognized that collaboration with stakeholders was a necessary
ingredient of any effort to address the language crisis in American
education. NSLI focuses exclusively on the investment in the United
States educational infrastructure. It responds to the concerns
expressed by the foreign language education community that more
emphasis needs to be placed on the development of programs at earlier
levels of the education process and answers the call for more teacher
education and certification. The K-16 pipeline concept embodied in NSLI
is an outgrowth of extensive dialogue and conversation with key
language associations including the American Council of Teachers of
Foreign Languages. We fully expect the implementation of NSLI programs
will continue to require an ongoing collaboration with all
stakeholders.
32. Senator Akaka. Secretary Chu, I am interested about costs
associated with the Department's efforts to improve foreign language
education and proficiency. Please state for the record how much funding
the Department will set aside in fiscal year 2007 and during the next 3
years for NSLI, programs proposed in the Defense Language
Transformation Roadmap, and current language training programs.
Secretary Chu. The Department of Defense is dedicating $19.2
million per year in fiscal years 2007-2011 toward the DOD programs that
contribute to the NSLI.
The QDR emphasizes the need for growing the foreign language and
regional expertise capability within DOD and targets funding for
several initiatives that support the Defense Language Transformation
Roadmap, including ramping up language and cultural expertise
instruction at the Service academies and at universities with Reserve
Officer Training Corps programs; expanding the Army's 09L program that
recruits Arabic heritage speakers into the Individual Ready Reserves;
the NSLI, etc. We are dedicating $429.7 million during fiscal years
2007-2011 toward these efforts.
In order to increase the proficiency of our linguists to the level
demanded by new communication technologies (3-3), we are reducing class
size and revising instruction at the Defense Language Institute as well
as expanding overseas training. In fiscal years 2007-2010, $330 million
will be used for these purposes.
national security personnel system
33. Senator Akaka. Secretary Chu, under the current scheduled
rollout of NSPS, some employees in Hawaii will be included in Spiral 1.
Because DOD is considering an employee's occupation in addition to
geographic location in determining whether an employee receives
locality pay, what impact will this have on employees who do not
receive locality pay but rather non-foreign COLA (5 U.S.C. 5941), which
is based on the employee's geographic location, which is not waived by
NSPS?
Secretary Chu. NSPS implementation will have no effect on COLAs for
non-foreign areas that are authorized under 5 U.S.C. 5941. As you
noted, the Department has no authority to waive section 5941. With
respect to NSPS provisions, local market supplements are additional
payments to employees in specified local market areas, occupations,
specializations, and/or pay bands. They may be established in response
to labor market conditions that are not already fully addressed by the
worldwide pay band rate ranges. As the Department makes decisions on
authorizing local market supplements, the applicability (presence) of
non-foreign COLAs will be a factor in determining the amount and
coverage of those local market supplements.
34. Senator Akaka. Secretary Chu, will pay bands remain stagnant
due to the mandatory non-foreign COLA increase and if no information is
available yet, when do you expect we will receive details on this
issue?
Secretary Chu. The NSPS pay bands, and their applicable rate
ranges, apply in all areas, both within and outside the continental
United States. In determining adjustments to these rate ranges, the
Secretary may consider mission requirements, labor market conditions,
availability of funds, pay adjustments received by employees of other
Federal agencies, and other relevant factors. The non-foreign COLAs
will not affect decisions on the NSPS worldwide rate ranges. However,
the presence of non-foreign COLAs will be considered in establishing
any applicable local market supplements.
35. Senator Akaka. Secretary Chu, after U.S. District Judge
Rosemary Collyer ruled in August 2005 that the Department of Homeland
Security's (DHS) new personnel system did not ensure collective
bargaining and did not provide for a fair appeals system, DOD informed
me that it had reviewed the DHS decision and made some changes to the
proposed NSPS regulations to avoid the issues raised in Judge Collyer's
decision. On Monday, February 27, Judge Emmet Sullivan ruled that the
final regulations on the NSPS are inconsistent with its enabling
statute in that it does not ensure collective bargaining, the National
Security Labor Relations Board is not independent, and the new appeals
process is not fair. Given the similarities in these court decisions,
can you specify what changes DOD and OPM made to the NSPS to avoid the
problems found in DHS's personnel system?
Secretary Chu. We were certainly aware of, and informed by, Judge
Collyer's decision. However, the statutory authority for NSPS is
different than the statutory authority provided to DHS. Ultimately,
changes that were made to the final regulations were a result of the
many public comments received, as well as input from the unions during
the meet and confer process.
36. Senator Akaka. Secretary Chu, as a former educator, I firmly
believe that agencies should adequately fund their training programs.
How much is DOD's overall training budget for fiscal year 2007 and what
portion is being used for NSPS training and how does this amount
compare to the training budget for fiscal year 2006, both for NSPS
training and established training programs employees rely on to do
their jobs?
Secretary Chu. Generally, the Department budgets for training as
part of the operations and maintenance requirement. Training required
by law and mission essential training, including NSPS training, will
continue to be the Department's top training priorities.
The DOD has budgeted approximately $522 million for civilian
education and training in the fiscal year 2007 budget and expects to
spend approximately $5.4 million on NSPS content-specific training in
fiscal year 2007. The Department budgeted approximately $509 million
for civilian education and training for fiscal year 2006 and expects to
spend approximately $5.4 million on NSPS content-specific training in
fiscal year 2006.
______
Questions Submitted by Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton
defense integrated military human resources system
37. Senator Clinton. Secretary Chu, the military continues to deal
with pay issues relating to wounded soldiers. In fact, I have recently
re-engaged the Secretary of the Army regarding my continuing concerns
with wounded soldier pay problems. A possible longer-term solution is
an integrated personnel and pay system that brings all components of
all Services under one system, the Defense Integrated Military Human
Resources System (DIMHRS). Please provide an update on the current
status of DIMHRS within the DOD, and specifically address the following
issues:
(A) What is the current time line and fielding plan for
DIMHRS?
Secretary Chu. A preliminary timeline was approved by the Acting
Deputy Secretary of Defense (Mr. England) during the Defense Business
Systems Management Committee meeting held on March 23, 2006. The
timeline showed an Initial Operating Capability to the Army in April
2008 with implementation in the Air Force to follow shortly after in
August 2008. The Defense Business Systems Acquisition Executive is in
the process of developing a full schedule. The Navy and United States
Marine Corps are currently conducting their assessments and have not
yet produced a projected deployment timeline.
(B) What is the total amount that has been invested in
developing DIMHRS to date?
Secretary Chu. Investment costs and operations costs incurred by
the DIMHRS (Pers/Pay) Program Manager (Oracle/PeopleSoft COTS software,
Northrop-Grumman developer/implementer contracts and Program Management
costs) for fiscal years 1998-2005 were approximately $373 million. Some
of this cost was incurred in fiscal year 2005 to support the Service
assessments of the software. These costs do not include the costs of
functional analyses of personnel and pay processes, business process
reengineering, and the documentation of standards and requirements,
since these activities were needed regardless of the technical
solution.
(C) What additional resources and/or congressional action
will be required to complete development and fielding of
DIMHRS?
Secretary Chu. The Defense Business Systems Acquisition Executive
(DBSAE) is currently working on finalizing the resource requirements
for the remainder of the program. The DBSAE is also working with the
Comptroller to develop a plan for funding the program. Congressional
support and guidance is critical to the success of the DIMHRS (Pers/
Pay) program.
As we streamline business processes, we may wish to request changes
to the language of legislation to support smooth implementation.
Congressional support for requests for changes that will ultimately
streamline and standardize our processes is paramount to the success of
this effort.
(D) How will DIMHRS address the following issues related to
wounded soldier pay problems:
(1) What safeguards will the system have to prevent
the military from mistakenly over-paying wounded
soldiers and then trying to claim debts and also asking
for other payments that are not well-founded?
Secretary Chu. DIMHRS (Pers/Pay) is an integrated personnel and pay
system. Entry of personnel information based upon pay affecting events
will result in timely and accurate computation of pay for all military
members. Overpayments result when a member's change in status and
geographical location is not reported to the compensation system in a
timely manner. Overpayments will be avoided with timely and accurate
entry of information relative to the member's status and automated
business rules that will govern eligibility for those pays driven by
status and geographical location. Business processes are already in
place.
(2) How will it enhance oversight of the debt
forgiveness process?
Secretary Chu. DIMHRS (Pers/Pay) will provide access to basic
personnel and pay information in a manner that will allow quick and
accurate identification of members in an overpayment or debt status.
Similarly, this access will enable the Department to quickly identify
members who fall into specific categories that would make them eligible
for forgiveness (for instance, wounded in action). This will allow for
quicker identification of the debt condition and ultimate resolution as
well as provide for a more consistent and timely adjudication of a debt
forgiveness request.
(3) How will it streamline providing assistance to
servicemembers making a request for debt forgiveness?
Secretary Chu. Complete information about a member's pay and an
audit trail for pay affecting event transactions will be immediately
available. This tool will provide needed information for responsible
finance officers to make appropriate determinations for cause, effect,
and amount of member indebtedness. This information is not flagged or
readily available today and thus results in cumbersome processes to
adjudicate requests. DIMHRS (Pers/Pay) will first substantially reduce
the number of overpayment cases and then facilitate the resolution of
any overpayments that do occur. It will reduce the dollar amounts of
the overpayment given timely entry of pay affecting information into
DIMHRS (Pers/Pay).
(4) What benchmarks will be established to measure
progress in correcting future pay problems?
Secretary Chu. Metrics are already in use to measure the percentage
of military members accurately paid correctly within 15 and 30 days of
a pay affecting event. We will continue to use these measurements to
monitor improvement. Additionally, an automated Case Management Tool
(first developed by the Air Force) is being used to collect, maintain,
track, administer, and provide historical reference to each pay problem
reported. The Department sets standards for the timeliness of
resolution of pay problems and uses the tool to measure success in
meeting the standards. This tool will continue to be used as long as
pay problems exist.
[Whereupon, at 10:17 a.m., the subcommittee adjourned.]
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION FOR APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR
2007
----------
TUESDAY, MARCH 14, 2006
U.S. Senate,
Subcommittee on Personnel,
Committee on Armed Services,
Washington DC.
HEALTH BENEFITS AND PROGRAMS
The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:34 p.m. in
SR-325, the Caucus Room, Russell Senate Office Building,
Senator Lindsey Graham (chairman of the subcommittee)
presiding.
Committee members present: Senators Graham, Dole, 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 members present: Jonathan D. Clark, minority
counsel; Gabriella Eisen, research assistant; and Gerald J.
Leeling, minority counsel.
Staff assistants present: Benjamin L. Rubin, Jill L.
Simodejka, and Pendred K. Wilson.
Committee members' assistants present: Meredith Beck and
Matthew R. Rimkunas, assistants to Senator Graham; Greg Riels,
assistant to Senator Dole; and Eric Pierce, assistant to
Senator Ben Nelson.
OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR LINDSEY O. GRAHAM, CHAIRMAN
Senator Graham [presiding]. Good afternoon. Senator Dole,
Senator Nelson, and I appreciate your coming. We have a dilemma
on our hands, ladies and gentlemen. We're going to start taking
budget votes at about 3:15 and we're going to have nine votes
so what we have to do is have a double-header here. The
Department of Defense (DOD) part of this hearing has been
rained out. We will reschedule the DOD witnesses on Panel II so
they may still come up here to make their presentation to the
subcommittee. Today, we'll hear from the groups representing
our military retired community. We appreciate everyone coming.
This is one of the most important hearings we'll have this
year about recruiting, retention, and the sustainability of
health care. I'm very eager to hear from everybody and I
appreciate those who attended an informal discussion on this
topic a couple of weeks ago. I learned a lot from it and I
thought it was tremendously beneficial.
Our panel today consists of Ms. Schmidli, Chairman and
Chief Executive Officer of the National Military Family
Association (NMFA); Lieutenant General McCarthy, Executive
Director of the Reserve Officers Association (ROA); Vice
Admiral Ryan, President of the Military Officers Association of
America (MOAA); and Edgar Zerr, National President of the Fleet
Reserve Association (FRA). We will hear from all of you
shortly.
I have a quick opening statement. The tale of the numbers.
Under the Civilian Health and Medical Program of the Uniformed
Services (CHAMPUS), before TRICARE came along, I've been told
that the average cost share for a military retiree was about 27
percent. TRICARE came along and it's about 12 percent. The
average increase in retirement benefits over the last decade
has been about 32 percent in terms of increase in retirement
pay. The DOD proposal is a 115-percent increase in fees and
services over a 2-year period. Ten years ago the DOD medical
expenditure was about 4 percent of its budget, and today it's
about 8 percent. As you project data in the future it's going
to be about 12 percent.
How do we reconcile all of these numbers? How do we find a
balance between 32 percent retired pay increase and a 115-
percent fee increase? How do we get ahead of the dynamic that
the military health care budget is growing exponentially and
you're having to pick between operational needs and military
retired needs? I think the way you do it is to talk to each
other, understand a common definition of the problem the best
you can, and phase in solutions that are fair, that increase
health care benefits, and at the same time will make the
program sustainable. It will only work if we work together. You
have my pledge and my promise to try to find some fair and
equitable way to deal with this on my watch, because I am not
going to pass this on to the next generation of senators and
military retirees.
Senator Nelson.
[The prepared statement of Senator Graham follows:]
Prepared Statement by Senator Lindsey O. Graham
Good afternoon. The committee meets today to consider the National
Defense Authorization Request for health benefits and programs for
fiscal year 2007, and in particular, the proposal of the Department of
Defense to begin the process of reform, through increasing TRICARE fees
for retirees.
Today's panel is comprised of advocates for military families and
retirees, and includes:
Tanna Schmidli, Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive
Officer of the National Military Family Association;
Lieutenant General Dennis M. McCarthy (USMC Ret.), Executive
Director of the Reserve Officers Association;
Vice Admiral Norbert R. Ryan (USN Ret.), President of the
Military Officers Association of America; and
Edgar Zerr, National President of the Fleet Reserve
Association.
We welcome all of you.
I begin with an acknowledgment that military service in an All-
Volunteer Force comes with a commitment for the highest quality health
care. Providing that benefit is essential, and this subcommittee will
ensure that the benefit is sustained.
To do so, however, in an era of rapidly growing health care costs,
requires our best thinking. I am committed to enacting carefully
crafted reforms which protect its quality, improve people's health, and
maximize the efficiency of the health care delivery mechanisms within
our control.
These are the questions that we will examine today. I hope that
this hearing will shed light on a way forward that is fair, and most
importantly will reflect our commitment to men and women in uniform and
their families, as well as retired members and their families for a
sustainable quality health benefit.
Senator Nelson, thank you once again for your service as we examine
the programs which support our military personnel and their families.
We have made significant advances in many areas, including health care
for the Reserves, military pay and quality-of-life. Our subcommittee's
tradition of bipartisanship is alive and well, and has produced
important programs and support for the quality-of-life of our men and
women in uniform and their families.
STATEMENT OF SENATOR E. BENJAMIN NELSON
Senator Ben Nelson. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you
to the panel for being here today. Obviously this is a very
important issue for the military retirees who correctly view
this program as an earned benefit. All throughout their
military careers they've been told that a significant portion
of their compensation for service was a generous health care
benefit throughout their entire retirement. They based their
career plans, as well as their retirement plans, on the promise
of an affordable health care benefit based on the structure in
existence for the last decade.
However, that doesn't mean that reasonable adjustments
cannot, and at times, should not be accommodated. While we
can't dismiss the legitimate concerns, we do have an obligation
to make sure that we can sustain this excellent health care
program for those who have already retired, for those who are
serving now, and for those yet to serve. It's very clear this
will require a careful balancing of interests, making all those
percentages that my colleague just recited balance out and work
for everybody who is concerned. I have a lengthier opening
statement, Mr. Chairman, but I'd like to have that submitted
for the record.
Senator Graham. Without objection.
Senator Ben Nelson. Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Senator Nelson follows:]
Prepared Statement by Senator E. Benjamin Nelson
Thank you, Senator Graham, for holding this hearing on military
health care. One of the most significant issues the Personnel
Subcommittee will address this year is the Department of Defense's
(DOD) proposal to increase health care premiums and annual deductibles
for retirees who are not yet eligible for Medicare and TRICARE for
Life.
This is a very emotional issue for many military retirees who
correctly view this as an earned benefit. All throughout their military
careers, they have been told that a significant portion of their
compensation for service was a generous health care benefit throughout
their retirement. They based their career plans, as well as their
retirement plans, on the promise of an affordable health care benefit
based on the fee structure in existence for the last decade. However,
that does not mean that reasonable adjustments cannot be accommodated.
While we cannot dismiss their legitimate concerns, we have an
obligation to make sure that we can sustain this excellent health care
benefit for those who have already retired, for those who are serving
now, and for those yet to serve. This will require a careful balancing
of interests.
My experience as a Governor and as a Senator has taught me that if
you are going to adjust a benefit, it cannot be a surprise and it must
be done in moderation. I am concerned that the Department's proposal is
too much too fast. The Department has had authority to adjust the
premiums for TRICARE since its inception in 1995 and has elected not to
increase them until now. It seems to me that trying to make up for
those 11 years in 2 years is too extreme. Increasing the enrollment fee
for TRICARE Prime in just 2 years from $460 a year to $650 a year for
family coverage for junior enlisted members, from $460 to $950 for
senior noncommissioned officers, and from $460 to $1,400 for officers
seems a bit much for families that have based their retirement plans on
the retired pay and health care costs as they existed when they
retired. Maybe we need to moderate the increase and spread it out over
a longer period to give these families time to make reasonable
adjustments to their budgets.
We also have to take into account the effect these proposed changes
will have on recruiting. The Service Personnel Chiefs have been telling
us for some time that one of the main challenges to successful
recruiting is the lack of support for military service by influencers.
These influencers include parents, teachers, guidance counselors, and
coaches. Those who have served in the military, especially retirees,
are very significant influencers. If military retirees believe that the
Government has reneged on a promised, earned benefit, can we count of
them to promote military service by the young people in their sphere of
influence?
I think we also need to understand the impact these proposed
increases will have on those who are serving today. Will these proposed
increases, if enacted, have an effect on the family decision to remain
in the military? Will they start to question what other benefits might
be changed that would have an impact on their retirement plans? I plan
to ask the military leaders whether they have attempted to ascertain
how this proposal is viewed by currently serving military personnel and
their families.
Mr. Chairman, we do need to help the DOD control the continuing
increases in health care costs. However, that includes more than just
looking at raising the premiums for retirees. For starters, it is not
clear to me that the Department's proposed increases will provide the
savings the Department is counting on. Their own figures show that the
increased fees will amount to $199 million while the Department's
health care budget reflects savings of $578 million. The Department has
reduced its budget request by $405 million on the theory that large
numbers of retirees will leave the TRICARE program because of the
increased fees, and by another $15 million, assuming that the increase
in annual deductibles will result in decreased utilization of health
care services. I'm not entirely sure why the administration has drawn
this conclusion--DOD acknowledges that ``the TRICARE benefit will
remain the best health benefit offered in this country,'' and even at
the increased rates, will still be less costly than almost any other
commercial or employer sponsored health care plan.
Mr. Chairman, however this works out, we need to make sure that the
Defense health program is fully funded. To do this, we will need to add
funding or find other efficiencies. One area that warrants greater
exploration is greater cooperation and resource sharing between the DOD
and the Department of Veterans' Affairs (VA). While I am committed to
separate health care systems for the VA and DOD, we need to continue to
look for opportunities for the two systems to work together to provide
better health care for the beneficiaries of each system in the most
economical way. We also need to look for efficiencies in the delivery
of health care within the DOD. Is the Department doing all that it can
to provide disease management for high-cost chronic illnesses? Has the
Department done enough to encourage use of the cost-effective mail
order pharmacy? Are the Services making the most effective use of
medical treatment facilities when this would result in cost savings?
These are just a few of the areas that should be explored in our joint
effort to control rising health care costs.
The witnesses on today's panel are all familiar with the military's
health care benefit, and I understand they have some very interesting
ideas for controlling increases in the cost of military health care.
Hearing their testimony today will give us the benefit of their ideas
so that we can discuss them with our second panel when we reschedule
their portion of this hearing.
Mr. Chairman, I am anxious to hear what our witnesses have to tell
us this afternoon. Thank you.
Senator Graham. Thank you for being such a good partner,
Senator Nelson. I could not have asked for a better person to
work with and I appreciate it.
Senator Dole.
Senator Dole. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I want to say to
you, Ms. Schmidli, that I've had an opportunity to become
familiar with Operation Purple and I want to congratulate you
on the tremendous work helping kids of parents who've been
deployed through some very difficult times, times of tension
and stress. I think it's a marvelous program and in North
Carolina the National Guard has a very similar program called
Kids on Guard. Again, it's wonderful for those who are being
deployed in terms of increasing their readiness because they
have peace of mind knowing that their families are being taken
care of and certainly for the families back home it also
provides a support network. What I'd like to suggest, if I may,
is that you get in touch with Lil Ingram, who is the wife of
our Adjutant General of North Carolina. I think there might be
synergies which could be produced as a result of this liaison,
which could be beneficial too, and could strengthen each
program.
I welcome all of you today. I just wanted to make those
comments in case I don't have a chance later if the votes
begin. Thank you.
Ms. Schmidli. Thank you so much for comments.
Senator Dole. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Ms. Schmidli. I have actually met Mrs. Ingram and I look
forward to meeting her again.
Senator Dole. Great, wonderful, thank you.
Ms. Schmidli. Thank you for your compliment.
Senator Graham. Ms. Schmidli, would you like to lead off
please?
STATEMENT OF TANNA SCHMIDLI, CHAIRMAN OF THE BOARD AND CHIEF
EXECUTIVE OFFICER, NATIONAL MILITARY FAMILY ASSOCIATION
Ms. Schmidli. It would be my honor, sir. Mr. Chairman,
Senator Nelson, Senator Dole, thank you on behalf of the
National Military Family Association for the opportunity to
testify.
NMFA thanks you for your concern for servicemembers and
their families, particularly we thank you for the provisions
you sponsored in the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA)
for Fiscal Year 2006. While our written statement submitted for
the record highlights many critical issues facing families, I
will speak today about DOD's health care proposals and NMFA's
response.
The proposal by DOD to raise TRICARE fees by exorbitant
amounts has resonated throughout the beneficiary population. As
expected, this reaction is across the board from all
beneficiaries. Families see the proposal as a concentrated
effort by DOD to change their earned entitlement of health care
into an insurance plan. NMFA is alarmed that DOD has already
instructed TRICARE contractors to develop plans to implement
its proposed changes in TRICARE prime enrollment fees without
allowing for sufficient congressional oversight.
NMFA believes DOD's premise of anticipated savings based on
an estimate of military retirees leaving the military health
system for other options is flawed. We believe the Department
is reaping the rewards of its own success and that families are
opting to retain their Prime benefit in retirement because of
their satisfaction and familiarity with the program. Retirees
who currently opt to use TRICARE Standard as a wrap-around of
their employer-sponsored plan may buy into Prime when offered,
rather than pay for both their civilian insurance and Standard.
NMFA strongly suggests that DOD look within itself for cost
savings before suggesting beneficiaries bear the burden. We
have outlined some possible efficiencies in our written
statement.
NMFA most emphatically opposes an enrollment fee for
TRICARE Standard because it would move the earned medical
entitlement into an insurance program. TRICARE Standard is the
successor to CHAMPUS, which was implemented as an extension of
the health care entitlement when the Direct Care System could
not care for all eligible beneficiaries. We understand unless
retirees pay this premium, they will be locked out of any care
at a military treatment facility (MTF). We believe enrollment
fees for Prime are different because additional benefits are
given to Prime beneficiaries: access guarantees, low out-of-
pocket costs, additional preventative care, and management of
the beneficiary's health care. Please see the changes on page
eight of our statement to view the differences between these
two options.
DOD's proposal to increase Prime enrollment fees, while
completely out of line dollar wise, is not unexpected. However,
NMFA is concerned that DOD's proposed tiering of the fees
increases may be too arbitrary and would impose inappropriate
charges to some of our most vulnerable beneficiaries,
especially wounded servicemembers who are medically retired and
survivors.
Acknowledging that the annual Prime enrollment fee has not
increased in more than 10 years, and that it may be reasonable
to have a mechanism to increase fees, NMFA would like to
present an alternative to DOD's proposal should Congress deem
some sort of cost increase necessary. NMFA suggests that over
the next 2 years DOD could raise the base annual Prime
enrollment fee by a percentage amount of the cumulative retiree
cost-of-living adjustment (COLA) since 1995. If DOD thought the
original fees were fair for all in 1995, it would appear that
raising the fees simply by the percentage increase in retiree
COLA is also fair.
NMFA also suggests that future increases in Prime
enrollment fees be the same percent as the annual retiree COLA.
We also suggest adjusting the TRICARE Standard deductibles by
the amount of the cumulative COLA since 1995 and set future
increases in the same percent as the annual retiree COLA.
In conclusion, NMFA would like to state its concern for the
long-term mental health and well-being of servicemembers and
their families who have faced repeated deployments in arduous
conditions. We ask you to ensure our country's commitment to
them continues as long as the need exists. Thank you for your
support of military families.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Schmidli follows:]
Prepared Statement by Tanna Schmidli
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 today on the state of military
health care, as well as other quality-of-life issues affecting
servicemembers and their families. Once again, we thank you for your
focus on many of the elements of the quality-of-life package for
servicemembers and their families: access to a quality health care
benefit, military pay and benefits, and support for families dealing
with deployment.
NMFA endorses the recommendations contained in the statement
submitted by The Military Coalition (TMC), with the exception of those
related to increases in TRICARE Prime enrollment fees and TRICARE
Standard deductibles. In this statement, NMFA will provide its
alternative both to the health care recommendation contained in the
Coalition's statement and to the proposals made by the Department of
Defense (DOD) in its fiscal year 2007 budget request. We will also
briefly address other quality-of-life issues for military families in
the following subject areas:
I. Military Health Care
DOD's Proposal to Increase TRICARE Fees
DOD Must Implement More Cost-Saving Measures
TRICARE Standard: Not Just Another Insurance Plan!
TRICARE Prime and TRICARE Standard
Prime Access Standards and Quality-of-Care
Obstetrical and Pediatric Rates
Deployment Health for Servicemembers and Families
Wounded Servicemembers Have Wounded Families
Health Care for Survivors
National Guard and Reserve Health Care
Pharmacy
Health Care for Special Needs Family Members/
Enhanced Care Health Option (ECHO)
Retiree Dental Insurance
Health Care Implications of Transformation, Global
Rebasing, and Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC)
II. Family Readiness
Caring for Military Children and Youth
Spouse Employment
III. Families and Deployment
IV. Families and Transition
Transformation, Global Rebasing, and BRAC
Survivors
V. Compensation and Benefits
Funding for Commissaries, Exchanges, and Other
Programs
Permanent Change of Station Improvements
Adjusting Housing Standards
VI. Families and Community
Servicemember readiness is imperative for mission readiness. Family
readiness is imperative for servicemember readiness. Family readiness
requires the availability of coordinated, consistent family support
provided by well-trained professionals and volunteers; adequate child
care; easily available preventative mental health counseling as well as
therapeutic mental health care; employment assistance for spouses; and
youth programs that assist parents in addressing the concerns of their
children during stressful times. However, no issue is more important to
family readiness than the military family's ability to access quality
health care in a timely manner and at a cost that is commensurate with
the sacrifices made by both servicemembers and families.
military health care
NMFA thanks this subcommittee for its steadfast authorization of a
robust military health care system. This system must continue to meet
the needs of servicemembers and the DOD in times of armed conflict. It
must also acknowledge that military members and their families are
indeed a unique population with unique duties, who earn an entitlement
to a unique health care program.
DOD's Proposal to Increase TRICARE Fees
The proposal by DOD to raise TRICARE fees by exorbitant amounts has
resonated throughout the beneficiary population. Seldom has the
reaction of servicemembers and families been as strong and strident.
Interestingly, this reaction is across the board from all
beneficiaries, even though the proposal would only marginally affect
current Active-Duty families or retirees over age 64. Beneficiaries see
the proposal as a concentrated effort by DOD to change their earned
entitlement to health care into an insurance plan. How detrimental this
could be to retention is unknown. But the volume of the voices suggests
that if the proposals are enacted as presented there will be an effect.
In addition, since statistics show the children of veterans are more
likely to volunteer for the uniformed services than the children of
non-veterans, and that the more positive ``influencers'' of service in
the military are military retirees and other military family members,
one must also wonder at the effect such proposals could have on
recruitment.
NMFA is alarmed DOD has already instructed the TRICARE Managed Care
Support Contractors to begin drawing up plans to implement its proposed
changes in TRICARE Prime enrollment fees on October 1, 2006. We believe
this action is inappropriate given that Congress has not yet had the
necessary time to study the proposals and the budget assumptions behind
them. We appreciate the many questions Members of Congress are asking
about these proposals. We urge Congress to direct DOD--possibly by
inserting a provision in the Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act
now being debated--to cease efforts to implement its proposals until
Members have had the opportunity to study them more closely.
As part of your review of these proposals, NMFA requests you ask
DOD officials which retirees they believe will leave TRICARE and bring
about their predicted cost savings. DOD asserts retirees under age 65
are leaving the health insurance offered by their civilian employer and
returning to TRICARE. Since the Department has produced no concrete
numbers to validate this assertion, it is difficult to comment on, but
NMFA does not dispute that some are doing so. However, we also believe
the Department is reaping the rewards of its own success. We suggest
TRICARE Prime has improved so significantly that many new retirees are
opting to stay in Prime since it has worked well for them on Active-
Duty. Anecdotally, NMFA has noticed a profound difference in retiree
behavior regarding health care choices over the past decade. The
younger retirees, when in an area where Prime is offered, appear
overwhelmingly to continue their Prime enrollment into retirement.
Older retirees appear more likely either to use Standard as a wrap-
around to their employer-provided health insurance or choose to buy a
TRICARE supplemental plan and use Standard as their primary benefit. We
would be very interested in seeing numbers to learn whether the steady
increase in retirees under age 65 enrolled in Prime is due more to the
retention of Prime in retirement among recent retirees or if it is
indeed the so-called ``ghosts'' returning.
If most of the increased numbers of retirees using TRICARE are
those who are retaining their Prime enrollment in retirement, then NMFA
questions if many (or any) will migrate to employer-provided health
insurance. NMFA believes most families entering retirement will choose
to stay with a known system that has worked for them rather than switch
to an unknown one. If it is the ``ghosts'' returning, then NMFA asserts
that the current proposal would exacerbate the situation. Retirees who
currently use TRICARE Standard as a wrap-around to their civilian
employer's health insurance may well opt to buy into TRICARE Prime
(where offered) rather than pay for both their civilian health
insurance and a TRICARE Standard premium (enrollment fee). NMFA is also
concerned that many retirees in this age group may not have access to
employer-provided health care as they are self-employed or work for a
small business that does not offer health care. These individuals would
be penalized for their choice of employment in retirement simply to try
to influence the decisions of others.
Active-Duty families fear for the future of their health care
entitlement. Retirees, once they can think beyond their outrage, are
frankly perplexed. When TRICARE Prime was first introduced, many
retirees could only participate in the option if they enrolled at a
military treatment facility (MTF). Later, many were told there was no
longer room for them at the MTF and they were forced to use Prime in
the civilian sector. Retirees who used CHAMPUS or TRICARE Standard
seldom could access space available care in MTFs and were forced to buy
supplemental policies to guard against high out-of-pocket expenses.
Yet, when an inpatient hospitalization loomed and continuity of care
with their civilian provider was upper most in their minds, they could
be forced back into the MTF via non availability statements. Note this
enforced return to the MTF was not for full care, but only for the
treatment or surgery required for that particular inpatient episode.
Now, retirees see the system does not want them at all! These are the
same retirees to whom President Bush referred in a speech before the
American Legion Convention on February 24, 2006, when he said: ``Our
men and women on the front lines are taking inspiration from the valor
and courage that you've shown in the field of battle.''
Finally, the Department is stating two reasons for its proposed
exorbitant increases in beneficiary cost shares. One is these cost
shares must be put in place to ``sustain the benefit.'' The other is
that the Department cannot afford to buy weapons systems and pay for
the earned health care entitlement. This mixed message cannot help but
send morale in a downward spiral. Are military retirees buying the next
submarine or aircraft or are they supposed to sacrifice their
entitlement to preserve the benefit for the future?
NMFA does not believe DOD's estimate of the migration of
retirees out of TRICARE is realistic and urges Congress to
obtain more information on the economic assumptions used by DOD
to formulate its budget proposal. We also urge Congress to
ensure adequate authority for DOD health care funding is
included in the fiscal year 2007 Budget Resolution and National
Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for Fiscal Year 2007. Because
DOD has already directed the TRICARE contractors to begin plans
to implement its proposed increases, NMFA requests that
Congress insert a provision in the Emergency Supplemental
Appropriations bill now being debated to forestall the
implementation of any increases until Congress has had more
time to study their impact on beneficiaries and to evaluate
DOD's cost assumptions.
DOD Must Implement More Cost-Saving Measures
In section 733 of the NDAA for Fiscal Year 2006, Congress requested
a report on the delivery of health care benefits through the military
health system (MHS). This report, due to you no later than February 1,
2007, asks key questions that should be answered before DOD attempts to
change beneficiary cost shares drastically. Many of the topics required
in the report deal with ways DOD could improve efficiencies in
delivering the benefit. NMFA believes DOD has many options available to
make the MHS more efficient and thus make the need for large increases
in beneficiary cost shares unnecessary.
For example, had the Department implemented a marketing plan for
the TRICARE Mail Order Pharmacy (TMOP) several years ago, the migration
to TMOP might have reduced health care costs significantly. Similarly,
if the TRICARE Uniform Formulary had been implemented when first
authorized by Congress in the fall of 2000 rather than just starting in
March 2005, additional savings could have been realized. NMFA is aware
DOD is attempting to get Federal pricing for medications in the TRICARE
Retail Pharmacy (TRRx); however, in the meantime, it may have passed up
several opportunities to receive significant discounts from
pharmaceutical companies.
In recent years at the annual TRICARE conferences and other venues,
DOD officials have discussed the benefits of disease management,
especially for certain chronic illnesses. These benefits flow to the
beneficiaries through better management of their conditions and to DOD
through patients' decreased need for costly emergency room visits or
hospitalizations. Most MTFs and all of the TRICARE Managed Care Support
Contractors have at least one disease management program, offered to
beneficiaries in both TRICARE Prime and Standard. However, not all
programs are offered everywhere, nor is there an effort to apply
disease management programs across the entire system, to include
pharmacy. DOD officials say disease management programs can benefit
patients and the Department's bottom line and that successful disease
management must include medical and pharmacy components. NMFA was
disappointed, therefore, to find no mention of disease management or a
requirement for coordination between the pharmacy contractor and
Managed Care Support Contractors in the recently-released request for
proposals for the new TRICARE pharmacy contract. NMFA was pleased to
see Congress recognized the importance of improved disease management
programs and included the study of the ``means of improving integrated
systems of disease management, including chronic illness management''
in section 733 of the NDAA for Fiscal Year 2006.
Similarly, section 739 of the NDAA for Fiscal Year 2006 directed
DOD to conduct a study evaluating the feasibility and cost
effectiveness of a Medicare Advantage Regional PPO demonstration for
TRICARE for Life (TFL) beneficiaries. This demonstration, focused on
the TFL population with its high utilization of resources, could
provide another opportunity to determine potential benefits from case
management and disease management programs for beneficiaries with
complex and/or chronic conditions. NMFA expects this program would be
voluntary and would preserve all the benefits currently available to
TFL beneficiaries under TRICARE and Medicare. NMFA has not yet heard
from DOD regarding its plans to implement this demonstration.
Despite the successes of the TRICARE Next Generation (T-Nex)
managed care support contracts implemented last year, NMFA remains
concerned that efforts to optimize the MTFs have not met expectations
in terms of increasing or even maintaining access for TRICARE
beneficiaries. NMFA believes optimizing the capabilities of the
facilities of the direct care system through timely replacement
construction, funding allocations, and innovative staffing would allow
more beneficiaries to be cared for in the MTFs, which DOD asserts is
the least costly venue. Innovative staffing approaches should look at
the mix of staff available through a variety of sources: military,
civilian, contract, and resource sharing. As with disease management,
staffing initiatives must involve a systemic approach to make the best
use of resources available through both the MTFs and the Managed Care
Support Contractors.
NMFA also believes the Managed Care Support Contractors have
additional beneficial suggestions that could reduce health care costs
through more efficient claims processing, the elimination of
redundancies, and the reduction of the number of DOD-unique
requirements in the contracts. Because the costs of recompeting and
implementing large contracts can be extremely high, NMFA suggests that
DOD delay the next round of TRICARE contract competitions for at least
a year. Last year's implementation of the T-Nex contracts went more
smoothly than many predicted, but beneficiaries and providers still
experienced a certain amount of turmoil. Both would benefit from a
longer period of stability and anticipated improvements in customer
service as the contractors become more familiar with their regions and
their implementation tasks. It is probable DOD could better serve its
beneficiaries and enhance savings and efficiency if it would take the
time to test new concepts for the next contracts through demonstration
projects evaluated in the current program rather than implementing them
untested in the new contracts. The Department should also ensure the
three major issues still outstanding in the implementation of the
current contracts--electronic claims, clean and legible records, and
referrals and authorizations--have been solved before launching into
another contract round.
NMFA strongly suggests that DOD look within itself for cost
savings before first suggesting that beneficiaries bear the
burden! We encourage DOD to investigate further cost saving
measures such as: a systemic approach to disease management, a
concentrated marketing campaign to increase use of the TRICARE
Mail Order Pharmacy, eliminating contract redundancies,
delaying the recompetition of the TRICARE contracts, speeding
implementation of the Uniform Formulary process, and optimizing
military treatment facilities.
TRICARE Standard: Not Just Another Insurance Plan!
NMFA thanks Congress for its sustained concern regarding providing
information and support to TRICARE Standard beneficiaries. We are
hopeful the newer emphasis on this population by DOD and the Managed
Care Support Contractors will translate into actual increased support
for these beneficiaries. However, we retain the right to come back to
Congress if such support does not materialize!
The precursor to TRICARE Standard, the basic benefit provided for
care in the civilian sector, was CHAMPUS. CHAMPUS was enacted when the
direct military health care system could no longer provide care for all
eligible beneficiaries. The relatively high deductibles for the time,
25 percent cost share for doctor visits and extremely high inpatient
costs (currently $535/day in non network hospitals), were included to
discourage the indiscriminate use of CHAMPUS when care was available in
the direct care system. However, CHAMPUS was then, as TRICARE Standard
is now, an extension of the earned entitlement to health care. Charging
a premium (enrollment fee) for TRICARE Standard moves the benefit from
an earned entitlement to an opportunity to buy into an insurance plan.
Active-Duty families appear to see this proposal from two points of
view. First, the security of knowing their earned entitlement to health
care would follow them into retirement has just flown out the window;
and second, that the constant reference to other health insurance plans
and the proposal to tie future increases to the Federal Employees
Health Benefit Program (FEHBP) will eventually affect their own cost of
health care. NMFA must also note that because TRICARE Prime is not
offered everywhere, Standard is the only option for many retirees and
their families and survivors who need to access their military health
care benefit.
NMFA opposes DOD's proposal to institute a TRICARE Standard
enrollment fee and believes Congress should reject this proposal
because it changes beneficiaries' entitlement to health care under
TRICARE Standard to just another insurance plan. However, we would be
remiss if we did not ask the many questions beneficiaries have about
how a Standard enrollment fee would be implemented and its implications
regarding access to care:
1. Will retirees who do not enroll in Prime and do not pay a
premium (enrollment fee) for Standard be refused space
available care in MTFs, including their emergency rooms?
2. Will these same retirees be refused pharmaceutical
services at MTFs or be unable to use TRICARE retail network
pharmacies and the TRICARE mail order pharmacy?
3. Will retirees who only use Standard as a wrap-around to
their employer-provided health care insurance pay the same
premium (enrollment fee) as those who will use Standard as
their primary benefit?
4. What type of open enrollment season will be needed to
provide retirees with the opportunity to coordinate coverage
between TRICARE and their employer-sponsored insurance?
5. How will DOD inform all eligible beneficiaries of this
significant change in their benefit and of the opportunity to
enroll?
6. What additional resources will DOD require the TRICARE
Managed Care Support Contractors to put in place to handle the
enrollment of beneficiaries?
7. How much will it cost to implement the enrollment fee,
including the education efforts, additional tasks imposed on
the TRICARE contractors, and the inevitable cost of handling
appeals from beneficiaries whose claims were denied because
they did not know they had lost their benefit?
8. Has DOD incorporated realistic cost estimates for the
implementation of a Standard premium into its budget proposal
and savings projections?
We also ask what additional services beneficiaries who enroll in
Standard will receive after paying the enrollment fee. Or, will they
only be paying for the ``privilege'' of having to seek their own
providers, often filing their own claims, meeting a deductible, paying
a 20-percent cost share for their care (plus an additional 15 percent
if the provider does not participate in the claim), and being liable
for a daily hospitalization charge of up to $535? And, because they
recognize the cost liabilities of being in Standard, we know most will
continue to bear the cost of a TRICARE supplemental insurance policy.
NMFA strongly asserts DOD's proposal to change the earned
entitlement to health care into an opportunity to buy into an
insurance plan breaks both faith and the implied contract with
currently serving members and those who have retired. We urge
Congress to reject any plan to establish a TRICARE Standard
enrollment fee.
TRICARE Prime and TRICARE Standard
In the current debate about whether or not to raise beneficiary
fees for TRICARE, NMFA believes it is important to understand the
difference between TRICARE Prime and TRICARE Standard and to
distinguish between creating a TRICARE Standard enrollment fee and
raising the Standard deductible amount. As we have stated above,
TRICARE Standard is the successor name for CHAMPUS, and as such is a
civilian extension of the basic entitlement to health care originally
provided only in MTFs. At the start of TRICARE in 1995, when TRICARE
Standard became the name for CHAMPUS, DOD also introduced an HMO-type
benefit called TRICARE Prime. Since Prime offered enhancements to the
health care benefit (lower out-of-pocket costs, access to care within
prescribed standards, additional preventive care, assistance in finding
providers, and the management of one's health care), enrollment fees
for Prime were charged for retirees. These fees, which have not changed
since the start of TRICARE, are $230 per year for an individual and
$460 per year for a family. Below is a general comparison of TRICARE
Standard and Prime for retired beneficiaries under the age of 65 when
they access care in the civilian sector. Retirees enrolled in Prime
with an MTF provider also pay the annual enrollment fee, but do not
have a co-payment for outpatient care and only a modest fee for
inpatient care received in the MTF.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Prime Standard
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Enrollment fees................. $230/year for an None
individual; $460/
year for a family.
Annual Deductibles.............. None.............. $150/individual;
$300 for a family
Outpatient co-payment (Prime)/ $12............... 25 percent of
cost share (Standard) for allowed charges
individual providers. 1,2
Inpatient co-payment/cost share None.............. 25 percent of
for individual providers. allowed charges
1,2
Daily inpatient hospitalization Greater of $11 per Lesser of $535/day
charge. day or $25 per or 25 percent of
admission. billed charges if
treated in non-
network hospital
\3\
Emergency Services co-payment/ $30............... 25 percent of
cost share. allowed charges
Ambulance Services co-payment/ $20............... 25 percent of
cost share. allowed charges
Preventive Examinations (such None.............. 25 percent cost
as: blood pressure tests, share 1,2
breast exams, mammograms,
pelvic exams, PAP smears,
school physicals) co-payments/
cost shares.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Providers may charge 15 percent above the TRICARE allowable and the
beneficiary is responsible for this additional cost, making the
potential cost share 40 percent.
\2\ If care is accessed from a TRICARE Prime/Extra network provider the
cost share is 20 percent.
\3\ If care is received in a TRICARE Prime/Extra network hospital the
daily hospitalization rate is the lesser of $250/day or 25 percent of
negotiated charges.
DOD's proposal to increase TRICARE Prime enrollment fees, while
completely out-of-line dollar wise, is not unexpected. In fact, NMFA
was surprised DOD did not include an increase as it implemented the new
round of TRICARE contracts last year. NMFA views enrollment fees for
Prime as justified because enrollees enjoy the additional benefits of
access guarantees, lower out-of --pocket costs, more preventive care,
and management of their health care. In other words, enrollment fees
for Prime are not to access the earned entitlement, but for additional
services.
NMFA does have concerns about the amount of DOD's proposed
increases for TRICARE Prime and the plan to impose a tiered system of
enrollment fees and TRICARE Standard deductibles. We believe the tiered
system is arbitrarily devised and fails to acknowledge the needs of the
most vulnerable beneficiaries: survivors and wounded servicemembers.
For example, under the DOD plan an individual retired officer or family
member would pay an enrollment fee of $700 for TRICARE Prime by fiscal
year 2008. The surviving spouse of a 2nd Lieutenant who died in Iraq
last year will revert to retiree status in terms of health care in
2008. Under the DOD plan, she would pay the $700 enrollment fee, the
same as paid by a retired General Officer. A marine with just a few
years' service who is medically retired after sustaining a serious
injury would pay the same premium for his/her family as would a retired
E-6 who served 20 years.
Acknowledging that the annual Prime enrollment fee has not
increased in more than 10 years and that it may be reasonable to have a
mechanism to increase fees, NMFA would like to present an alternative
to DOD's proposal should Congress deem some cost increase necessary.
NMFA suggests DOD apply the cumulative retiree cost-of-living
adjustment (COLA) to the base annual Prime enrollment fee of $230 for
an individual and $460 for a family. Using the 31.4 percent cumulative
COLA for the years from 1995 through 2006, the annual fee would rise to
approximately $302 for a single servicemember and $604 for a family. If
DOD thought $230/$460 was a fair fee for all in 1995, then it would
appear that raising the fees simply by the percentage increase in
retiree pay since then is also fair. NMFA also suggests that, to avoid
another ``sticker shock,'' fees be raised annually by the same percent
as the retiree COLA. NMFA further believes adjusting the current fees
over a 2-year period would decrease the effect of ``sticker shock'' and
allow families to adjust their budgets. We are aware the current system
does require retirees/survivors with smaller incomes to pay a higher
percentage of their pension/annuity for Prime than those with higher
incomes; however, we believe the benefits of simply updating the
current fees are greater for almost all concerned than devising another
option, especially an arbitrarily-designed tier system. NMFA also
suggests it would be reasonable to adjust the TRICARE Standard
deductibles in the same manner: cumulative COLA for the years since
1995 and then tie future increases to the percent of the retiree annual
COLA.
NMFA believes its alternative proposal to increase Prime
enrollment fees and Standard deductibles using the cumulative
retiree COLA over the past 10 years and to tie future increases
to the same percent as the retiree COLA is a fair way to
increase beneficiary cost shares should Congress deem an
increase necessary.
Prime Access Standards and Quality-of-Care
NMFA remains concerned that prescribed access standards are not
being met for enrolled TRICARE Prime beneficiaries at MTFs. No one is
more cognizant of the need for superior health care to be provided to
servicemembers in harm's way than their families. In addition, no one
is more willing to change providers or venues of care to accommodate
the need for military health care providers to deploy than the families
of those deployed. However, a contract was made with those who enrolled
in Prime. Beneficiaries must seek care in the manner prescribed in the
Prime agreement, but in return they are given what are supposed to be
guaranteed access standards. When an MTF cannot meet those standards,
appointments within the civilian TRICARE network must be offered. In
many cases this is not happening and families are told to call back
next week or next month. MTFs must be held as accountable as the
Managed Care Support Contractors for meeting stated access standards.
In addition, requests for referrals for specialty care must not be held
up beyond access standards simply to meet some arbitrary ``right of
first refusal'' standard. MTFs must be as responsive to civilian
providers regarding care provided to beneficiaries in the direct care
system as the contracts require civilian network providers to be to the
MTF for beneficiaries referred within the civilian network.
Beneficiaries should not be caught in a bureaucratic ``catch 22'' when
care is needed from both venues.
Because operational requirements have reduced the number of
uniformed health care personnel available to serve in the MTF system, a
more coordinated approach is needed to optimize care and enable MTFs to
meet access standards. Efficient contracting for health care staffing
could increase the amount of care provided in the direct care system,
thereby reducing the overall cost of care to the military health care
system. NMFA suggests Congress direct DOD to reassess the resource
sharing program used prior to the implementation of the T-Nex contracts
and take the steps necessary to ensure MTFs meet access standards with
high quality health care providers.
NMFA also emphasizes that quality care must be available to
beneficiaries both in the direct care and purchased care systems.
Routinely contracting for the lowest cost providers is a high risk
strategy that does not serve the long-term interests of the military
health care system. The inherent risks are heightened by the absence of
clear, consistent standards for firms providing health care staffing.
NMFA understands the Joint Commission on Accreditation of Health Care
Organizations (JCAHO) has implemented a certification program for
private sector health care staffing firms operating in the civilian
sector to ensure they meet established standards. We encourage Congress
to direct DOD to adopt these JCAHO standards as well for health care
staffing firms that support military hospitals and clinics. The
military beneficiaries receiving care in MTFs deserve at least the same
protections as those who receive care in private sector hospitals.
Obstetrical and Pediatric Reimbursement Rates
NMFA thanks Congress for requiring the Comptroller General to
investigate reimbursement levels for obstetrical and pediatric care. We
continue to receive concerns from families that finding providers in
these two specialties is extremely difficult in many areas. We look
with anticipation to the report and request appropriate legislation if
DOD does not propose adequate remedies for the situation.
Deployment Health for Servicemembers and Families
As servicemembers and families experience numerous lengthy and
dangerous deployments, NMFA believes the need for confidential,
preventative mental health services will continue to rise. The Services
must balance the demand for mental health personnel in theater and at
home to help servicemembers and families deal with unique emotional
challenges and stresses related to the nature and duration of continued
deployments. The good news for family support professionals who believe
military families are reluctant to seek help for mental health issues
is that many now recognize counseling is an option for them. Families
perceive counseling and mental health support as especially helpful if
it is confidential and with a professional familiar with the military.
One spouse who completed NMFA's recent Cycles of Deployment Survey
stated:
Three deployments have caused great mental strain on me as
the spouse of a servicemember. Thank goodness for mental health
services, which I have used for more than a year now and will
continue to use. I have to work daily on managing depression
and anxiety, which I feel are a direct result of the
deployments.
The Services recognize the importance of educating servicemembers
and family members about how to achieve a successful homecoming and
reunion and have taken steps to improve the return and reunion process.
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. Successful return
and reunion programs will require attention over the long term. Many
mental health experts state that some post-deployment problems may not
surface for several months or years after the servicemember's return.
NMFA is especially concerned that not as many services are 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 Department of Veterans' Affairs
(VA), what happens when the military health benefits run out and
deployment-related stresses still affect the family?
Military OneSource (www.militaryonesource.com) helps returning
servicemembers and families access local community resources and
receive up to six free face-to-face mental health visits with a
professional outside the chain of command. NMFA is pleased DOD has
committed to funding the counseling provided under the OneSource
contract. This counseling is not medical mental health counseling, but
rather assistance for family members in dealing with the stresses of
deployment or reunion. It can be an important preventative to forestall
more serious problems down the road.
NMFA notes, however, that Military OneSource is only available for
members of the four Services under the authority of the DOD. The parent
Departments of the Coast Guard, Public Health Service, and National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration operate their own Employee
Assistance Programs and provide some of the same information through
them as Military OneSource. However, these EAPs may not be equipped
with the resources and experience to provide the same type of
deployment-related information and assistance as offered by Military
OneSource. We ask members of this subcommittee to urge the appropriate
committees with jurisdiction over the three uniformed services not part
of DOD to work with DOD and ensure deployed members of all uniformed
services and their families have access to the same level of
deployment-related assistance--including the face-to-face counseling
services--provided under Military OneSource.
NMFA remains concerned about access to mental health care,
both preventative and therapeutic, for the long haul.
Unfortunately the costs of war may linger for servicemembers
and their families for many years. It is imperative that
whether or not the member remains on Active-Duty and entitled
to military health care there are provisions for both
servicemembers and their families to access appropriate mental
health services paid for by their government.
Wounded Servicemembers Have Wounded Families
Post-deployment transitions could be especially problematic for
injured servicemembers and their families. NMFA asserts that behind
every wounded servicemember is a wounded family. We have been pleased
the military medical centers are involving VA personnel to ease wounded
servicemembers' transition to civilian life and care in the VA. The
transition between the DOD and the VA health system can be confusing
for servicemembers and their families. In the case of the 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. Wounded servicemembers who are medically retired need more
information on the full benefit package available to them from both DOD
and the VA. They especially need more education about their eligibility
for both DOD and VA health care and when it is most appropriate to use
each system.
To ease wounded servicemembers' and their families' health care
transition and reduce their out-of-pocket costs in the years
immediately following their injury, we urge Congress to allow wounded/
injured servicemembers who are medically retired and their families to
be treated as Active-Duty family members in terms of TRICARE costs and
access to care at military hospitals for 3 years following the
servicemembers' retirement. This change would mirror the 3-year
transitional status provided to surviving spouses of Active-Duty
deaths.
Family Assistance Centers 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 is hearing the Services are now sending
more wounded servicemembers back to their home installations sooner to
receive care at their home installation MTF--which could be a community
hospital rather than a medical center. Therefore, NMFA believes Family
Assistance Centers are urgently needed in every MTF that treats injured
servicemembers. In addition to the recreation, travel, and emergency
support these centers provide, they also assist the family in dealing
with the servicemember's transition back home.
NMFA applauds recent provisions in the NDAA for Fiscal Year 2006
that require standards for assisting wounded and injured
servicemembers. NMFA strongly encourages the Services to cooperate and
expedite the standardization of programs. NMFA has heard from families
of wounded servicemembers that they are not offered the ``same
services.'' An injured soldier, airman, sailor, or marine should be
offered access to the same services as the soldier, airman, sailor, or
marine recuperating in the bed next to them in a military hospital. We
continue to ask that the role of the DOD and the VA be clearly
explained and delineated and joint efforts between all the Services and
the VA, in support of the servicemember and family, continue to be the
priority.
To support wounded and injured servicemembers and their
families, NMFA recommends that Congress extend the 3-year
survivor health care benefit to servicemembers who are
medically retired and their families and direct DOD to
establish a Family Assistance Center at every MTF caring for
wounded servicemembers.
Health Care for Survivors
NMFA thanks Congress for including section 715 in the NDAA for
Fiscal Year 2006, which allows surviving children of Active-Duty deaths
to be treated as Active-Duty family members for purposes of enrolling
in TRICARE Prime until they age out of TRICARE. We and the surviving
families who contact us are waiting--slightly impatiently--for word
from DOD on how this important benefit change will be implemented. To
date, we have not received this information.
This year, we ask for consideration of several other proposals to
ease the health care transition for survivors of Active-Duty deaths.
First, we ask Congress to update the survivor benefit to enable
survivors of Active-Duty deaths to enroll in TRICARE Prime Remote
during the time they are treated as Active-Duty family members for
health care--3 years for the spouse. Some survivors may immediately
relocate to the area where their parents live for the security and
support they need. Others may remain for their 1 year entitlement in
government quarters and then relocate to family or for the necessity of
employment. In these cases, the area to which the survivors have
relocated may not be one in which TRICARE Prime is offered. It seems
reasonable these survivors should be able to qualify for the Prime
Remote option during the period when they are treated as Active-Duty
family members in terms of TRICARE to minimize their out of pocket
costs during this traumatic transition time.
National Guard and Reserve families may choose to keep their
employer sponsored health and dental care when their servicemember is
activated and deployed. The family's eligibility for this care may
cease if the servicemember is killed on Active-Duty. Legislative
changes are needed to enable these family members to take advantage of
their survivor benefit for coverage under the TDP, the dental insurance
for Active-Duty families. As the law is currently written, with limited
exceptions, only those families enrolled in the TDP at the time of the
servicemember's death are eligible to continue enrollment and receive
premium-free dental insurance for 3 years. NMFA recommends, in cases
where the family has employer sponsored dental insurance, survivors be
treated as if they had been enrolled in the TDP at the time of the
servicemember's death.
Survivors of those who die on Active-Duty or in retirement justly
lose their entitlement to DOD benefits to include access to
commissaries, exchanges, morale, welfare, and recreation (MWR)
benefits, and health care when they remarry. Survivors eligible for the
Veterans' Administration CHAMPVA program are eligible for health care
reinstatement if their second marriage ends, but NOT those previously
eligible for DOD-provided health care, even though their entitlement
for all other benefits is reinstated. NMFA requests this inequity be
removed and these survivors have their health care entitlement
restored.
In cases where the family of a deceased servicemember has
been enrolled in an employer-sponsored dental plan, NMFA
recommends survivors be treated as if they had been enrolled in
the TRICARE Dental Program at the time of the servicemember's
death. We also recommend that Congress update the TRICARE
benefit provided in the 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.
National Guard and Reserve Health Care
NMFA also asks for an update to the TRICARE Prime Remote
eligibility rules for some National Guard and Reserve families. While
Guard and Reserve families in remote locations may be eligible for
Prime Remote while their servicemember is on Active-Duty, they lose
their eligibility once the servicemember is demobilized and is eligible
for the 180-day Transitional Assistance Management Program (TAMP)
benefit. We believe, for the sake of continuity of care as well as the
family's financial stability during the Guard or Reserve member's
transition back to civilian live, the servicemember and family should
retain eligibility for Prime Remote during the TAMP period.
NMFA thanks Congress for extending the ability to buy into TRICARE
to members of the Selected Reserve, but is concerned the ``one shoe
fits all'' solution does not translate into continuity-of-care for all
their families when the member is mobilized. Certainly those with no
access to health care insurance will benefit from the ability to buy
into TRICARE and thus ensure their families have continuity of care
when they are mobilized. However, a large segment of this population
has employer-provided health insurance and for their families
continuity of care would best be achieved by a DOD subsidy of this
insurance when they are mobilized. Having to change health care plans
and possibly providers when the member is going in harm's way are not
conducive to family readiness!
We also ask you to monitor the process by which DOD determines
rates for TRICARE Reserve Select. We were just as surprised as the
Reserve Select beneficiaries when DOD chose to increase premiums for
this program so soon after its implementation. NMFA was also concerned
at the percentage increase in the premium, which was tied to the
premium increase for the standard option Blue Cross/Blue Shield plan
offered under the FEHBP.
To promote continuity of care for families of mobilized Guard
and Reserve members, NMFA asks that Congress authorize DOD to
subsidize the cost of family coverage under the member's
employer-sponsored health insurance while the servicemember is
mobilized. NMFA also asks Congress to monitor the premium-
setting process used by DOD for TRICARE Reserve Select.
Pharmacy
NMFA applauds DOD's proposal to encourage migration to the TRICARE
Mail Order Pharmacy by removing cost shares for generic medications.
NMFA and other associations have long encouraged DOD to launch a
concentrated marketing effort to promote use of the TMOP, as it
provides significant savings to beneficiaries as well as huge savings
to the Department. The proposed beneficiary cost share increases in the
pharmacy retail network program are not as exorbitant as the proposals
for increases in Prime enrollment fees, the premium to access TRICARE
Standard, or the increase in Standard deductibles, but do represent a
67-percent increase for all beneficiaries. If some additional cost
share for TRRx is instituted, NMFA believes it should not be
implemented until all of the medications available through TRRx are
also available through TMOP and DOD joins the associations in actively
and strongly promoting use of the TMOP.
NMFA is most grateful to Congress for establishing the Beneficiary
Advisory Panel to review and comment on the recommendations of the
Pharmacy and Therapeutics Committee for the Uniform Formulary. It
appears as though the process has been beneficial to both groups and a
good working relationship has been established. However, NMFA has
several concerns. First, even when the majority of the panel recommends
against a Pharmacy and Therapeutics Committee recommendation, there is
no feedback on why its comments were rejected by the final decision
maker, the Director of the TRICARE Management Agency. While NMFA would
certainly not suggest the Director ``report'' to the Panel, in the
spirit of collegiality, a direct communication to the Panel on why
their recommendations were rejected would enhance the working
relationship. Second, NMFA and our fellow associations were initially
assured few drugs would move to the nonformulary or third co-payment
tier. Yet in the first year of the process, 41 drugs out of 131
considered have been moved to the third tier. Third, the law clearly
states congressional intent that beneficiaries were to have access to
nonformulary drugs; they just had to pay more for them. However, an
internal DOD policy currently appears to require MTF providers to write
prescriptions only for drugs that are available on that MTF's
formulary, unless medical necessity has been determined. Hence,
beneficiaries treated at an MTF are precluded from accessing
nonformulary drugs at either the TRRx or the TMOP, even if they are
willing to pay the higher cost share. Finally, it is well understood,
and NMFA has no great argument with the premise, that the process of
establishing a Uniform Formulary was to provide clinically appropriate
drugs at a cost savings to the Department. We believe information must
be gathered to determine if the Uniform Formulary process is meeting
the desired goals.
NMFA requests the Government Accountability Office (GAO) be
asked to conduct a review to see if the Uniform Formulary
process is producing the savings projected and the extent, if
any, beneficiaries believe they have been denied medications
they and their provider believe would be more clinically
appropriate for them.
Health Care for Special Needs Family Members/ECHO
On September 1, 2005, the TRICARE Management Activity (TMA) at last
implemented the Enhanced Care Health Option, which was authorized in
the NDAA for Fiscal Year 2002 as the replacement for the Program for
Persons with Disabilities (PFPWD). ECHO is intended to provide
additional benefits to Active-Duty family members with a qualifying
mental or physical disability, generally defined as: moderate or severe
mental retardation; a serious physical disability; or an extraordinary
physical or psychological condition of such complexity that the
beneficiary is homebound. The program recognizes the additional
challenges faced by Active-Duty families because of the servicemember's
deployment or frequent relocations that often make accessing services
in the civilian community difficult.
ECHO offers services and supplies beyond the basic TRICARE benefit
covered in Prime and Standard, up to a maximum of $2,500 per eligible
family member per month, a $1,500 increase over the PFPWD.
Additionally, some beneficiaries may qualify for ECHO Home Health Care,
which provides medically-necessary skilled services to eligible
homebound beneficiaries. Families registered in ECHO pay a rank-based
monthly cost share. They must be enrolled in their Service Exceptional
Family Member Program in order to receive ECHO services.
Active-Duty families with a special needs family member had eagerly
awaited the often-delayed implementation of ECHO. While the numbers of
eligible beneficiaries for ECHO is much smaller than for the PFPWD
because certain services covered by the PFPWD have now been moved to
the basic TRICARE benefit, there have been numerous problems with the
transition to the new program. These problems generally fall into three
areas: information about ECHO eligibility and how to access services,
obtaining covered respite care, and changes in TRICARE coverage for
Applied Behavioral Analysis (ABA) therapy.
In the early months of ECHO implementation beneficiaries generally
reported confusion about eligibility for ECHO services, what services
are covered, and how to obtain the needed authorization for these
services. Because of the relatively-small numbers of eligible
beneficiaries, the TRICARE contractors generally chose to manage the
information flow through its case managers rather than through its
TRICARE Service Centers or customer service lines. Beneficiaries who
grew frustrated with a lack of answers to their questions had to learn
from each other to ask for a case manager or someone familiar with ECHO
when seeking assistance.
Respite care is a new benefit under ECHO that was not available
under the PFPWD and was probably the most anticipated of all ECHO
benefits. There are two types of respite care benefits: the ECHO
respite care benefit of 16 hours per month when receiving other ECHO
services and the ECHO Home Health Care ``sleep benefit'' of 8 hours per
day for 5 days each week. Because of some confusion about what other
services are covered under ECHO or a difficulty in accessing these
services, many beneficiaries found they were not eligible for the ECHO
respite care benefit. Families had looked forward to this service
because it would give the parents the opportunity to spend time
together or with their other children without worrying about the care
of the special needs child. Beneficiaries have also told NMFA they and
their TRICARE contractors have been confused about the type of provider
qualified to provide the respite care services. Often, local home
health agencies are geared toward providing care for the elderly and
not for children. In some locations, there are not enough agencies
available to meet the demand for these services.
Beneficiaries who cannot obtain respite care services note a
benefit isn't a benefit if you can't access it. Complaints of a hollow
benefit have been heard most often in connection with the provision of
ABA services for children with autism. ABA is a type of educational
therapy that has been effective for some children with types of autism.
In recent years, DOD paid for ABA therapy under the PFPWD and promised
it would continue as a benefit under ECHO. Unfortunately, many military
children who received ABA therapy under the PFPWD lost these services
when they were transitioned to ECHO. With the implementation of ECHO,
DOD chose to change its standards for authorizing and paying ABA
providers. At issue is who provides the hands-on, in-home therapy that
is the key to effective ABA therapy. Currently, the industry standard
for treatment in ABA therapy is that certified ABA therapists develop
the treatment plan and train and supervise tutors who provide the
hands-on therapy, often several times each week. Formerly, DOD paid for
therapy following this standard. With the implementation of ECHO, DOD
announced it would only pay for ABA therapy when it was done by the
board-certified therapist and not by a tutor operating under the
therapist's supervision.
DOD has argued this change is necessary to ensure therapy is
provided by qualified providers. Unfortunately, there are not enough
board-certified therapists in the field to meet the demand for this
therapy and as a result military families are reporting their children
are losing ground in their ability to learn and function because their
services have been scaled back or curtailed. Of course NMFA believes
DOD should have high quality standards for all providers; however, we
are concerned the Department is ignoring industry standard and is
opting to eliminate a benefit promised under ECHO rather than devise a
more reasonable way to ensure quality. We find it ironic that DOD
officials talk about the need for highly trained providers but yet have
suggested parent training in ABA therapy as a viable alternative to
paying for trained tutors working under the supervision of certified
providers. NMFA does not disagree that parents should be knowledgeable
about the therapy in order to reinforce the work done by the tutor
during the home visits. However, parents should not be the DOD-
authorized replacements for trained therapists!
NMFA requests this subcommittee direct DOD to meet military
families' needs for promised services under ECHO and to revise
policies that would deny special needs family members access to
these services.
Retiree Dental Insurance
NMFA frequently hears from individuals in the two categories of
TRICARE-eligible beneficiaries who were not included in the list of
eligibles in the legislation creating the TRICARE Retiree Dental Plan.
We recommend Congress add military retirees and their families who live
overseas as well as TRICARE-eligible former spouses to the list of
eligible beneficiaries for this plan. Since the TRICARE Retiree Dental
Plan is not subsidized by DOD, there is no cost to the Department to
include these otherwise TRICARE eligible beneficiaries.
NMFA requests TRICARE eligible former spouses and military
retirees and their family members who live overseas be allowed
to participate in the TRICARE Retiree Dental Plan.
Health Care Implications of Transformation, Global Rebasing, and BRAC
NMFA believes it imperative the full spectrum of health care be
available to families at losing or closing installations until the last
family has left and also be in place before the first new family
arrives at a gaining installation. NMFA is fully aware this cannot be
accomplished solely through the direct care system. However, the
Managed Care Support Contractors must be required to meet the need when
the direct care system cannot and to do so within the Prime access
standards. In communities experiencing an increase in Active-Duty
population, this may mean they will need to recruit more family
practice providers, pediatricians, and OB/GYNs for their networks.
Because of housing patterns in affected communities, more network
providers may be needed in locations farther from the installations
than are currently requred. For example, the North region contractor
has already had to recruit additional network providers in the
Syracuse, New York, area because families of servicemembers stationed
at Fort Drum have been forced to find housing there. The contractors
must also be prepared to work together to ease the transition of large
numbers of Active-Duty members and their families from installation to
installation, in many cases across regional boundaries.
In addition, NMFA is concerned about other beneficiaries, to
include those who are medically retired and survivors, who may be left
without access to an MTF at closing or downsizing installations. At a
minimum, Prime must continue to be an option in BRAC areas and a robust
network of providers, to include all relevant specialists, must be in
place before an MTF downsizes or closes. In areas where military
hospitals are being downsized to outpatient clinics, every effort must
be made to ensure continuity of care for beneficiaries needing to move
back and forth between the direct care and purchased care segments of
the MHS. DOD must ensure the contractors develop adequate hospital
networks to replace care now provided in the direct care system.
family readiness
NMFA recognizes and appreciates the continued focus all the
Services are placing on family readiness. Family readiness affects a
servicemember's entire career from recruitment to retention to
retirement. DOD must continue to refine and improve family readiness
programs not only because it is the right thing to do, but also to
retain highly trained and qualified servicemembers.
In NMFA's recent Cycles of Deployment Survey, respondents' comments
paint a picture of both successes and failures in the family support/
readiness arena. A common theme was the desire for a ``purple'' family
support system. As an Active-Duty Army spouse stated: ``We are all in
this together--it doesn't matter the branch of service.'' What matters
to the family is that the information and support that they are
promised is provided in a consistent manner. Accessing the right
information when they need it continues to be a critical issue for
Guard and Reserve families who generally have very limited access to
military installations. Like the families in our survey, NMFA believes
family support agencies must reach out to all families located in their
geographical area regardless of Service affiliation.
Evidence of this need for outreach by strong, well-coordinated
programs was seen in the confusion and frustration experienced by so
many uniformed service families in the wake of Hurricane Katrina and in
the responses initiated by their Services. In the wake of the disaster
and in response to calls from families and family support providers
alike, NMFA worked quickly to compile contact and support information
for all agencies and Services in order to be able to provide accurate
and timely advice to families. While we were happy to provide a one-
stop information portal for families from all the uniformed services
and while the individual Services ended up offering a wide variety of
information and support resources, we just kept thinking how nice it
would have been if military leaders had focused more from the beginning
on working together to meet families' needs.
NMFA applauds the various initiatives designed to meet the
needs of servicemembers wherever they live and whenever they
need them. DOD must have the flexibility to meet emerging
needs, the mandate to reach out to families, and the resources
to ensure continuation of the ``bedrock'' support programs.
Whenever possible, these programs should focus on a joint
solution and reach out to all family members, including parents
of single servicemembers.
Caring for Military Children and Youth
Frequent deployments and long work hours make the need for quality
affordable and accessible child care critical. We thank Congress for
making additional funding available for child care since the beginning
of the global war on terrorism. We were pleased that DOD has requested
military construction for eight child development centers for fiscal
year 2007. The communities slated to receive these centers desperately
need them. Currently, DOD estimates it has a shortage of 31,000 child
care spaces within the system, not counting the demand from the
mobilized Guard and Reserve community. While efforts are being made to
bridge this gap, thanks in part to congressional funding for child care
over the past few years, additional innovative strategies are needed.
Programs such as Military Child Care in Your Neighborhood and Operation
Military Child Care, which assist military families in finding and
paying for child care, are welcome pieces of the solution, but are
insufficient to completely meet all the need.
Older children and teens cannot be overlooked. Parents tell us
repeatedly they want resources to ``help them help their children.''
NMFA is working to meet this need through programs such as our
Operation Purple summer camps and a pilot after school program for
children of deployed servicemembers. We also applaud the partnership
between DOD and Johns Hopkins School of Public Health to assist school
personnel in helping military children deal with frequent moves or the
deployment of a parent. We urge Congress to increase its funding for
schools educating large numbers of military children. This supplement
to Impact Aid is vital to these districts, which have shouldered the
impressive burden of ensuring military children receive a quality
education despite the stresses of military life.
Schools serving military children, whether DOD or civilian
schools, need the resources to meet military parents'
expectation that their children receive the highest quality
education possible. Because Impact Aid funding from the
Department of Education is not fully funded and has remained
flat in recent years, 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
In recent years, DOD has sponsored a variety of programs, including
a partnership with Monster.com, to promote spouse employment. However,
with 700,000 Active-Duty spouses, the task of enhancing military spouse
employment is too big for DOD to handle alone. NMFA encourages more
private employers to step up to the plate and form partnerships with
local installations and DOD. We ask DOD to reach out to potential
employers and acquaint them with the merits of hiring the members of
this talented and motivated workforce.
Despite greater awareness of the importance of supporting military
spouse career aspirations, some roadblocks remain. State laws governing
unemployment compensation vary greatly regarding eligibility for
military spouses who have moved because of a servicemember's government
ordered move. NMFA is appreciative of DOD's efforts to work with States
to promote the award of unemployment compensation to military spouses,
eligibility for in-State tuition, and reciprocity for professional
licenses.
NMFA asks 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 to make
college credits and fees more easily transferable and also
explore paths towards national standards or reciprocity 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 all
available resources to educate themselves about factors to
consider regarding employment benefits, to include investments,
health care, portability, and retirement.
families and deployment
In July 2004, NMFA published Serving the Home Front: An Analysis of
Military Family Support from September 11, 2001 through March 31, 2004.
This report noted progress made to the military's support of its
families during the first 18 months of the global war on terrorism.
Understanding the need for further research and information on the
long-term effects of repeated deployments and the reunion and
reintegration of both Active and Reserve component families, NMFA
developed its Cycles of Deployment survey. This survey was active on
the NMFA website between April and November 2005 and received 1,592
responses. The message from military families came through loud and
clear: families cannot nor should they have to make it through a
deployment alone. They expect family support to be available to all,
regardless of their Service component or where the family lives.
Respondents acknowledged they had a role to play in their own family
readiness; however they looked to their commands, their unit
volunteers, and their communities to recognize their sacrifice and help
them make it through deployments.
NMFA could not agree more. We are pleased to note the progress made
on innovative ways in which families can communicate with command and
family readiness/support groups. The Army Virtual Family Readiness
Group (VFRG) has just recently gone live and will soon be able to
connect up to 800 battalions with family members and significant
others, to include spouses, children, fiances, parents, and extended
family members. VFRGs should be a tremendous help in meeting the needs
of geographically-dispersed servicemembers, Guard and Reserve members,
and individual augmentees and their families who feel left ``out of the
communication loop'' and consistently ask: ``who's my group?''
As deployments have continued, the Services have refined programs
dealing with the return and reunion process. Families worry about how
the reunion will go even as they are worrying about the servicemember's
safety in theater. Attention also needs to be placed on how children,
at varying stages of their lives, reconnect with a parent who in all
likelihood will be deployed again sometime soon.
Families need to be better educated in how to deal with problems
that could surface months after the servicemember returns.
Multiple deployments are no longer the exception but rather the
norm. Families experiencing a second or third deployment never start
from the same place. Along with skills acquired during the first
deployment, there are unresolved anxieties and expectations from the
last. New families are entering the cycle, whether they are new
recruits, servicemembers deploying with new units, or families whose
life situations have changed since the last deployment. More families
seem willing to seek mental health care and counseling but it is not
always readily available. Many of our survey respondents called for
counselors to be assigned to unit family readiness groups, as well as
on-call professionals who would be available to deal with troubled
families or the emergency situations currently being thrust on often
inadequately trained volunteers. NMFA applauds the Soldier and Family
Life Consultants Program, which is used by the Army to provide
additional preventative counseling support to soldiers and their family
members, especially following soldiers' return from deployments. The
number of Army installations using this program is growing; services
have also been provided to the Marine Corps Reserve for returning
units. NMFA recommends increased funding for this program and for DOD
to provide the option to expand it to all Services.
Higher stress levels caused by open-ended and multiple
deployments require a higher level of community support. We ask
Congress to ensure the Services have sufficient resources to
provide robust quality-of-life and family support programs
during the entire deployment cycle: pre-deployment, deployment,
post-deployment, and in that critical period between
deployments. Programs must also address the specific needs of
family volunteers, who make up the front line of family
readiness.
families and transition
Transitions are part of the military life. For the individual
military family, transitions start with the servicemember's entrance in
the military and last through changes in duty station until the
servicemember's separation or retirement from the service. Another
transition comes with the injury or death of the servicemember.
National Guard and Reserve families face a transition with each call-up
and demobilization of the member. The transition to a restructured
military under Service transformation initiatives, Global Rebasing, and
BRAC will affect servicemembers, their families, and their communities.
Transformation, Global Rebasing, and BRAC
As the Global Rebasing and the BRAC process are implemented,
military families look to Congress to ensure 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, survivor, 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 and changes in Navy home ports, 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 cannot emphasize enough the urgency for DOD and Congress to
allocate resources now to support communities involved in movements of
large numbers of troops. 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 has already had an impact in some communities.
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. Fort
Riley and Fort Carson are already seeing the troops arriving from
overseas installations being downsized. The latest news is that the
Army will move approximately 7,200 soldiers and 11,000 family members
from Germany to stateside installations during fiscal year 2006. Over
the next 5 or 6 years, U.S. Army Europe will reduce from 62,000
soldiers to 24,000. Several communities in Europe will also grow, as
the remaining troops are consolidated into fewer locations. The DOD
must do more now to ensure that communities have the resources to
support these increased populations.
Most of the Army installations expecting an increase in population
have already privatized their housing or expect to do so soon.
Privatization contracts were structured to deal with those
installations' housing needs at the time the contracts were signed, and
not in anticipation of the arrival of several thousand servicemembers
and their families. At most of these installations, waiting lists for
housing on the installation are common now. What will happen when the
troops arrive from overseas? Where will their families live? The
Services generally deem the amount of housing in the area surrounding
an installation is adequate if enough exists within a 40-mile radius of
the installation. Forcing military families, especially those of junior
enlisted servicemembers, to live that far from the installation will
increase their financial hardships because of transportation costs, as
well as their isolation from the military community.
We ask you to seek information from the Services on housing
capacity, not just on the installations anticipating growth, but also
in the surrounding communities. We also ask you to encourage DOD to re-
negotiate housing privatization contracts or authorize more military
construction funding where appropriate to increase the housing stock on
affected installations and to look for other innovative ways to meet
housing demands caused by these troop movements. We urge you to pay
particular attention to the effect of the influx of servicemembers and
families on local housing costs to ensure that sufficient funding is
provided for Basic Allowance for Housing (BAH) in these communities.
We also urge Congress to remember that, as families are forced to
seek housing farther from the installation, they lose some of their
connection with other military families and the military community. The
installation is the focal point for the military family. When families
are scattered in towns and subdivisions miles from the installation,
they lose not only their link to that focal point but also find it more
difficult to access the support services--commissaries, exchanges,
health care, youth programs, chapel programs, family readiness
activities--offered on the installation. The challenge to the
installations experiencing growth will be to reach out to isolated
families and let them know they remain a part of the community. Leaders
will also have to answer the question of what MWR programs and family
support services must be available for families regardless of their
location and which can be offered only to families who can or choose to
access them on an installation on a regular basis. Will additional
subsidies be available for child care slots at civilian facilities?
Should family center personnel operate satellite facilities or do
outreach to areas farther from an installation? How valuable is a
commissary or exchange benefit if a young family must drive 45 miles to
reach it? How can DOD help these families located far from an
installation access their benefits?
We are pleased Congress has directed DOD to report on the impact of
troop and family movements on schools. We thank Congress for providing
funds to assist schools in meeting the additional costs that come with
the arrival of large numbers of military students. We believe this DOD
funding--$7 million appropriated for this year vice $10 million
authorized--will be needed in larger amounts for several years until
districts are able to secure resources from other Federal, State, or
local resources. Because many incoming families may be forced to find
housing farther away from the installation than families now live, they
may find themselves in school districts that have little experience
with military children. Nevertheless, they will expect these schools to
have the resources needed to educate their children properly. Schools
must have at least 20 percent military student enrollment to qualify
for additional funds for schools experiencing an increase in student
population due to transformation, rebasing, or BRAC, according to
section 572 of the NDAA for Fiscal Year 2006. That means schools with
the least experience with military children, who potentially could see
significant increases in their military population, will not qualify
for assistance from DOD. What message does this send to these
communities and to the military families who must move there about
DOD's concern about the quality of education there?
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. Regarding the DOD funding for schools
experiencing an increase in the number military children, NMFA
recommends eligibility be based on increases in population
alone and not on the percentage of military children already in
the district. DOD must provide support for all districts facing
a large influx of military children, those facing rising
enrollments of military students for the first time as well as
those currently educating a high percentage. We want these
districts to welcome military children and not blame them for
cutbacks in services because the schools could not receive DOD
funds to assist them in supporting these children.
Survivors
NMFA believes the 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. We are most grateful to members of this committee for your
advocacy in providing the increased death gratuity of $100,000 to
survivors of all Active-Duty deaths as part of the NDAA for Fiscal Year
2006. NMFA would also like to thank Senator Carl Levin, Ranking Member
of the full Committee, for requesting budget authority for $45 million
to provide the same enhanced death gratuity to the survivors of certain
servicemembers who died between May 12, 2005 and August 31, 2005. A gap
between the language of the fiscal year 2005 Emergency Supplemental and
that of the NDAA for Fiscal Year 2006 inadvertently denied the enhanced
death gratuity to these survivors. NMFA hopes this situation can be
fixed as soon as possible.
NMFA also appreciates the work done this year by DOD and the
Services to improve the education of casualty assistance officers and
to make sure survivors are receiving accurate information in a timely
manner. A new DOD publication will soon be available for each surviving
spouse and/or parent outlining the benefits available to them. It is an
on-line document and can be easily updated as changes occur. It will be
supplemented by Service-specific information. NMFA also looks forward
to the results of the GAO study on the casualty notification and
assistance process.
DOD and the VA have formed a committee to examine procedures and
review complaints that they hear about the present casualty
notification and assistance process and have included stakeholders like
the Gold Star Wives, the Transition Assistance Program for Survivors
(TAPS), the military relief societies, and NMFA. These initiatives
provide a response to the recent language included in the NDAA for
Fiscal Year 2006, which requires DOD to develop and implement a
comprehensive casualty assistance program that offers training of
casualty assistance officers, centralized case management, personalized
benefits information for survivors, financial counseling, and liaison
with VA and Social Security. While we still hear from some widows that
they received wrong or incomplete information from their casualty
assistance officer, these problems are quickly resolved when surfaced
to the higher headquarters. We are concerned, however, about the widows
or parents who still do not know who to call when there is a problem.
An area that NMFA feels could still be addressed is the need for
specific training in bereavement and other counseling for family
readiness group leaders, ombudsmen, and key volunteers. Many widows say
they suddenly felt shut out by their old unit or community after the
death of their servicemember. Often the perceived rejection is caused
by a lack of knowledge on the part of other families about how to meet
the needs of the survivors in their midst. Because they find contact
with survivors difficult, they shy away from it. In some communities,
support groups outside the unit family support chain have been
established to sustain the support of the surviving families in the
days and months after the death of the servicemember. Fort Hood, Texas,
for example, has a special command-sponsored support group for the
widows in the surrounding area. We have been especially pleased to note
the development of the ``Care Team'' concept at a growing number of
installations. Care Teams are family volunteers who receive special
training to assist survivors immediately after the casualty
notification. Key in making the Care Teams effective is the extensive
training received by the volunteers and the de-briefing of these
volunteers by chaplains or other trained counselors that occurs after
their contact with the surviving family members.
NMFA believes the benefit change that will provide the most
significant long term advantage to the surviving family's financial
security would be to end the Dependency Indemnity Compensation (DIC)
offset to the Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP). 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 monthly payment of $1,033 for the surviving spouse and
$257 for each surviving child. The SPB 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.
Surviving Active-Duty spouses can make several choices, dependent
upon their circumstances and the ages of their children. Because SBP is
offset by the DIC payment, the spouse may choose to waive this 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, this leaves the spouse
who has chosen this option with an annual income of $12,396. In each
case, this is a significant drop in income from what the family had
been earning while on Active-Duty. The percentage of loss is even
greater for survivors whose servicemembers had served longer. Those who
give their lives for their country deserve more fair compensation for
their surviving spouses. We urge Congress to intensify efforts to
eliminate this unfair ``widow's tax'' this year.
As part of the standardization and improvement of the
casualty assistance process, more effort needs to be placed on
supporting the long-term emotional needs of survivors and of
communities affected by loss. NMFA recommends that the DIC
offset to SPB be eliminated. Doing so would recognize the
length of commitment and service of the career servicemember
and spouse and relieve the spouse of making hasty financial
decisions at a time when he or she is emotionally vulnerable.
To ensure the VA continues to meet survivors' long-term needs,
NMFA recommends the establishment of a Survivor Office within
the VA to provide long-term information and support for
surviving spouses and children and offer individualized
information about each surviving family's benefit package.
compensation and benefits
NMFA appreciates the military pay raises set above the Economic
Cost Index for the past several years. They serve as both an
acknowledgement of service and recognition of the need for financial
incentives as a retention tool. As DOD prepares its Quadrennial Review
of Military Compensation, NMFA hopes Congress, in evaluating its
recommendations, considers their effects on the whole pay and
compensation package. Changes in individual elements of that package
can have unintended consequences on other elements or on the package as
a whole. And, while pay raises are important, equally important is the
need to maintain the non-pay benefit package that makes up such a vital
part of military compensation.
Funding for Commissaries, MWR, and other Programs
Commissaries, exchanges, recreational facilities and other MWR
programs are an integral part of military life and enhance the overall
quality-of-life for servicemembers and their families. Respondents to
NMFA's recent survey on military benefits spoke emphatically about the
value of commissaries, exchanges, and MWR programs. Almost three-
quarters of the respondents stated the commissary benefit was important
to their family; more than half voiced a similar opinion about military
exchanges. The majority of respondents used at least one MWR activity
monthly. Families also value their installation family centers.
Delegates at the recent Army Family Action Plan Conference, for
example, rated Army Community Services as their most valued service.
NMFA urges Congress to strengthen and protect these benefits during
the upheavals and troop movements over the next few years. We are
concerned about the timeline for the closure of commissaries and
exchanges overseas and the ability of stores at installations
experiencing growth to handle the increased demand. We understand the
Army and Air Force Exchange Service earns approximately 50 percent of
its profits at overseas stores, many of which will close or downsize as
troops and families move back to continental United States
installations. When these stores are gone, what will be the future of
the MWR programs funded by these profits? Are the Army and Air Force
examining their program needs, developing a plan, and identifying
alternate funding sources to maintain vital programs despite a
projected increase in exchange revenues?
Permanent Change of Station Improvements
NMFA is grateful for recent increases in PCS weight allowances for
senior enlisted members included in the NDAA for Fiscal Year 2006.
Weight allowances for these ranks were dramatically out of sync with
the expected accumulation of goods over the course of a career and with
the responsibility shouldered by these servicemembers. These increases,
while still below the levels NMFA believes are appropriate, will ease
the financial burden for many servicemembers and their families when
the government orders them to move. NMFA asks Congress to continue
reviewing the weight allowance tables and increase them to better
reflect the needs and responsibilities of today's force.
While applauding this much needed change in weight allowances,
families still wait for what they view as the most important
improvement to the PCS process: full replacement value reimbursement
for household goods lost or damaged in a government-ordered move. In
the NDAA for Fiscal Year 2004, based on promises that the DOD household
goods re-engineering initiative, ``Families First,'' would be
implemented in the fall of 2004, Congress authorized full replacement
value reimbursement for military moves, but tied its implementation to
the implementation of the re-engineering project. Unfortunately for
families, ``Families First'' has not yet been implemented. The Military
Surface Deployment and Distribution Command, the agency in charge of
the household goods move process, announced last fall that, after many
other delays, the implementation of ``Families First'' is in a
``strategic pause.'' NMFA finds it disappointing that families have
been anything but first in DOD's efforts to improve the move process.
The delay to implement these improvements has gone on long enough. We
believe DOD must have this program in place before the bulk of the
overseas rebasing and BRAC moves occur. Military families want and
deserve a program that works and have waited long enough.
NMFA asks Congress to press DOD to implement ``Families
First'' and begin paying full replacement value reimbursement
as promised more than 2 years ago.
The shipment of a second vehicle for all uniformed services members
moving to outside the continental United States assignment (including
Alaska and Hawaii) has been a major quality-of-life issue for
servicemembers and their families stationed overseas. With
servicemembers' long work hours in support of the mission, having only
one car available to the family limits a spouse's employment options
and family members' access to commissaries, children's schools and
activities, and installation support programs. NMFA hopes Congress will
address this concern and authorize and fund the costs of shipping a
second vehicle for overseas PCS moves.
PCS mileage reimbursement rates are no more than 20 cents per mile
and then, only if four persons are in the vehicle. The official
explanation for this rate is that the Monetary Allowance in Lieu of
Transportation (MALT) and PCS rates were never intended to reimburse
the transportation costs for driving a car; they are based on
commercial fares and are a payment instead of providing the member or
employee with government-procured transportation. The MALT/PCS mileage
rates do not reflect the price of gasoline. As we all know, commercial
carriers are raising their rates because of the increased price of
fuel. NMFA feels an increase in the PCS mileage rates would reflect the
increase in the commercial rate and provide a more realistic
reimbursement for mileage to servicemembers and families as they
relocate.
Adjusting Housing Standards
Increased funding for BAH over the past 6 years has been a quality-
of-life success story for military families. This funding has cut
families' out-of-pocket costs tremendously, especially in high cost-of-
living areas. DOD's claims that out-of-pocket costs for military
families living off the installation have been ``zeroed out'' only
apply, however, to averages. Many servicemembers' BAH still does not
cover their families' total housing costs. This disparity is due in
part to the housing standard tied to a servicemember's rank.
The trend in housing construction on military installations,
whether through military construction or the privatization contracts,
has been to construct larger homes that meet so-called ``community
standards.'' The standard on the installation for assigning or offering
housing is based on rank and the number of family members. If an E-5
with three dependents is lucky enough to live on the installation in
privatized housing, they may be living in a three-bedroom duplex or
townhouse. Yet, if that E-5's family is forced to live off the
installation in the community, the rate of BAH they receive is based on
the DOD E-5 standard of a two bedroom townhouse. Servicemembers needing
a larger home off-base cover the additional rental costs out of their
own pockets. An enlisted member must be an E-9 before ``earning''
sufficient BAH to rent a single family dwelling.
NMFA believes it is time to revisit and possibly revamp the
housing standards used to determine Basic Allowance for Housing
to better reflect the ``community standards'' used in
constructing housing on military installations and the
responsibilities placed on servicemembers.
families and community
Military families are members of many communities. Communities
small and large in every corner of the United States now have military
families, due to the increased deployment and utilization of National
Guard and Reserve members since the beginning of the global war on
terrorism. NMFA has heard how these communities want to help the
military families in their midst. They want to be better informed on
how to provide this help. How can this be accomplished?
As the sacrifice of servicemembers and families continues in the
global war on terrorism, many States have implemented military family
friendly programs and passed legislation to support families. NMFA
applauds the states assisting servicemembers and their families with
in-State tuition, unemployment compensation for spouses, licensing
reciprocity, and education and sports provisions for military children.
The DOD State Liaison office works to promote these policies and
publicizes them on the DOD Web site USA4MilitaryFamilies.org, a web
forum for sharing information about State and local initiatives to
support military families. Of special importance is the work this
office is doing to improve community-based support for disabled
servicemembers. It is also working to deter the payday lenders, check
cashing stores, title loan companies, and other financial predators
that plague servicemembers. DOD is promoting financial literacy
programs to insure stability for the members and their families. NMFA
has worked closely with the State Liaison Office on several State
initiatives concerning spouse unemployment compensation, predatory
lending, and in-State tuition.
Many States recognize the financial difficulties facing some
National Guard and Reserve families. Some have instituted State-
coordinated emergency funds financed through corporate and individual
donations or through State residents' designations on their State
income tax forms. Others pay the differential between State employees'
military and civilian pay when the employee is mobilized or pay the
health insurance premiums to enable the Guard or Reserve member's
family to maintain continuity of health care. New Mexico pays the
Servicemembers' Group Life Insurance premium for the deployed National
Guard and Reserve members from their State.
Concern for deployed servicemembers from North Carolina and
compassion for their loved ones left behind prompted the creation of a
unique partnership to help the combatants' families, particularly those
in remote areas. The Citizen-Soldier Support Program (CSSP) is a
collaborative effort, funded by Congress through a DOD grant, and
coordinated by the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. CSSP is
designed to mobilize communities and make them aware of the needs of
local military families so people can reach out and help when help is
needed. The program is designed as a preventative measure, as opposed
to a crisis-response structure, to help with little things before they
become big things. The support program uses existing agencies within
counties and communities to broadcast the needs of military families.
Liaisons also seek help from representatives of Rotary Clubs, Lions
Clubs, the American Legion, and Veterans of Foreign War units who are
interested in helping military families. Other States have expressed
interest in starting similar programs. We hope North Carolina will be
the training center to expand the program to other States and
communities.
NMFA recommends increased funding for community-based
programs, including the North Carolina Citizen-Soldier Support
Program, to reach out to meet the needs of geographically
dispersed servicemembers and their families.
In conclusion, NMFA would like to thank the many dedicated people
who serve our military families. We again express our extreme gratitude
for the actions of this subcommittee, which has consistently supported
the needs of our Nation's warriors and their families, both while on
Active-Duty and in retirement. You too are part of the tapestry of
support. By keeping military families strong, you are ensuring the
force will remain strong.
Senator Graham. Thank you. General.
STATEMENT OF LT. GEN. DENNIS McCARTHY, USMC (RET.), EXECUTIVE
DIRECTOR, RESERVE OFFICERS ASSOCIATION
General McCarthy. Mr. Chairman, I must begin by first
expressing my very sincere thanks for the opportunity to appear
here today. I ask that my written statement be accepted for the
record. Thank you, sir.
I'm here to tell you that the ROA believes very strongly
that the Nation's commitment to first class military health
care for Active and Reserve members, for serving and retired
personnel, must be honored. Our resolve on that point is
unshakeable.
I had the privilege of serving in uniform as a United
States Marine for almost 41 years. During 33 of those years,
our Nation developed and depended on an All-Volunteer Force
that was composed of both Active and Reserve components. Each
of those components is essential to national security. The
Active component was never designed to fight a sustained
conflict without augmentation and reinforcement. Some of the
earliest proponents of the All-Volunteer Force thought that
that surge of reinforcements would have to come from a draft.
As it turns out, that has not been necessary.
In the global war on terrorism we fought the first really
sustained conflict with our All-Volunteer Force and we have
done so without recourse to a draft because of the 500,000 men
and women of the National Guard and Reserves who have surged
forward to augment and reinforce the Active Forces. Keeping
both components of that force together for future service
requires a sustained recruiting and retention effort. It is in
that context that military health care must be viewed.
Among the commitments that the Nation has made to the
warrior citizens of the All-Volunteer Force is to provide first
class health care to them and their families while they're
serving in uniform and during their years of retirement.
Congress has come to realize that this commitment is critical
for both the Active and the Reserve components. The ROA has
sought and will continue to seek to find a path that will allow
the Nation to meet its health care commitments to the warrior
citizens and will also enable to it to meet other important
commitments.
I'd like nothing better than to sit here and say ``just
appropriate more money,'' that whatever it costs, ``just find
the money.'' But regretfully, I don't believe that that's how
things work in the real world and I don't think it's how they
work in Washington, either.
As an association chartered by Congress to advance national
security, ROA has chosen to support the position taken by the
Chairman of the Joint Chiefs and by his fellow Service Chiefs
who, we believe, are seeking a balanced approach that
recognizes the fiscal realities of life in a time of war. We
wish to work with Congress in finding a balance to meet health
care commitments, to fund training and equipment needs of those
serving in uniform today, and to avoid a course that will break
the ability of our Nation to have an All-Volunteer Force.
Our key points are these: first, that independent
verification is needed of the total cost of DOD health care
benefits, and we believe Congress should propose a brief
moratorium on changes until true costs are known; second, we
believe that changes in the beneficiary cost share should be
phased in and that the 2-year period proposed by the DOD is too
abrupt; and third, that a fair 3-tier system is attainable for
Reserve members, but operational reservists serving today are
paying a disproportionate cost and we think Congress needs to
take a hard look at that.
At the end of the day, we need a first class military
health care system that our country can afford and that our
warrior citizens see as a true benefit. I thank you for your
consideration and I look forward to your questions.
[The prepared statement of General McCarthy follows:]
Prepared Statement by Lt. Gen. Dennis M. McCarthy, USMC (Ret.)
introduction
Mr. Chairman and distinguished members of the Senate Armed Services
Committee, on behalf of its 75,000 members, the Reserve Officers
Association (ROA) thanks the committee for the invitation and
opportunity to present testimony on military health care issues.
ROA applauds the efforts by Congress to address the issue of
increasing Department of Defense (DOD) health care costs and its
interest to initiate dialogue and work with both the Pentagon and the
beneficiary associations to find the best solution. Unfortunately, the
Members of Congress are caught between DOD and a coalition of
beneficiary associations as particular positions are being advanced.
The health care issues that are before us are not black and white.
No single source for solution is the best one. Outreach to many groups
should be encouraged to solicit various concepts. ROA favors open
dialogue and the generation of new ideas in support of the best
solution. We hope that this hearing is just one step in a series of
discussions toward finding an accord.
Health care services are vital to keeping the Nation's military
force strong and ready. It is also a deferred benefit and recognition
of retired members for their service to the Nation. ROA strongly urges
that when all cost-sharing is finally taken into account, our
beneficiaries must still view DOD health care as an enhanced benefit
when compared to the private sector.
executive summary
Increasing the cost-share of DOD health care beneficiaries is
admittedly an emotional issue. Yet the Nation and the DOD are faced
with ever increasing health care costs. Because of the dynamics
involved, this is an issue that shouldn't be rushed. Here is a summary
of the key points as seen by the ROA.
Moratorium:
- As DOD has already directed the TRICARE contractors to move
ahead on implementing the TRICARE PRIME fee increases, a
moratorium on such increases should be declared to allow
Congress time to review this action.
TRICARE Prime:
- Adjustments to the enrollment fee are acceptable if tied to
true health care costs.
- It is important to independently verify the current total
cost of DOD health care benefits. Such an audit will permit
Congress to validate proposals based on cost-sharing
percentages.
- A 2-year implementation is too abrupt. Cost-sharing
adjustments should be spread over at least 5 years to permit
household budgets to adjust.
- Annual increases should not be tied to the market-driven
Federal Employee Health Benefits Plan (FEHBP).
TRICARE Standard:
- ROA does not endorse an annual enrollment fee for either DOD
or the Department of Veterans' Affairs (VA).
- If TRICARE Standard requires beneficiary enrollment, it
should be only a one-time minimal administrative fee.
- Adjustments to TRICARE Standard should be made to the
deductible.
- Because of larger co-payments of 25 percent after the
deductible, the costs of TRICARE standard need to be analyzed
from a total cost rather than initial cost perspective.
- TRICARE Standards cost deductible automatically adjusts with
escalating health care costs.
TRICARE Reserve Select (TRS):
- ROA is deeply concerned that after they return from
deployment, operational reservists pay substantially higher
premiums than retiree enrollment costs.
- Family Premiums for a Tier I TRS operational reservist are
$3,336 per year for fiscal year 2006 compared to a proposed
combined cost of $1,120 for TRICARE Standard in fiscal year
2008. This is inequitable.
- We agree that today's operational reservists should pay a
fair share of the cost of their DOD health care when not on
Active-Duty. However, a ``fair share'' should reflect their
past and future contributions to the Nation. Congress's role in
finding that ``fair share'' balance cannot be overstated.
- TRICARE standard deductible increases should not be rolled
over into TRS.
On Pharmacy Co-payments:
- ROA believes higher retail pharmacy co-payment should not
apply on initial prescriptions, but on maintenance refills.
- ROA supports DOD efforts to enhance the mail-order
prescription benefit.
background
In testimony before Congress, Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld talked
about the rising cost of health care. ``The current health care system
[as] funded is not sustainable. . . The Department's health care costs
have almost doubled over the past 5 years--from $19 billion in 2001 to
$37 billion in fiscal year 2006. . . Using a conservative projection,
these health care costs will likely reach $64 billion in fiscal year
2015, an estimated 12 percent of the total Department budget. By
comparison, health costs were 4.5 percent of the Department's budget
back in 1990. . .''
``In 1995, beneficiaries paid 27 percent of their total health care
costs,'' his testimony continued. ``Today, because there has been no
change in TRICARE annual premiums for 11 years, beneficiaries currently
pay not 27 percent, but just 12 percent of costs. The proposed plan
would ask retirees to pay somewhat more in premiums and for certain co-
payments.''
ROA clearly understands that health care costs must be brought back
into alignment and that some cost will have to be borne by retirees and
families of serving members, both Active and Reserve.
discussion
A number of visible issues relate to TRICARE in calendar year 2006.
The Reserve Officers Association is concerned that a myopic focus on
any one issue may cause a loss of focus on other equally important
issues.
The ROA is disappointed in how the DOD Health Affairs has attempted
to address such an emotionally laden issue unilaterally. ROA would like
to thank Congress for its continued involvement and leadership on DOD
health care issues.
While it is important to sustain the DOD health care benefit as a
deferred benefit for our serving Active and Reserve component members
and their families, it is not a necessary to do two quick increases
``overnight'' in the TRICARE fee schedules.
While retired, these beneficiaries have accepted risks and made
sacrifices in their earlier military careers that have not been asked
of the remaining 99 percent of the Nation's population. TRICARE
fulfills an ongoing promise by the government for continued health care
to those who have served or are serving.
Conversely, the DOD and this Nation cannot afford to carry the full
burden of health care costs. The operational Active and Reserve Force
and their families deserve the best, both while serving and into
retirement. To preserve the top health care program in the Nation as a
DOD benefit, the ROA is a proponent of cost-sharing.
ROA does not find the goal of returning the retiree beneficiary
contribution to 27 percent of DOD's health care cost as being out of
line, as it was Congress's intent in 1995. Yet, after 10 years of fixed
costs, these increases should be phased-in over a wider duration of
time to help those retirees on fixed incomes, and then any future
increases should be affixed to a formula other than the civilian health
care market place.
Some associations will suggest that there should be no jumps in
annual premiums and that beneficiary fees should only be raised
annually by the level of retiree cost-of-living adjustment. ROA's
concern is by using this approach to cost share, the percentage of
beneficiary contribution would continue to decline, with DOD paying an
every increasing share. This could give DOD justification to implement
a different plan.
Secretary Rumsfeld has publicly stated that DOD should not be in
the business of health care. Ever increasing health care would provide
DOD with a good reason to civilianize health care for families and
retirees by transferring the program over to a company such as Blue
Cross/Blue Shield. Beneficiaries would pay more for less benefits, and
be subjected to the profit-making pressures of the commercial market,
where premium cost have increased by double digits over the last 5
years.
Under a freeze on fees, the current Active-Duty retiree
beneficiaries might continue paying a low cost-share, but the next
generation, who is currently serving, would end-up paying more for
their retirement programs. As with any deficit, the medical
expenditures of the current generation would be cost-shifted to the
next.
Fuzzy Numbers on Both Sides:
The challenge for using a 27 percent base line is determining of
what it is 27 percent. Yet the pentagon seems to have trouble measuring
this accurately. The TRICARE Reserve Select family premium (Tier I) is
set in law at 28 percent as a TRICARE Standard program. The 2006 annual
premium and deductible is $3,336 based on a $10,834 a FEHBP premium
base of $10,834. Excluding deductibles, this is 28.02 percent.
Beneficiary medical expense totals have not yet been provided by
DOD. Congress should ask the Pentagon for a financial breakdown. An
independent audit by the Government Accountability Office (GAO) or
another agency would allow Congress an opportunity to validate
proposals based on cost-sharing percentages.
The numbers being used in materials by some beneficiary
associations have also not been adequately delineated. ROA hopes in
this testimony to provide sufficient details to support our positions.
TRICARE Prime has been the primary focus of DOD Health Affairs and
its civilian health care contractors. A ``fully loaded model'' health
care plan, it has been rated the #1 health care plan in national
surveys for the last 3 years. Prime currently costs a retiree $460 per
year. DOD has suggested a 2-year phase-in, 141 percent increase to $650
for enlisted E-6 and below, a 206.5-percent increase to $950 per year
for E-7 thru E-10, and a 304-percent increase to $1,400 per year for
officers. This is still a bargain when compared to what the average
U.S. family is paying. A Kaiser Family Foundation Survey reported that
in 2005 an employee paid 26 percent of the employer's annual premiums
for family coverage of $10,880, or $2,828.80 per year for lesser health
care coverage.
Single enrollees will have a 141-percent increase to $325 for
enlisted E-6 and below, a 204.35-percent increase to $475 per year for
E-7 thru E-10, and a 304-percent increase to $700 per year for single
officers. Kaiser reported that civilian workers opting for single
coverage paid an average of $643.84 per year, which could indicate the
single officers' increase may be a little high.
TRICARE Standard:
The Reserve Officers Association has concerns with suggested
enrollment fees and deductible increases for TRICARE Standard. TRICARE
Standard is the system on which TRICARE Reserve Select is based. DOD
Health Affairs and its contractors have benignly neglected TRICARE
Standard at best.
While offered as an option to TRICARE Prime to Active-Duty
retirees, TRS is the required choice for serving reservists and may be
the health care plan of choice for Guard and Reserve retirees between
the ages of 60 and 65 because most live outside the TRICARE Prime
network of health care providers.
These areas have fewer authorized TRICARE providers. It becomes
incumbent upon the TRICARE beneficiary to find a physician that accepts
TRICARE Standard and often the beneficiaries must administer their own
TRICARE health plan. Because of its costs and problems with
availability, TRICARE Standard can only be viewed as DOD's ``basic
model'' health care program.
TRICARE Prime is DOD's voluntary health maintenance organization,
while TRICARE Standard is DOD's preferred provider organization plan
and a fee for service plan.
Ironically, TRICARE Standard, which was intended by Congress to be
the Civilian Health and Medical Program of the Uniformed Services
(CHAMPUS) replacement, has become more expensive than TRICARE Prime,
even without DOD's suggested enrollment fee increases. With a $150
deductible for singles and a $300 deductible for families, TRICARE
Standard beneficiaries pay co-payments (cost-share) of 25 percent per
visit after the deductible.
Comparing the average cost of an office visit between TRICARE Prime
and TRICARE Standard we see that costs favor the beneficiary with
TRICARE Prime. (See Appendix A.) From these calculations, it appears
that the TRICARE Standard retiree beneficiary will be paying much more
than 27 percent of the DOD cost share goal as set for TRICARE Prime.
TRICARE Prime beneficiaries pay only $12 per outpatient visit, and
$30 for emergency care. However, if they choose to get care under the
Point of Service option with care outside the TRICARE network, there's
an annual deductible (for both inpatient and outpatient care) of $300
for an individual and $600 for a family.
TRICARE Extra gives a discount of 5 percent for co-payments (cost-
share) for TRICARE retired standard beneficiaries who use TRICARE
health care providers from the TRICARE Prime network.
DOD Health Affairs [table one] is attached, which gives more
details on current cost.
For a healthy family, TRICARE Standard can be low cost, if they
don't use the health care benefits, which is why it should remain a fee
for service. If a family has frequent visits, costs under TRICARE
standard will surpass those of TRICARE Prime. By adding a $140-$560
annual enrollment fee and increasing the annual deductible, TRICARE
standard costs are being aligned with those of TRICARE PRIME. This is
making the down payment on the ``basic model'' Standard as expensive as
the ``fully loaded'' Prime.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
TRICARE Standard
TRICARE Prime Enrollment +
Enrollment Fee Deductible Single/
Single/Family Family
------------------------------------------------------------------------
E-6 and Below................... $325/$650......... $325/$650
E-7 thru E-10................... $475/$950......... $385/$770
Officers........................ $700/$1,400....... $560/$1,120
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Reserve Officers Association does not endorse annual enrollment
fees for individuals who don't use the health care plan, whether it is
DOD or VA.
ROA has never objected to requiring a TRICARE enrollment, as this
would include those service members and retirees who don't use the
TRICARE benefit. Rather than an annual fee, this can be handled by a
one time fee to cover administrative costs; perhaps in the range of
$25-$50, although this is atypical of the commercial market which
charges only monthly premiums.
If increases were required for TRICARE Standard, ROA would rather
see an emphasis on deductible costs rather than an annual enrollment
fee.
We should also examine the levels of proposed deductibles. In the
most common type of plan--PPO plans--the average deductible for in-
network services was $323 for single coverage and $679 for family
coverage. Yet, 44 percent of them have plans requiring co-payments of
$20 or $25 for physician visits and prescription drugs, far less the
TRICARE Standard's 25 percent co-payment.
Annual premium increases:
Once the 27 percent cost share is achieved, it is been reported
that DOD wants to tie further annual increases to the premium increases
of the FEHBP. According to a Kaiser Family Foundation survey released
in September 2005, the average premium growth rate in 2005 year was 9.2
percent. This outpaced both the growth in wages (2.7 percent) and
inflation (3.5 percent). The FEHBP increased its premiums by 14.5
percent. FEHBP has had double-digit increase for each of the last 5
years. Such disparity between increased health care costs and FEHBP
premium increases will cause the retiree beneficiary cost share to rise
beyond 27 percent.
If DOD is unable to calculate premium cost using the 27 percent
figure, other cost-of-living indexes could be used, such as an annual
inflation rate.
Pharmacy Co-payment changes:
DOD is suggesting an increase in co-payments in retail pharmacy
from $3 to $5 dollars for generic prescriptions, and from $9 to $15 for
brand drugs. Generic pharmacy prescriptions would drop from $3 to $0 to
align with military clinics.
ROA understands the motives for this change, to encourage pharmacy
beneficiaries to use the mail order pharmacy system, which is the least
expensive. What DOD overlooks is that often times the retail pharmacy
network is the only source to immediately fill a prescription, as many
pharmacy beneficiaries are unable to go to a military clinic for the
initial prescription.
ROA suggests that the higher retail pharmacy co-payments not apply
on an initial prescription, but on refills of a serial maintenance
prescription.
TRICARE Reserve Select:
While ROA is satisfied with a three-tier construct for cost share
as developed by Congress, we are deeply concerned that the cost share
for operational reservists who have just returned from mobilization is
much higher than what is paid by Active-Duty retirees.
TRICARE Reserve Select family premium (Tier I) is based on a
Federal Employee Health Benefit Plan premium base of $10,834. Family
premiums and deductible for a Tier I TRS operational reservist are
$3,336 per year for fiscal year 2006 compared to a proposed combined
cost for retired officers of $1,120 for TRICARE Standard in fiscal year
2008. Single TRS combined costs $1,272 compared to the suggested
TRICARE standard cost of $560. ROA finds this is inequitable.
This again gives an appearance that the reservist is a second-class
warrior in the Total Force, when Active-Duty personnel are not charged
any fee. We agree that today's operational reservists should pay a fair
share of the cost of their DOD health care when not on Active-Duty.
However, a ``fair share'' should reflect their past and future
contributions to the Nation. Congress's role in finding that ``fair
share'' balance cannot be overstated.
DOD may argue that Active personnel remain on Active-Duty, while
the Selected reservist returns to civilian status; yet neither
component is deployed 100 percent. General Pace has stated that the
deployed schedule of Active personnel will be 1 year deployed, for
every 2 years stateside duty. The plan for operational Army Guard or
Reserve member is 1 year deployed, for every additional 4 years in
``drill and training'' status.
Using costing numbers for Active-Duty personnel, the Pentagon has
determined that the Active-Duty member is on duty 270 days a year. A
Guard or Reserve member's civilian employment is 264 days a year, plus
Reserve employment per title 10 is another 38 days. Operational
reservists are being encouraged to spend those 28 days in support of
Active commands, which normally are outside the average commute
distances of civilian employment. Including travel, Reserve duty days
increase to over 50 days. Since operational support doesn't include
administrative time, or professional training, another 24 days without
pay can be added, at a minimum, to senior Guard and Reserve duty time,
bringing Reserve contributions to 75 days or more. By the Pentagon's
own numbers the average reservist is contributing over 120 days a year
between drill and deployments.
ROA hopes that Congress re-examines the costs percentage of Guard
and Reserve warriors who operational support the Total Force.
TRICARE Reserve Select is evolving into a stand alone health plan.
While it uses the TRICARE standard as an engine, its fees are based on
FEHBP premiums, so it is no longer a TRICARE standard program. TRICARE
standard fee increases must not be rolled over into TRS.
ROA Suggestions for Enhancing TRICARE Reserve Select:
1. Many different types of orders are being cut for operational
support of Active-Duty. Guard and Reserve members are serving on these
orders for various lengths of time. Operational support is being
provided within theater, in support of theater, and on the peripheral.
Examples:
1. Warfighters in Iraq and Afghanistan
2. Custom inspectors in Kuwait
3. Joint Task Force--Horn of Africa in Djibouti
4. Fleet support in Rota, Spain.
5. Air maintenance on combat aircraft in Turkey.
6. Guard duty at Guantanamo Bay
7. Active-Duty command support
8. Pentagon Staffing
9. Working with wounded marines and sailors at National Naval
Medical Center, Bethesda, MD
Each duty disrupts a Guard or reservist's civilian career and
interferes with the continuity of health care. Communication of
benefits and narrow interpretation of ``in support of contingency
operations \1\'' by Reserve service components has created an
inconsistent policy when extending TRS to all who might qualify.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Title 10, section 101(a), paragraph (13), The term
``contingency operation'' means a military operation that----
``(A) is designated by the Secretary of Defense as an operation
in which members of the armed forces are or may become involved in
military actions, operations, or hostilities against an enemy of the
United States or against an opposing military force; or
``(B) results in the call or order to, or retention on, Active-
Duty of members of the uniformed services under section 688, 12301(a),
12302, 12304, 12305, or 12406 of this title, chapter 15 of this title,
or any other provision of law during a war or during a national
emergency declared by the President. . .''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Section 701 of Public Law 108-375, 108th Congress, does not use the
definition of ``contingency operation.'' Instead, this section defines
eligibility based on ``service on Active-Duty.'' \2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ a Guard and Reserve member as ``eligible for health benefits
under TRICARE Standard as provided in this section after the member
completes service on Active-Duty to which the member was called or
ordered for a period of more than 30 days on or after September 11,
2001.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Section 704, Waiver of Certain Deductibles Under TRICARE Program
for Members on Active-Duty for a Period of more than 30 Days, and
Section 705, Authority for Payment by United States of additional
amounts billed by health care providers to activated Reserves, do
contain the contingency language.
Suggested changes:
1.a. Expand eligibility of the Tier I ``earned benefit'' to all
members who are serving in support of the global war on terrorism, no
matter what the type of order. Since the language only defines
``Active-Duty'' Congress should direct DOD to a broader interpretation.
1.b. Include legislative change to permit mobilized Reserve
component member to accumulate health care to qualify for future TRS
utilization. Suggested language footnoted.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ Sec. 1076d (a) ``. . . which the member was called or ordered
for a period of more than 30 days on or after September 11, 2001, under
a provision of law referred to in section 101(a)(13)(B), if the
member----
``(1) served continuously on Active-Duty for [an accumulated] 90
or more days pursuant to such call or order; and
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. Request a study by GAO or another agency to explain why there is
such a high drop out from application to acceptance in TRS. Over 40,000
have applied, but only 9,500 have been accepted. (See Appendix B)
3. Provide TRS to demobilized reservists returning to the
Individual Ready Reserve (IRR). While Congress improved the benefit by
allowing individual ready reservists a year to find a Selected Reserve
Billet, this is not an option for many senior members.
Rather than precluding these operational reservists from a deserved
benefit, have IRR members commit to a continued period in the IRR,
subject to future recall, where these members will be required to
maintain training and qualifying years.
4. Provide TRS to demobilized recalled retired reservists. As an
incentive to recalled ``gray area'' retired reservist who volunteer for
operational support should qualify for TRS. It is wrong to send them
back into a ``retirement'' that has no benefits.
5. TRS should be an incentive to transition Active-Duty members
into the Reserve. If an Active component member leaves following a
deployment, they can qualify for TRS.
6. Gray area retiree buy-in to TRS. Gray-area reservists are
currently in limbo between TRS while drilling and TRICARE with
retirement-in-pay. TRS buy-in would be at the full monthly cost, but at
least this would provide a continuity of coverage for those waiting for
TRICARE retirement.
7. Employer health care option: The Reserve Officers Association
continues to support an additional option where DOD pays a stipend to
employers of deployed Guard and Reserve members to continue employer
health care during deployment. Because TRICARE Prime or Standard is not
available in all regions that are some distance from military bases, it
is an advantage to provide a continuity of health care by continuing an
employer's health plan. This stipend need not be higher than any DOD
contribution to Active-Duty TRICARE.
conclusion
The Reserve Officers Association encourages ongoing oversight
management of DOD health care by Congress. There is an attitude of
autonomy within the Pentagon that overlooks the partnership of the
branches of government. ROA looks forward to working with this
committee, Congress, and the Pentagon on this and other issues for
constructive solutions. When DOD clarifies these costs, ROA is willing
to take this new information back to educate our members and support
increases as necessary.
Senator Graham. Admiral Ryan.
STATEMENT OF VADM NORBERT R. RYAN, JR., USN (RET.), PRESIDENT,
THE MILITARY OFFICERS ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA
Admiral Ryan. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Senator Nelson, and
Senator Dole. We appreciate your leadership in arranging this
meeting. In the interest of time I'll jump to MOAA's 3 minute
bottom line, if I could, using these charts.
[The chart referred to follows:]
We see the DOD proposed health fee increases as
inappropriate and disproportional. Proposed increases for all
grades would far exceed military retired pay growth as shown by
the blue line on the chart. This is unfair for the retired
force and a current readiness concern too.
[The chart referred to follows:]
Some claim this isn't an issue for currently serving
people, but this recent quote from the Navy Times shows how one
leader sees health care affecting retention. In surveying our
members' views, we've been overwhelmed by 34,000 responses as
of this morning, including 4,000 Active-Duty members.
[The chart referred to follows:]
This next chart shows that more than 9 out of 10 oppose the
DOD plan. They know they already paid huge up front premiums
through decades of sacrifice. People aren't exactly lined up
around the block at recruiting offices to get this great
military health deal. Why? Because very few are willing to pay
the extremely high price required to earn the benefit.
[The chart referred to follows:]
DOD's projected savings assume the fee increases will stop
hundreds of thousands of people from using their earned
military benefit. Congressman McHugh questioned the morality of
that and we agree. On the pure budget side, some Pentagon
analysts admit to us privately that the projected savings are
grossly overstated. So the fee increases will just anger the
troops, leave the health budget underfunded, and put our
volunteer force at further risk. The sustainability of our
superb All-Volunteer Force in this prolonged war already keeps
many of us awake at night. A thousand dollar a year retirement
benefit cut can't help.
[The chart referred to follows:]
This next chart shows MOAA's recommendations. First, do no
harm, no fee increases this year. Second, DOD has lots of other
ways to cut health care spending without charging
beneficiaries. I offer for the record, this list of 16 possible
options, just two of which, in the pharmacy area alone, could
generate as much first year savings as DOD's proposal.
[The chart referred to follows:]
There should also be an outside look at DOD's cost
containment efforts and alternative savings options. Finally,
we support some statutory constraints on DOD's current fee
adjustment authority.
[The chart referred to follows:]
Mr. Chairman, my last chart is a list of suggested
statutory caps we hope this subcommittee will consider. While
this hearing's focus is on health care, I hope the subcommittee
can continue to make progress again this year on other military
coalition priorities concerning end strength, the survivor
benefit plan, concurrent receipt, and certainly Guard and
Reserve health and retirement needs. We thank all of you for
your leadership and your efforts to find fair answers on these
vital issues.
[The joint prepared statement of Admiral Ryan and Mr. Zerr
follows:]
Joint Prepared Statement by VADM Norb Ryan, Jr. (USN-Ret.) and Edgar
Zerr
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
Non Commissioned Officers Association
Reserve Enlisted 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
Health Care Issues
Defense Health Program Funding
The Military Coalition (TMC) urges the subcommittee to ensure
continued full funding for Defense Health Program (DHP) needs.
Protecting Beneficiaries Against Cost-Shifting
The Coalition recommends against implementing any increases in
health fees for uniformed services beneficiaries this year. The
Coalition believes strongly that America can afford to and must pay for
both weapons and military health care. The Coalition recommends
strongly against establishment of any TRICARE Standard enrollment fee.
The Coalition urges the subcommittee to require the Department of
Defense (DOD) to pursue greater efforts to improve TRICARE and find
more effective and appropriate ways to make TRICARE more cost-efficient
without seeking to ``tax'' beneficiaries and make unrealistic budget
assumptions. (See separate National Military Famility Association
(NMFA) testimony concerning TRICARE Prime premiums and Standard
deductibles.)
TRICARE Standard Improvements
The Coalition urges the subcommittee to establish requirements for
TRICARE Standard beneficiary surveys and a definition of what level of
provider participation shall be deemed to require positive action to
increase it. The Coalition urges the subcommittee to direct DOD to
eliminate TRICARE-unique administrative requirements that deter
provider participation and thus contribute to denying beneficiaries
access to care. The Coalition recommends requiring DOD to work with the
State Medical Associations and the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid
Services to initiate an appropriate information program for providers
who will not see TRICARE patients, highlighting specific improvements
in claims/payment processing timeliness.
TRICARE Reimbursement Rates
The Coalition urges the subcommittee to exert what influence it can
to persuade the Ways and Means/Finance Committees to reform the
Medicare/TRICARE statutory payment formula. To the extent the Medicare
rate freeze continues, we urge the subcommittee to encourage the
Defense Department to use its reimbursement rate adjustment authority
as needed to sustain provider acceptance. The Coalition urges the
subcommittee to require a Comptroller General report on the relative
propensity of physicians to participate in Medicare vs. TRICARE, and
the likely effect on such relative participation of a further freeze in
Medicare/TRICARE physician payments.
TRICARE vs. Medicare Coverage
The Coalition urges the subcommittee to align TRICARE coverage to
at least match that offered by Medicare in every area.
TRICARE Reserve Select
The Coalition strongly recommends capping TRICARE Reserve Select
(TRS) premium increases at a percentage not to exceed the percentage of
their basic pay raise. The Coalition recommends increasing the Federal
subsidy for TRS, at least for those members who do not have access to
employer-sponsored health coverage. The Coalition recommends developing
a cost-effective option to have DOD subsidize premiums for member's
private insurance as an alternative to TRICARE Reserve Select coverage.
We recommend a Government Accountability Office (GAO) report to
identify the level of payment that would represent a cost-effective
option for the government.
Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act (USAERRA)
Protections
The Coalition urges continued efforts to ensure consistency of
benefits and continuity of care for Guard and Reserve members and their
families in an environment of increased length and frequency of
deployments.
Restoration of TRICARE For Widows
The Coalition recommends restoration of TRICARE benefits to
previously eligible survivors whose second or subsequent marriage ends
in death or divorce.
TRICARE Prime Remote
The Coalition recommends removal of the requirement for the family
members to reside with the Active-Duty member to qualify for the
TRICARE Prime Remote Program.
BRAC, Re-Basing, and Relocation
The Coalition urges Congress to codify the requirement to provide
TRICARE Prime in Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC)-affected areas and
ensure, via a report from DOD, that adequate health resources are
available to provide care within access standards for those affected by
re-basing.
Mental Health
The Coalition strongly urges Congress to closely monitor DOD and
Department of Veterans' Affairs (VA) implementation of much-needed Post
Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) awareness and treatment programs.
Pharmacy Copayments
The Coalition recommends no changes to the copayment rates until
all medications are available in the mail order program and limiting
any future pharmacy copayment increases to the lesser of the percentage
increase in basic pay or retired pay, rounded down to the next lower
dollar. The Coalition recommends eliminating beneficiary copayments in
the mail-order pharmacy system for generic and brand name medications
to incentivize use of this lowest-cost venue and generate substantial
cost savings.
Expansion of ``Third Tier'' Formulary
The Coalition urges the subcommittee to monitor DOD's consideration
of Beneficiary Advisory Panel input in future uniform formulary
decisions and reassert its intent that the Panel should have a
substantive role in the process, including access to meaningful data on
relative cost of drugs in each affected class. The Coalition recommends
a GAO review of the Uniform Formulary process to determine whether
actions taken thus far have realized the projected savings.
TRICARE Prime Referral and Authorization System
The Coalition recommends that Congress require a cost analysis
report concerning the referral process within DOD and reliance on
Civilian Network Providers within a Military Treatment Facility's (MTF)
Prime Service Area.
DOD-VA Transition
The Coalition urges the committee to direct and oversee a concerted
``Manhattan Project'' effort to ensure full and timely implementation
of seamless transition activities, a bi-directional electronic medical
record (EMR), enhanced post-deployment health assessments, and one-stop
physical at time of discharge.
Tax Law Changes
The Coalition urges all Armed Services Committee members to press
the Ways and Means and Finance Committees to approve legislation to
allow all beneficiaries to pay TRICARE-related insurance premiums in
pre-tax dollars, to include TRICARE Prime enrollment fees and premiums
for TRICARE Standard supplements, long-term care insurance, and TRICARE
dental premiums.
Dental Issues
The Coalition recommends allowing TRICARE-eligible former spouses
to participate in the TRICARE Retiree Dental Plan. The Coalition
recommends a GAO study of the viability of subsidizing the retiree
dental program, including the likely long-term impact of different
subsidy levels on retiree participation and dental health.
Active Force Issues
Pay Raises
The Military Coalition strongly recommends providing military pay
raises that exceed the Employment Cost Index until such time as full
military pay comparability has been restored. The Coalition further
recommends targeted increases for selected noncommissioned officers/
petty officers and warrant officers as needed to attain the 70th-
percentile comparability standard.
Family Readiness, Support Structure, and Morale, Welfare and
Recreation Programs
The Military Coalition urges Congress to maintain a well-funded
family readiness and support structure to enhance family well-being and
to improve retention and morale. The Coalition also asks Congress to
highlight and protect the interests of all beneficiaries impacted by
overseas rebasing, Army modularity, and BRAC and ensure support
services and infrastructure remain in place throughout the entire
transition period for all beneficiary populations.
Personnel Strengths
TMC strongly urges sustaining end strengths to meet mission
requirements, and opposing force reductions that have the primary
purpose of paying for other programs.
Housing
TMC urges correction of military housing standards that inequitably
depress Basic Allowance for Housing (BAH) rates for mid to senior
enlisted members by assuming their occupancy of inappropriately small
quarters.
Flexible Spending Accounts
TMC urges the subcommittee to continue pressing the DOD until
servicemembers are provided the same eligibility to participate in
Flexible Spending Accounts (FSAs) that all other Federal employees and
corporate employees enjoy.
Permanent Change of Station Reimbursement
The Military Coalition supports upgrading permanent change-of-
station (PCS) allowances to reflect the expenses members are forced to
incur in complying with government-directed relocations.
Dependent Education
The Coalition urges the subcommittee to continue its priority on
mitigating adverse effects of government decisions on military
children's education. The Coalition urges the subcommittee to support
nationwide in-State tuition eligibility for service families in the
State in which the member is assigned or the member's home State of
record, and continuity of in-State tuition once established for a
military student. The Coalition also urges support of a nationwide
reciprocity standard to allow full transfer of school credits for
graduation requirements for service and family members. The Coalition
continues to believe that it would be a powerful career retention
incentive to authorize transferability of at least a portion of
Montgomery G.I. Bill (MGIB) benefits to family members for long-serving
members who agree to complete a military career.
Montgomery GI Bill
The Coalition urges the subcommittee's support for a 21st century
MGIB, with benefit amounts indexed to the cost of a 4-year education at
a public institution, and no reduction in benefits for education
obtained while on Active-Duty.
Guard and Reserve Issues
Guard/Reserve Health Care
The Coalition strongly recommends increasing subsidy levels for
TRICARE coverage for drilling Guard/Reserve members not yet mobilized
and having one set rate for members of the Guard and Reserve who
continue to be drilling members. The Coalition supports further
strengthening rights under the Uniformed Services Employment and
Reemployment Rights Act (USERRA) to permit Reserve component members to
retain employer-sponsored insurance if coverage is terminated due to
TRICARE benefits provided 90 days prior to mobilization. The Coalition
supports extending military dental coverage to reservists for 180 days
post mobilization (during Transition Assistance Management Program
(TAMP)), unless the individual's dental readiness is restored to T-2
condition before demobilization.
Guard/Reserve Retirement Age
TMC urges Congress to reduce the age when a Guard and Reserve
member is eligible for retirement pay, particularly for those members
who have experienced extended mobilizations.
Transition Assistance Services and Protections
TMC urges funding of tailored Transition Assistance Program (TAP)
services and enactment of stronger economic, financial, academic,
health and legal protections for Guard and Reserve members and their
families.
``Total Force'' Montgomery GI Bill
TMC supports the integration of all elements of the MGIB under
title 38, restoring benefit rates commensurate with service performed,
and a post-service eligibility period for Selected Reserve members.
Guard and Reserve Family Support Programs
TMC urges Congress to continue and expand its emphasis on providing
consistent funding and increased outreach to connect Guard and Reserve
families with these support programs.
Overseas Rebasing, Base Realignment and Closure Issues
Rebasing and BRAC
The Military Coalition urges the subcommittee to monitor the
implementation of rebasing, BRAC, and Service Transformation
initiatives to ensure protection of support services for military
families.
Survivor Program Issues
Survivor Benefit Plan-Dependency Indemnity Compensation (SBP-DIC)
Offset
The Military Coalition strongly supports legislation to repeal the
SBP-DIC offset introduced by Senator Nelson (D-FL) (S. 185) and
Representative Brown (R-SC) (H.R. 808), respectively. Enactment remains
a top Coalition goal for 2006.
30-Year Paid-Up SBP
The Military Coalition recommends a 2-year acceleration of the
implementation date for paid-up SBP coverage, so that it takes effect
on October 1, 2006.
Final Retired Pay Check
The Military Coalition urges Congress to allow survivors of
retirees to retain the full month's retired pay for the month in which
the retired member dies.
Retirement Issues
Concurrent Receipt
The Coalition urges the subcommittee to expand Combat-Related
Special Compensation to members who were medically compelled to retire
short of 20 years of service solely because of their combat-incurred
disabilities, as envisioned in H.R. 1366. The Coalition urges the
subcommittee to end the disability offset to retired pay immediately
for otherwise-qualifying members rated as ``unemployable'' by the VA.
Former Spouse Issues
The Military Coalition urges legislation to eliminate inequities in
the USFSPA.
overview
Mr. Chairman, TMC thanks you and the entire subcommittee for your
continued, unwavering support of our Active-Duty, Guard, Reserve,
retired members, and veterans of the uniformed services, to include
their families and survivors. The subcommittee's work has generated
significant improvements in military end strength, pay, health care,
survivor benefits, and disabled retiree programs.
Six years ago, the Joint Chiefs of Staff advised Congress of the
need to repeal REDUX, fix pay raises, and correct inequities in retiree
health care, all of which were having a negative retention impact on
serving members. You heard the call, and made those fixes and others.
Now, unfortunately, we hear increasing complaints about the cost of
some of those improvements from leaders who seem to have forgotten why
they were enacted.
Some in the administration argue for a return to past practices of
capping military pay raises below private sector wage growth. Service
leaders are planning force reductions even as Congress has authorized
end strength increases to meet frenetic rotation requirements that have
no end in sight. Defense officials decry the cost of retiree health
care and seek to impose four-figure increases in health care fees
charged to those who spent a career thinking they were paying their
premiums in specie of personal and family sacrifice.
Some contend that support for military personnel programs
inevitably faces a periodic cycle of ebb and flow, and that the benefit
improvements of the last 6 years must now yield to several years of
cutbacks.
The Military Coalition continues to look to this subcommittee for
leadership to ensure the country doesn't return to the penny-wise and
pound-foolish benefit cutbacks that caused the retention problems of
the 1970s and the 1990s.
Today's reality is that 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 is a real concern, and anyone who talks
to frustrated military families has to question the credibility of any
alleged rosy retention outlook.
In testimony today, TMC offers its collective recommendations on
what needs to be done to address these important issues and sustain
long-term personnel readiness.
Full Funding for the Defense Health Program
We particularly appreciate the key role played by the subcommittee
in ending the chronic under funding experienced in past years. But
recent events raise our concern that this condition is likely to arise
again unless the subcommittee continues its aggressive oversight.
The Defense Department, Congress, and The Military Coalition all
have reason to be concerned about the rising cost of military health
care. But it is important to recognize that the bulk of the problem is
a national one, not a military-specific one. It's also important, in
these times of focus on deficits, to keep in perspective the
government's unique responsibility as the recruiter, retainer,
employer, and custodian of a career military force that serves multiple
decades under extraordinarily arduous conditions to protect and
preserve our national welfare.
In this regard, the government's responsibility and obligations to
its servicemembers go well beyond those of corporate employers. The
Constitution itself puts the responsibility on the government to
provide for the common defense, and on Congress to raise and maintain
military forces. No corporate employer shares any such awesome
responsibility and obligation, and there is no other employee
population upon whom the entire Nation depends for its very freedom.
Congress has pursued its responsibilities with vigor on behalf of
those who are sacrificing, have sacrificed, and will continue to
sacrifice so much for the rest of America. Continuing those vigorous
efforts will be essential in addressing the budget challenges of the
years ahead.
The Military Coalition urges the subcommittee to ensure
continued full funding for Defense Health Program needs.
Protecting Beneficiaries Against Cost-Shifting
The administration is proposing a significant increase in fees paid
by retired uniformed services beneficiaries, including doubling or
tripling enrollment fees for TRICARE Prime and tripling or quadrupling
fees for TRICARE Standard. In addition, the President's budget
recommends a 67-percent increase in retail pharmacy fees for all
Active-Duty, Guard, Reserve, retired, and survivor beneficiaries.
The Coalition believes strongly that these proposed increases are
disproportional, inequitable, inappropriate, and unwise. (See separate
NMFA testimony concerning TRICARE Prime premiums and Standard
deductibles.)
The Coalition recommends against implementing any increases in
health fees for uniformed services beneficiaries this year.
People vs. Weapons
Dr. William Winkenwerder, Assistant Secretary of Defense (Health
Affairs), briefed the Coalition that rising military health care costs
are ``impinging on other service programs.'' Other reports indicate
that DOD leadership is seeking more funding for weapons programs by
reducing the amount it spends on military health care and other
personnel needs.
The Military Coalition asserts that such budget-driven trade-offs
are misguided and inappropriate. Cutting people programs to fund
weapons ignores the much larger funding problem, and only makes it
worse.
The Coalition believes strongly that the proposed defense budget is
too small to meet national defense needs. Today's defense budget (in
wartime) is less than 4 percent of gross domestic product, well short
of the average for the peacetime years since WWII.
The Coalition believes strongly that America can afford to
and must pay for both weapons and military health care.
Comparison With Civilian Plans Is Inappropriate
Defense leaders assert that substantial military fee increases are
needed to bring military beneficiary costs more in line with civilian
practices. But comparison with corporate practices is inappropriate.
Military medical and retirement benefits must be markedly better
than civilian benefits, since they are the primary offsets for enduring
decades of extraordinarily arduous military service conditions that
constitute military members' unique contributions toward their unique
retirement and health benefits.
The Nation has a far greater obligation to military retirees than
corporations have to theirs. In demanding such extraordinary
commitments from career servicemember, the government assumes a
reciprocal obligation to provide benefits commensurate with their
extraordinary sacrifices.
TRICARE Standard Enrollment Fee is Inappropriate
TRICARE Standard has long been the basic military insurance
coverage. Only 50 percent of providers in America have ever submitted a
TRICARE claim, and many providers are reluctant to accept Standard
beneficiaries. Many who do so refuse to accept any new TRICARE
patients. To date, little effort has been expended by the DOD or its
contractors to assist Standard beneficiaries in finding providers.
When TRICARE Prime was authorized in 1995, Congress authorized an
enrollment fee for this program in recognition that beneficiaries who
signed up for Prime could expect a higher level of service. They were
to be guaranteed access to a participating provider within established
timeliness standards.
The Department is now attempting to establish an enrollment for
TRICARE Standard without any such commitment for a higher level of
service. With TRICARE provider payments expected to decline in the
future under current law, provider participation is actually likely to
decline in the future.
Establishing an enrollment fee without any commitment to provide
improved service for that fee is inappropriate.
The Coalition recommends strongly against establishment of
any TRICARE Standard enrollment fee.
Large Retiree Fee Increases Can Only Hurt Retention
The reciprocal obligation of the government to maintain an
extraordinary benefit package to offset the extraordinary sacrifices of
career military members is a practical as well as moral obligation.
Mid-career military losses can't be replaced like civilians can.
Eroding benefits for career service can only undermine long-term
retention/readiness. Today's troops are very conscious of Congress'
actions toward those who preceded them in service. One reason Congress
enacted TRICARE For Life (TFL) is that the Joint Chiefs of Staff at
that time said that inadequate retiree health care was affecting
attitudes among Active-Duty troops.
The current Joint Chiefs have endorsed increasing TRICARE fees only
because their political leaders have convinced them that this is the
only way they can secure funding for weapons and other needs. TMC
believes it is inappropriate to put the Joint Chiefs in the untenable
position of being denied sufficient funding for current readiness needs
if they don't agree to beneficiary benefit cuts.
Reducing military retirement benefits would be penny-wise and
pound-foolish when recruiting is already a problem and an overstressed
force is at increasing retention risk.
TFL Trust Fund Accrual Deposit Is Dubious Excuse
An analysis by the Congressional Budget Office showed that most of
the growth in defense health spending (56 percent) is attributable to
overall growth in national health care spending. The next largest
contributor is beneficiary population growth (23 percent).
Establishment of the accrual accounting methodology for the TFL trust
fund (which doesn't affect current outlays) accounts for 18 percent of
the DOD cost growth.
When the DOD argued 2 years ago that the trust fund deposit was
impinging on other defense programs, the Coalition and the subcommittee
agreed that that should not be allowed to happen. When the
administration refused to increase the budget topline to accommodate
the statutorily mandated trust fund deposit, Congress changed the law
to specify that the entire responsibility for TFL trust fund deposits
should be transferred to the Treasury. Subsequently, administration
budget officials chose to find a way to continue charging that deposit
against the defense budget anyway.
In the Coalition's view, this represents a conscious and
inappropriate administration decision to cap defense spending below the
level needed to meet national security needs. If the administration
chooses to claim to Congress that its defense budget can't meet those
other needs, then Congress (which directed implementation of TFL and
the trust fund deposit) has an obligation to increase the budget as
necessary to meet them.
Proposed Increases Far Exceed Inflation Increases
The administration's proposed increases are grossly out of line
with TRICARE benefit levels originally enacted by Congress, even
allowing for interim inflation since current fees were established.
If the $460 family prime enrollment fee were increased by interim
consumer price index (CPI) changes (those used to increase retired
pay), assuming the same 2.5 percent future CPI change assumed in the
President's budget, it would be $635 for fiscal year 2008--far less
than $1,400 proposed by DOD.
If the $300 deductible for TRICARE Standard were CPI-adjusted for
the same period, it would be $414 by 2008--one-third the $1,200 in
annual deductible and new fees proposed by DOD.
Further, the administration proposes to make annual fee adjustments
thereafter, based on Federal Employees Health Benefit Plan (FEHBP)
medical inflation, which has been two to three times the inflation-
based increases in members' retired pay. This would ensure that
members' medical costs would consume a larger share of their income
with each passing year. The Coalition realizes that this has been
happening to many private sector employees, but believes strongly that
the government has a greater obligation to protect the interests of its
military beneficiaries than private corporations feel for their
employees.
Proposed Increases Disproportional to VA Fee Changes
Congress acted wisely in each of the last 2 years by squelching
administration proposals to institute an annual enrollment fee of $250
and significantly raise pharmacy co-payments for non-disabled veterans
who had served as few as 2 years. This year, the VA has increased
pharmacy copayments by $1. Tripling and quadrupling TRICARE fees for
retirees who served 20-30 years in uniform and raising retail pharmacy
copays by 67 percent for all military beneficiaries would be grossly
disproportionate in comparison.
Unrealistic Budget Assumptions Will Leave TRICARE Underfunded
The DOD budget proposal assumes the proposed fee increases and co-
payment changes will save money by shifting 14 percent of pharmacy
users away from retail outlets and causing hundreds of thousands of
current beneficiaries to exit TRICARE by 2011. Thus, DOD has reduced
the amount budgeted for health care on the assumption that it will be
treating fewer beneficiaries.
Many Defense and Service analysts believe it is unrealistic to
assume that this number of beneficiaries will leave TRICARE if such
fees are introduced, largely because switching to civilian coverage
usually would entail even larger fees for beneficiaries.
Because the assumed level of beneficiary flight is extremely
unlikely to occur, the Department almost certainly will experience a
substantial budget shortfall before the end of the year. This would
then require supplemental funding, further benefit cutbacks, and even
greater efforts to shift more costs to beneficiaries in future years.
Thus, the most likely result of this misguided cost-shifting
proposal would be to disproportionately penalize retirees, undermine
military health benefits, and further threaten future retention and
readiness.
Alternative Options to Make TRICARE More Cost-Efficient
The Coalition believes strongly that the DOD has not sufficiently
investigated other options to make TRICARE more cost-efficient without
shifting costs to beneficiaries. The Coalition offers the list of
alternatives below as initial cost saving possibilities.
Promote retaining other health insurance by making
TRICARE a true second-payer to other insurance (far cheaper to
pay another insurance's copay than have the beneficiary migrate
to TRICARE)
Eliminate DOD-unique administrative requirements that
make DOD pay higher overhead fees
Size and staff military treatment facilities (least
costly care option) to reduce reliance on non-MTF civilian
providers
Change electronic claim system to kick back errors in
real time to help providers submit ``clean'' claims, reduce
delays/multiple submissions
Change law to limit incentives private firms can offer
employees to shift to TRICARE, or require such matching
payments to TRICARE
Increase efficiency via a single contract for all
claims processing
Implement effective disease management programs and
ensure coordination across the entire system
Test voluntary participation in Medicare Advantage
Regional PPO to foster chronic care improvement and disease
management
Negotiate with drug manufacturers for retail pharmacy
discounts (the most costly venue), which DOD has failed to do,
or change the law to mandate Federal pricing for retail
pharmacy network (rather than charging beneficiaries more if
drug companies don't agree to Federal pricing)
Reduce/eliminate all mail-order copays to boost use of
lowest-cost venue
Do more to educate beneficiaries and providers on
advantages of mail-order pharmacy
Establish one central DOD facility to order/fill all
prescriptions for exceptionally high-cost drugs (Air Force
model has been successful)
Centralize military treatment facility pharmacy
budget/funding process, with emphasis on accountability and
cost-shifting
TRICARE Still Has Significant Shortcomings
While DOD chooses to focus its attention on the cost of the TRICARE
program to the government, the Coalition believes those making that
case too often fail to acknowledge that TRICARE continues to have
significant problems that deter many providers from accepting it and
affect delivery of care to beneficiaries.
The Coalition urges the subcommittee to require DOD to pursue
greater efforts to improve TRICARE and find more effective and
appropriate ways to make TRICARE more cost-efficient without
seeking to ``tax'' beneficiaries and make unrealistic budget
assumptions.
TRICARE Standard Improvements
The Coalition very much appreciates the subcommittee's continuing
interest in the specific problems unique to TRICARE Standard
beneficiaries. In particular, we applaud your efforts in the National
Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for Fiscal Year 2006 to expand TRICARE
Standard provider surveys and establish Standard support
responsibilities for TRICARE Regional Offices. These are needed
initiatives that should help make it a more effective program. We
remain concerned, however, that more remains to be done. TRICARE
Standard beneficiaries need assistance in finding a provider that can
provide health care services within a reasonable time and distance from
their home. This will become increasingly important with the expansion
of TRICARE Reserve Select as these individuals are most likely not
living within a Prime Service Area.
Provider Participation Adequacy
The provider surveys are a first step and should provide a wealth
of additional information. The question is what use will be made of the
information.
The Coalition is concerned that DOD has not established any
standard for the adequacy of provider participation. Participation by
half of the providers in a locality may suffice if there is not a large
Standard beneficiary population. The Coalition would prefer to see an
objective participation standard (perhaps number of beneficiaries per
provider) that would help shed more light on which locations have
participation shortfalls of Primary Care Managers and Specialists that
require positive action. The Coalition is not asking DOD to build a
TRICARE Standard network. However, once shortfalls are identified then
further action by DOD should be undertaken to entice providers to
accept TRICARE Standard patients.
We are also concerned about whether the Standard surveys actually
measure what they purport to measure. In particular, we are perplexed
that DOD survey results for some locations do not conform to
(admittedly anecdotal) inputs that beneficiary associations have
received from some of the same localities. Coalition discussions with
those who processed the surveys yielded acknowledgements that health
care providers may give different answers to the surveyors than they
give to beneficiaries--if only because the beneficiaries may ask
different questions of them than the survey-takers do. The Coalition
believes it would be useful and appropriate to conduct independent
surveys of TRICARE Standard beneficiaries, so that beneficiary inputs
could be correlated with provider inputs for a given area.
The Coalition urges the subcommittee to establish
requirements for TRICARE Standard beneficiary surveys and a
definition of what level of provider participation shall be
deemed to require positive action to increase it.
Administrative Deterrents to Provider Participation
Feedback from providers indicates TRICARE imposes additional
administrative requirements on providers that are not required by
Medicare or other insurance plans. On the average, about 50 percent of
a provider's panel is Medicare patients, whereas only 2 percent are
TRICARE beneficiaries. Providers are unwilling to incur additional
administrative expenses that affect only a small number of patients.
Thus, providers are far more prone to non-participation in TRICARE than
in Medicare.
One problem is that TRICARE requires that each provider be
identified by each physical location where he or she performs services.
If a clinic has 50 providers that have privileges at 10 different
addresses in a clinic group, TRICARE requires 500 unique provider
numbers. Medicare and most commercial insurers are moving to embrace a
National Provider Indicator. TRICARE has been reluctant to change
because of concerns for identifying fraud, but Medicare has been
successful in fraud identification using one unique provider
identification number.
Another problem is that, TRICARE still requires submission of a
paper claim to determine medical necessity on a wide variety of claims
for Standard beneficiaries. This thwarts efforts to encourage
electronic claim submission and increases provider administrative
expenses and delays receipt of payments. Examples include speech
therapy, occupational/physical therapy, land or air ambulance service,
use of an assistant surgeon, nutritional therapy, transplants, durable
medical equipment, and pastoral counseling.
Another source of claims hassles and payment delays involve cases
of third party liability (e.g., auto insurance health coverage for
injuries incurred in auto accidents). Currently, TRICARE requires
claims to be delayed pending receipt of a third-party-liability form
from the beneficiary. This often delays payments for weeks and can
result in denial of the claim (and non-payment to the provider) if the
beneficiary doesn't get the form in on time. Recently, a major TRICARE
claims processing contractor recommended that these claims should be
processed regardless of diagnosis and that the third-party-liability
questionnaire should be sent out after the claim is processed to
eliminate protracted inconvenience to the provider of service.
The Coalition urges the subcommittee to direct DOD to
eliminate TRICARE-unique administrative requirements that deter
provider participation and thus contribute to denying
beneficiaries access to care.
Provider Education Needs Improvement
While these and other administrative impediments remain to be
corrected, the Coalition does believe that overall claims processing
timeliness has improved considerably from previous years.
We believe one reason for provider non-participation in TRICARE is
lack of information, outdated information, or previous bad experiences
with TRICARE in areas that have subsequently seen substantial
improvement. DOD is currently developing an annual newsletter for
TRICARE Standard beneficiaries and could generate an informative
newsletter to providers who have submitted claims. This will be all
well and good but the target group of providers that will not get a
newsletter or information are those who do not see TRICARE
beneficiaries. We look forward to working with DOD to improve efforts
to educate providers with respect to the differences between TRICARE
Standard and TRICARE Prime. A solid education and communication program
will go a long way to attract providers.
The Coalition recommends requiring DOD to work with the State
Medical Associations and the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid
Services to initiate an appropriate information program for
providers who will not see TRICARE patients, highlighting
specific improvements in claims/payment processing timeliness.
Tricare Reimbursement Rates
Physicians consistently report that TRICARE is virtually the
lowest-paying insurance plan in America. Other national plans typically
pay one-quarter to one-third higher rates. In some cases the difference
is even higher.
While TRICARE rates are tied to Medicare rates, TRICARE Managed
Care Support Contractors make concerted efforts to persuade providers
to participate in TRICARE Prime networks at a further discounted rate.
Since this is the only information providers receive about TRICARE,
they see TRICARE as even lower-paying than Medicare.
This is exacerbated by annual threats of further reductions in
TRICARE rates due to the statutory Medicare rate-setting formula.
Doctors are unhappy enough about reductions in Medicare rates, and many
already are reducing the number of Medicare patients they see.
But the problem is far more severe with TRICARE, because TRICARE
patients typically comprise a small minority of their beneficiary
caseload. Physicians may not be able to afford turning away large
numbers of Medicare patients, but they're more than willing to turn
away a small number of patients who have low-paying, high-
administrative-hassle TRICARE coverage.
Congress has acted to avoid Medicare physician reimbursement cuts
for the last 3 years, but the failure to provide a payment increase for
2006 is another step in the wrong direction according to physicians.
Further, Congress still has a long way to go in order to fix the
underlying reimbursement determination formula.
Correcting the statutory formula for Medicare and TRICARE physician
payments to more closely link adjustments to changes in actual practice
costs and resist payment reductions is a primary and essential step. We
fully understand that is not within the purview of this subcommittee,
but we urge your assistance in pressing the Ways and Means and Finance
Committees for action.
In the meantime, the rate freeze for 2006 makes it even more urgent
to consider some locality-based relief in TRICARE payment rates, given
that doctors see TRICARE as even less attractive than Medicare.
The TRICARE Management Activity has the authority to increase the
reimbursement rates when there is a provider shortage or extremely low
reimbursement rate for a specialty in a certain area and providers are
not willing to accept the low rates. In some cases, a State Medicaid
reimbursement for a similar service is higher than that of TRICARE. To
date, this authority has been used only in Alaska. One concern, as
mentioned previously, is that the Department has been reluctant to
establish a standard for adequacy of participation.
There are specialties that do not fall cleanly within the Medicare
reimbursement rates. Obstetrical and pediatric services have been a
constant source of aggravation for military beneficiaries and the
Managed Care Support Contractors. We applaud Congress' requirement for
a Comptroller General report on obstetrical and pediatric reimbursement
levels to ensure the adequacy of a quality network. We look forward to
its findings and in the meantime encourage DOD to make full use of its
authority to set higher rates for these specialties.
The Coalition urges the subcommittee to exert what influence
it can to persuade the Ways and Means/Finance Committees to
reform Medicare/TRICARE statutory payment formula. To the
extent the Medicare rate freeze continues, we urge the
subcommittee to encourage the Defense Department to use its
reimbursement rate adjustment authority as needed to sustain
provider acceptance.
The Coalition urges the subcommittee to require a Comptroller
General report on the relative propensity of physicians to
participate in Medicare vs. TRICARE, and the likely effect on
such relative participation of a further freeze in Medicare/
TRICARE physician payments.
Minimize the Differences between Medicare and TRICARE Coverage
DOD submitted a report to Congress last year indicating the
coverage differences between Medicare and TRICARE. The report showed
that there are at least a few services covered by Medicare that are not
covered by TRICARE. These include an initial physical at age 65,
chiropractic coverage, respite care, and certain hearing tests. We
believe that the TRICARE coverage should at least be the equal of
Medicare's in every area. Our military retirees have made sacrifices
far and above those who have not served and deserve no less coverage
than is provided to other Federal beneficiaries.
The Coalition urges the subcommittee to align TRICARE
coverage to at least match that offered by Medicare in every
area.
Guard and Reserve health care
The Coalition applauds the subcommittee for extending TRS coverage
to all member of the Selected Reserve in the NDAA for Fiscal Year 2006.
Since DOD is relying upon the Guard and Reserve personnel more heavily
and deployments are becoming longer and more frequent we must continue
to view these individuals as an indispensable part of our Armed Forces.
We should treat them accordingly.
Setting the TRS Premium
We have concerns over the manner at which the premiums for this
program are set. Currently, the DOD adjusts TRS premiums based on
annual adjustments to the basic FEHBP insurance option. This adjustment
mechanism has no relationship either to the Department's military
health care costs or to increases in eligible members' compensation.
The Coalition believes we have a higher obligation to restrain
health cost increases for currently serving military members who are
periodically being asked to leave their families and lay their lives on
the line for their country. These members deserve better than having
their health premiums raised arbitrarily by a formula that has no real
relationship to them.
The Coalition strongly recommends capping TRS premium
increases at a percentage not to exceed the percentage of their
basic pay raise.
Improve Premium Subsidies
Although we recognize that Congress took a huge step in expanding
eligibility to all members of the Selected Reserve, we are also aware
that the step finally taken fell well short of what both the House and
Senate Armed Services Committees initially recommended last year. We
are very concerned that the high premiums required for those who have
not been mobilized in the recent past will deter many Guard and Reserve
members from needed participation.
The Coalition recommends increasing the Federal subsidy for
TRS, at least for those members who do not have access to
employer-sponsored health coverage.
Private Insurance Premium Option
The Coalition believes Congress is missing an opportunity to reduce
its health care costs (for retired members as well as for Selected
reservists) by failing to authorize eligible members the option of
electing a partial subsidy of their civilian insurance premiums in lieu
of TRICARE coverage.
Many members would be motivated to elect this option, especially if
their family's current health care provider is reluctant to participate
in TRICARE. Rather than having to find a new provider who will accept
TRICARE, many beneficiaries may prefer a partial subsidy (at lower cost
to DOD) to preserve the convenience and continuity of their family's
health care.
The Department could calculate a maximum monthly payment level that
would represent a cost savings to the government, so that each member
who elected that option would reduce TRICARE costs.
The Coalition recommends developing a cost-effective option
to have DOD subsidize premiums for member's private insurance
as an alternative to TRICARE Reserve Select coverage. We
recommend a GAO report to identify the level of payment that
would represent a cost-effective option for the government.
USERRA protections
We very much appreciate Congress' continuing efforts to ensure that
USERRA provisions catch up to recent changes in members' service
requirements. One continuing need is to further strengthen rights under
USERRA to permit Reserve component members to retain employer-sponsored
insurance if coverage is terminated due to the existence of TRICARE
coverage, and to protect their re-enrollment rights in employer-
provided health coverage upon expiration of TAMP and 28-percent-
subsidized TRS coverage.
The Coalition urges continued efforts to ensure consistency
of benefits and continuity of care for Guard and Reserve
members and their families in an environment of increased
length and frequency of deployments.
Consistent Benefit
As time progresses and external changes occur, we are made aware of
pockets of individuals who for one reason or another are denied the
benefits that they should be eligible for. DOD and all its health
contractors were leaders in modifying policy and procedures to assist
Katrina victims. Additionally, Congress' action to extend eligibility
for TRICARE Prime coverage to children of deceased Active-Duty members
was truly the right thing to do.
Restoration of TRICARE for Widows
One group of individuals that has earned the TRICARE benefit is now
being closed out and needs to be brought back into the fold. When a
TRICARE-eligible widow/widower remarries, he/she loses TRICARE
benefits--and rightly so. When that individual's second marriage ends
in death or divorce, the individual has eligibility restored for
military identification card benefits, including SBP coverage,
commissary/exchange privileges, etc.--with the sole exception that
TRICARE eligibility is not restored.
This is out of line with other Federal health program practices,
such as the restoration of Civilian Health and Medicare Program of the
Veterans' Administration (CHAMPVA) eligibility for survivors of
veterans who died of service-connected causes. In those cases, VA
survivor benefits and health care are restored upon termination of the
remarriage.
Military survivors deserve equal treatment.
The Coalition recommends restoration of TRICARE benefits to
previously eligible survivors whose second or subsequent
marriage ends in death or divorce.
TRICARE Prime Remote exceptions
We thank Congress for the NDAA for Fiscal Year 2006 provision
allowing the Secretaries to waive the requirement for the spouse to
reside with the servicemember for purposes of TRICARE Prime Remote
eligibility if the service determines special circumstances warrant
such coverage. We remain concerned about the potential for inconsistent
application of eligibility, however.
With longer deployments and sea shore and overseas assignment
patterns families are faced with some tough decisions. A spouse and
children may find it easier and more supportive to reside with or
around relatives during extended separations from their Active-Duty
spouse. The special authority is a step in the right direction, but
there is a wide variety of circumstances that could dictate a family
separation of some duration, and the Coalition believes each family is
in the best situation to make its own best decision.
The Coalition recommends removal of the requirement for the
family members to reside with the Active-Duty member to qualify
for the TRICARE Prime Remote Program.
BRAC, Rebasing, and Relocation
Relocation from one geographic region to another brings multiple
problems. A smooth health care transition is crucial to a successful
relocation. That means ensuring a robust provider network and capacity
is available as long as members and families remain in either losing or
gaining locations affected by BRAC and global rebasing. A major effort
is essential by the Department and its Managed Care Support Contractors
to ensure smooth beneficiary transition from one geographic area to
another.
It also is important to sustain Prime networks at closing locations
to protect health care access for Guard/Reserve and retired members and
families remaining in the area. We stress the importance of
coordination of construction and funding in order to maintain access
and operations while the process takes place.
We urge Congress to codify the requirement to provide TRICARE
Prime in BRAC-affected areas and ensure, via a report from DOD,
that adequate health resources are available to provide care
within access standards for those affected by rebasing.
Mental Health
We are most appreciative of the extra effort the subcommittee made
in the NDAA for Fiscal Year 2006 to assist members and families who may
be affected by PTSD or other psychological conditions. The pilot
projects on PTSD and creation of a Task Force on Mental Health are
major steps to establish outreach and ensure returning members and
their families get timely access to the care they need.
We support the establishment of a meaningful pre- and post-
deployment mental health screening process to ensure members and their
families are referred to and receive appropriate interventional
services. We will be very interested in the results of the studies
Congress has required of DOD on this topic and look forward to working
with DOD and Congress as the results are completed.
The Coalition strongly urges Congress to closely monitor DOD
and VA implementation of much-needed Post Traumatic Stress
Disorder awareness and treatment programs.
Pharmacy
The TRICARE Pharmacy benefit must remain strong and affordable and
meet the pharmaceutical needs of millions of eligible beneficiaries.
While we are pleased at the overall operation of the program, the
Coalition does have concerns about certain apparent trends.
In particular, we are concerned about ongoing efforts to shift
disproportional cost increases onto military beneficiaries.
Pharmacy Copayment Changes
The Coalition is concerned that, 5 years after pharmacy copayment
levels were established, the Department is proposing a 67-percent
increase in retail copayments. The rationale for the proposed increase
is the rapid growth in retail pharmacy use since enactment of TRICARE
For Life.
The Coalition believes strongly that uniformed services
beneficiaries deserve more stability in their benefit levels, and that
DOD has not performed due diligence in exploring other ways to reduce
pharmacy costs without shifting such increased expense burdens to
beneficiaries. Thus far, the Department has refused to negotiate with
drug companies for discounts in the retail arena. Not enough has been
done to educate beneficiaries and providers on the advantages of the
mail-order program. The Department has failed to centralize purchasing
and filling of prescriptions for high-cost drugs, as the Air Force has
done successfully.
Last year, Congress rightfully rejected the administration's
proposal to double VA pharmacy copayments for certain categories of
nondisabled veterans. This year, the VA increased copayments by $1 for
those categories, a much more reasonable adjustment that would not have
happened without Congress' intervention. Military beneficiaries deserve
no less protection.
A formula that limits pharmacy copayment increases to the lesser of
the percentage increase in basic pay or retired pay, rounded down to
the next lower dollar, would provide for modest periodic adjustments
consistent with beneficiary income increases. DOD should not modify
copayment rates until all medications that are available in the retail
system are also available in the mail order program.
The Coalition recommends no changes to the copayment rates
until all medications are available in the mail order program
and limiting any future pharmacy copayment increases to the
lesser of the percentage increase in basic pay or retired pay,
rounded down to the next lower dollar.
Most of all, the Department has ignored what the Coalition believes
would create the most powerful incentive for beneficiaries to shift
from the more costly retail program to the mail order program--
eliminating mail-order copays. While modest already, mail-order
copayments entail considerable processing expense for the contractor
and DOD. In many cases, the processing expense is greater than the
value of the copayment. Marketers know that offering something for free
is a powerful economic incentive. The Coalition believes that
eliminating mail-order copayments altogether would send a strong
economic and educational message to beneficiaries on the advantages of
the mail-order system, and that the government would realize very large
savings from this change.
The average drug purchased in the mail-order system saves the
government $49 relative to providing the drug through the retail
system. If all mail-order copayments would be eliminated, the savings
would still be at least $43 per prescription (in fact, savings would be
larger, since the government would no longer pay contractors to process
copayments). Elimination of mail-order copays would save the government
$20 million for each 1 percent of prescriptions that migrate from the
retail to the mail-order pharmacy system.
The Coalition recommends eliminating beneficiary copayments
in the mail-order pharmacy system for generic and brand name
medications to incentivize use of this lowest-cost venue and
generate substantial cost savings.
Rapid Expansion of ``Third Tier'' Formulary
The Coalition very much appreciated the efforts of the subcommittee
to protect beneficiary interests by establishing a statutory
requirement for a Beneficiary Advisory panel (BAP) to give beneficiary
representatives an opportunity in a public forum to voice our concerns
about any medications DOD proposes moving to the third tier ($22 co-
pay). We were further reassured when, during implementation planning,
Defense officials advised the BAP that they did not plan on moving many
medications to the third tier.
Unfortunately, this has not been the case. To date, DOD has moved
41 medications to the third tier. While the BAP did not object to most
of these, the BAP input has been universally ignored in the small
number of cases when it recommended against a proposed
reclassification. In at least one case, the medications moved to the
third tier affected 98 percent of the beneficiaries with prescriptions
in that particular class of drug. The Coalition is also concerned that
the BAP has been denied access to information on relative costs of the
drugs proposed for reclassification and the DOD has established no
mechanism to provide feedback to the BAP on why its recommendations are
being ignored.
The Coalition believes the subcommittee envisioned that the BAP
would be allowed a substantive input in the Uniform Formulary decision
process, but that has not happened. We hope to address this matter
substantively with the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Health
Affairs (ASD(HA)).
The Coalition urges the subcommittee to monitor DOD's
consideration of BAP input in future uniform formulary
decisions and reassert its intent that the Panel should have a
substantive role in the process, including access to meaningful
data on relative cost of drugs in each affected class.
The Coalition recommends a GAO review of the Uniform
Formulary process to determine whether actions taken thus far
have realized the projected savings.
TRICARE Prime and Managed Care Support Contractor Issues
DOD and its health contractors are continually trying to improve
the level of TRICARE Prime service. We appreciate their inclusion of
our associations in their process improvement activities and will
continue to work with them to ensure the program remains beneficiary-
focused and services are enhanced, to include: Beneficiary education,
network stability, service level quality, uniformity of benefit between
regions (as contractors implement best business practices), and access
to care.
Referral and Authorization System
There has been much discussion and consternation concerning the
Enterprise Wide Referral and Authorization system. Much time, effort
and money have been invested in a program that has not come to
fruition. Is adding to the administrative paperwork requirements and
forcing the civilian network providers into a referral system really
accomplishing what DOD set out to do? Rather than forcing unique
referral requirements on providers, perhaps DOD should look at
expanding its Primary care base in the Prime Service Areas and capture
the workload directly.
The Coalition recommends that Congress require a cost
analysis report concerning the referral process within DOD and
reliance on Civilian Network Providers within an MTF's Prime
Service Area.
DOD/VA Transition
TMC is grateful that the NDAA for Fiscal Year 2005 required DOD to
do a better job of collecting baseline health status data through a
formal medical readiness tracking and health surveillance system.
Seamless Transition
Our Nation's service men and women deserve first class treatment
and services before, during and after separation from military service.
DOD and VA have critical, complementary roles in the transition
process. Unfortunately, bureaucratic inertia and intramural priorities
in DOD and the VA have slowed the pace of collaborative efforts towards
the goal of ``seamless transition''. Some of these efforts have been
going on for decades 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.
Single Separation Exam
We are particularly concerned about the significant gaps in
implementing a single separation physical 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 VA are headquartered
here. It seems reasonable to expect the Washington, DC MTFs to serve as
models for other DOD and VA medical delivery systems. TMC recommends
the committees to provide continued oversight to ensure that this
important program is implemented promptly and effectively at all sites.
Electronic Medical Record
DOD has developed an electronic health record system (AHLTA) that
will provide DOD providers with real-time, centrally based access to
beneficiary health information regardless of current location. This is
a wonderful advancement and we applaud DOD's efforts. However, the
current system still does not allow direct transfer of this information
to the VA upon separation of an Active-Duty member. This poses a major
problem which must be corrected as soon as possible. We look forward to
seeing the results of the report on this topic as required by the NDAA
for Fiscal Year 2006 and hope that Congress will demand a highly
ambitious implementation of two-way electronic data exchange between
DOD and VA.
The Coalition urges the committee to direct and oversee a
concerted ``Manhattan Project'' effort to ensure full and
timely implementation of seamless transition activities, a bi-
directional EMR, enhanced post-deployment health assessments,
and one-stop physical at time of discharge.
Tax Law Changes
Many uniformed services beneficiaries pay annual enrollment fees
for TRICARE Prime, and premiums for supplemental health insurance, such
as a TRICARE supplement, the TRICARE Dental and Retiree Dental Plans,
or for long-term care insurance. For most military beneficiaries, these
premiums are not tax-deductible because their annual out-of-pocket
costs for health care expenses do not exceed 7.5 percent of their
adjusted gross taxable income. In 2000, a Presidential directive
allowed Federal employees who participate in FEHBP to have premiums for
that program deducted from their pay on a pre-tax basis. Similar
legislation for all active and retired military and Federal civilian
beneficiaries would restore equity with private sector workers, many of
whom already can pay their health premiums with pre-tax dollars. Tax
incentives will help offset the cost of these important coverages,
promote enrollment, and reduce members' liability for catastrophic
expenses.
The Coalition urges all Armed Services Committee members to
press the Ways and Means and Finance Committees to approve
legislation to allow all beneficiaries to pay TRICARE-related
insurance premiums in pre-tax dollars, to include TRICARE Prime
enrollment fees and premiums for TRICARE Standard supplements,
long-term care insurance, and TRICARE dental premiums.
Dental Issues
Former Spouse Dental Coverage
The TRICARE Retiree Dental plan offers retirees the option to
purchase a dental insurance policy. There is only one category of
TRICARE-eligible beneficiaries who are denied eligibility to
participate in the TRICARE Retiree Dental Plan--otherwise qualifying
former spouses. The Coalition believes this inconsistency is
inappropriate.
The Coalition recommends allowing TRICARE-eligible former
spouses to participate in the TRICARE Retiree Dental Plan.
Retiree Dental Plan
The TRICARE Retiree Dental Plan is contractor-operated and is not
subsidized by the government. Retired beneficiary premiums must cover
the total cost of the program. For retirees, this has become an
increasing monthly expense, with some choosing to forego dental care.
For the long term, the Coalition would like to see some level of
government subsidy for the TRICARE Retiree Dental Plan.
The Coalition recommends a GAO study of the viability of
subsidizing the retiree dental program, including the likely
long-term impact of different subsidy levels on retiree
participation and dental health.
active force issues
The Coalition appreciates the subcommittee's many actions to help
relieve the stress of repeated deployments--end strength increases,
bonus improvements, family separation, and danger area pay increases,
and more.
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. They are enduring longer duty days; increased family
separations; cutbacks in installation services; less opportunity to use
education benefits; and significant out-of-pocket expenses with each
PCS move.
Intensified and sustained operations in Iraq and Afghanistan are
being met by servicemembers' patriotic dedication, but retention must
be an increasing concern as 1 percent of Americans continue to bear the
entire burden of national sacrifice in the global war on terrorism.
Service leaders may tout seemingly high retention figures, but the
Coalition cannot reconcile this with the ever-increasing stresses on
military families.
Military families have continued to demonstrate their exceptional
support of servicemembers' long, recurring deployments; yet, 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. Unless they see
some prospect of near-term respite, 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. High retention simply cannot continue to
co-exist with such levels of high operations tempo and family
separations, despite the reluctance of some to see anything but rosy
scenarios.
The Coalition views with alarm the Defense Department's
determination to sacrifice troop levels to pay for weapons systems,
with seemingly little regard for the impact these decisions will have
on servicemembers and their future retention. The finest weapon systems
in the world will be of little use if the Services don't have enough
high quality, well-trained people to operate, maintain and support
them.
The Coalition believes the ``weapons or people'' debate is a
patently false one--akin to forcing a choice between one's left and
right arms.
Pay Raises
Now that the statutory requirement to reduce the relative military
``pay gap'' has expired, the Coalition is concerned that an
administration looking for ways to cut people costs may seek to
reintroduce the failed practice of capping military raises. In the
relatively recent past, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB)
advocated capping military pay raises at the level of inflation, rather
than restoring comparability with private sector wage growth. The
measure of merit with pay raises is not inflation--it's the draw from
the private sector. 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 to your efforts, the gap
has been reduced to 4.4 percent in 2006. But while the subcommittee
recently established private sector wage growth as the statutory
standard for future military pay raises, there is no longer any
statutory requirement to continue reducing the current comparability
gap.
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. Those targeted raises
were intended to establish a new pay comparability standard, setting
military pay at the 70th percentile of earnings for private workers of
comparable age, experience, and education as recommended by the 9th
Quadrennial Review of Military Compensation..
In recent years, however, the OMB has denied DOD's request to
continue targeted raises for career servicemembers--a decision that
deeply disappointed the Coalition.
Pay and allowance raises and higher reenlistment bonuses are
essential to reduce other significant career irritants, but they can't
fix fatigue and lengthy, frequent family separations.
A recent RAND Corporation survey indicated that the higher
operations tempo and extended working hours, even when not deployed,
are taking a toll on military members and families that will harm
retention. Over the long run, experience has shown that time and again
that time spent away from the family--whether on deployment or at the
home duty station--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 providing military
pay raises that exceed the Employment Cost Index until such
time as full military pay comparability has been restored. The
Coalition further recommends targeted increases for selected
noncommissioned officers/petty officers and warrant officers as
needed to attain the 70th-percentile comparability standard.
Maintain Well-funded Family Readiness, Support Structure, and
Morale, Welfare and Recreation Programs
Today, two-thirds of Active-Duty families and virtually all Guard
and Reserve families live off military installations, and more than
one-half 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, especially when
military families are coping with the increased deployments and
separation.
More needs to be done to ``connect'' servicemembers and their
families with important resources. Military OneSource has provided a
great start to improve family readiness; however, a more aggressive
outreach effort is needed to educate servicemembers and their families
on the benefits and programs to which they are entitled. These outreach
efforts need to address the unique needs of National Guard and Reserve
families to include transitioning to and from Active-Duty status.
Traditional delivery systems of ``build it and they will come'' no
longer serve the transforming military community of today that is
increasingly non-installation based. More robust outreach delivery
systems and programs are called for that can be accessed anywhere and
anytime.
Additionally, we cannot forget Public Health Service families as
deployments are expected to increase under Public Health Service
transformation initiatives. A systematic and integrated family support
system will help families cope with deployment stresses and military
life demands. Addressing such issues as childcare, spousal employment/
education, flexible-spending accounts, increases in Servicemembers
Group Life Insurance, and other quality-of-life concerns will go a long
way in enhancing family well-being and improving retention and morale
of the force.
Because of multiple DOD modernization efforts (global rebasing,
Army modularity, and BRAC initiatives) that are occurring
simultaneously, TMC is concerned about the synchronization, pace of
planning, implementation timetables, timing of budgets and resource
allocations, and the evaluation of the rebasing and BRAC plans. TMC
asks Congress to ensure necessary family support/quality-of-life
program dollars are in line with the DOD/military services overseas
rebasing and BRAC plans. Further, the Coalition urges Congress to
insist that support services and infrastructure remain in place at both
the closing and the gaining installations, throughout the transition
period.
The Coalition appreciates the recent congressional enhancements in
military childcare, family readiness, and supportive counseling
programs to assist families in dealing with deployments and the return
of servicemembers. Family support, quality-of-life, and morale,
welfare, and recreation (MWR) programs are especially critical to the
readiness of our forces and the support of their families during
periods of conflict and extended separations. Therefore, the Coalition
urges the subcommittee to block any DOD initiative that withholds,
reduces, or eliminates program dollar availability for military
beneficiaries. In order for these programs to flourish, they require
consistent sourcing, deliberate outreach, and must remain flexible to
meet emerging challenges.
The Military Coalition urges Congress to maintain a well-
funded family readiness and support structure to enhance family
well-being and to improve retention and morale.
The Coalition also asks Congress to highlight and protect the
interests of all beneficiaries impacted by overseas rebasing,
Army modularity, and BRAC and ensure support services and
infrastructure remain in place throughout the entire transition
period for all beneficiary populations.
Personnel Strengths
The Coalition has been disappointed at the Defense Department's
annual resistance to Congress' repeated offers to permanently increase
Service end strength to relieve the stress on today's Armed Forces.
While we are encouraged by the subcommittee's work to increase Army and
Marine Corps end strength and authorizing much needed recruiting and
retention bonuses; however, we are deeply concerned that
administration-proposed plans rely too heavily on overly optimistic
retention assumptions, overuse of the Guard and Reserves, optimistic
scenarios in Southwest Asia, and the absence of new contingency needs.
The Department has indicated that it prefers to ``transform''
forces, placing non-mission essential resources in core warfighting
skills, and transferring certain functions to civilians. However, any
such implementation will take a long time while we continue to exhaust
our downsized forces.
In addition, the Department is already cutting back even on those
plans, proposing to reduce six Army National Guard brigades, reduce
planned growth in the number of Active-Duty brigades, continue
systematic personnel reductions within the Navy, and impose further
dramatic reductions in Air Force personnel. Media reports indicate that
previous plans to civilianize military positions have been changed, and
that substantial numbers of military positions now will simply be
eliminated, without civilian replacements--imposing even greater stress
on the remaining force.
Force reductions envisioned in the Quadrennial Defense Review are
being undertaken not because of any reduction in mission, but simply to
free up billions of dollars for weapons programs.
Defense leaders warn that the long-term mission against terrorism
will require sustained, large deployments to Central Asia and
elsewhere, but the Services are being denied the manpower to meet those
requirements without unacceptable impacts on members' and families'
quality-of-life.
If the administration does not recognize when extra missions exceed
the capacity to perform them, Congress must assume that obligation.
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. The DOD Inspector General reported that
visits to 14 units found that four units deployed with less than 80
percent of their senior enlisted warfighting positions filled.
According to the report, ``personnel in those units were exposed to a
higher level of risk for mishap or injury during their deployment.''
Planned strength reductions can only exacerbate this problem.
The Military Coalition strongly urges sustaining end
strengths to meet mission requirements, and opposing force
reductions that have the primary purpose of paying for other
programs.
Access to Quality Housing
The Military Coalition thanks Congress and the subcommittee for
this past year's provision that provides temporary housing allowance
adjustments for military members affected by disasters. Additionally,
the Coalition is particularly grateful for the subcommittee's multi-
year effort to raise housing allowances to cover 100 percent of
servicemembers' median housing costs, by grade and location. But the
recent achievement of that goal doesn't satisfy all of the housing
problem, especially for enlisted members. Fundamental flaws in the
standards used to make those calculations remain to be corrected.
The Coalition supports revised housing standards that are more
realistic and appropriate for each pay grade. Many enlisted personnel
are unaware of the standards for their respective pay grade and assume
that their BAH level is determined by a higher standard or by the type
of housing for which they would qualify if they live on a military
installation. For example, only 1 percent of the enlisted force (E-9)
is eligible for BAH sufficient to pay for a 3-bedroom single-family
detached house, even though thousands of more junior enlisted members
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.
In addition, we urge the subcommittee to keep close vigilance on
two areas that could potentially impact military members and families,
housing privatization initiatives and the end of geographic housing
rate protection. The Coalition will monitor the impact of these
initiatives to ensure increases to occupant costs and housing
allowances are applied uniformly and that military personnel accounts
remain adequate to ensure servicemembers on average have zero out of
pocket costs for housing at the standard for their rank.
The Military Coalition urges correction of military housing
standards that inequitably depress BAH rates for mid to senior
enlisted members by assuming their occupancy of inappropriately
small quarters.
Flexible Spending Accounts
The Coalition cannot comprehend the DOD's continuing failure to
implement existing statutory authority for Active-Duty and Selected
Reserve members to participate in FSAs.
All other Federal employees and corporate civilian employees are
able to use this authority to save thousands of dollars a year by
paying out-of-pocket health care and dependent care expenses with pre-
tax dollars. It is unconscionable that the Department has failed to
implement this money-saving program for the military members who are
bearing the entire burden of national sacrifice in the global war on
terrorism.
We are grateful to the subcommittee for its report language in the
NDAA for Fiscal Year 2006 that requires a Pentagon report to Congress
with a plan to evaluate and implement this much-needed program.
TMC urges the subcommittee to continue pressing the DOD until
servicemembers are provided the same eligibility to participate
in Flexible Spending Accounts that all other Federal employees
and corporate employees enjoy.
Permanent Change of Station Reimbursement Needs
The Military Coalition is most appreciative of the significant
increases in the Temporary Lodging Expense 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 NDAA for Fiscal
Year 2004 to provide full replacement value for household goods lost or
damaged by private carriers during government directed moves, but is
concerned that the DOD has not yet implemented its ``Family First'' re-
engineering that would allow payment under this provision. The
Coalition appreciates this past year's gains and Congress' support by
modifying the personal property weight allowances for senior enlisted
grades (E-7, E-8, and E-9).
These were significant steps to upgrade allowances that had been
unchanged over many years. Even with these changes, servicemembers
continue to incur significant out-of-pocket costs in complying with
government-directed relocation orders.
For example, PCS mileage rates still have not been adjusted since
1985. The current rates range from 15 to 20 cents per mile--less than
half the 2006 temporary duty mileage rate of 44.5 cents per mile for
military members and Federal civilians. 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
privately-owned vehicle 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 spouses' career progression. The
Coalition believes strongly that the Nation that requires military
families to incur these disruptions should not be requiring them to
bear the resulting high expenses out of their own pockets.
The Military Coalition supports upgrading permanent change-
of-station allowances to reflect the expenses members are
forced to incur in complying with government-directed
relocations.
Dependent Education Needs
Quality education is an instrumental retention tool for DOD--we
recruit the member, but retain the family. However, many ongoing
initiatives--housing privatization, service transformation, overseas
rebasing, and BRAC--will have a direct impact on the surrounding
communities that provide educational programs for our military
families. A positive step in the right direction is reflected by the
subcommittee's efforts in the NDAA for Fiscal Year 2006 that provided
increased Impact Aid funding for highly impacted school districts with
significant military student enrollment.
The Coalition urges the subcommittee to continue its priority
on mitigating adverse effects of government decisions on
military children's education.
Affordability of children's college education is a critical issue
for military families. This is of particularly importance for members
whose frequent moves cause difficulties in satisfying eligibility
requirements for graduation and in-State tuition rates. Some States,
but not all, authorize in-State tuition eligibility for servicemembers
assigned within the State. A smaller number allows continuation of such
eligibility for already enrolled children after the member is
reassigned out of the State, recognizing the difficulty of completing a
degree during one military assignment. Graduation requirements also
vary greatly by State-by-State. Military children or family members
often must repeat course work and incur additional costs because school
credits do not transfer to another State.
The Coalition urges the subcommittee to support nationwide
in-State tuition eligibility for service families in the State
in which the member is assigned or the member's home State of
record, and continuity of in-State tuition once established for
a military student.
The Coalition also urges support of a nationwide reciprocity
standard to allow full transfer of school credits for
graduation requirements for service and family members.
The Coalition continues to believe that it would be a
powerful career retention incentive to authorize
transferability of at least a portion of MGIB benefits to
family members for long-serving members who agree to complete a
military career.
Montgomery GI Bill
Military transformation and rising pressures on the Total Force
point to the need to restructure the MGIB, which Congress intended to
support military recruitment as well as transition. The Coalition notes
with appreciation that Congress has 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 greater retention. Moreover, double-
digit education inflation is dramatically diminishing the value of
MGIB. Despite recent increases, MGIB benefits fall well short of 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 Veterans' Educational Assistance Program (VEAP) era
but declined to enroll in that program (in many cases, on the advice of
government education officials) have been denied a MGIB enrollment
opportunity.
The Coalition urges the subcommittee's support for a 21st
century MGIB, with benefit amounts indexed to the cost of a 4-
year education at a public institution, and no reduction in
benefits for education obtained while on Active-Duty.
guard and reserve issues
More than a half a million 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 at any time since World War II.
Guard/Reserve operational tempo has placed enormous strains on
reservists, their family members, and their civilian employers that
were never anticipated by the designers of Guard and Reserve personnel
and compensation programs.
The Coalition fully supports the prominent role of the Guard and
Reserve Forces in the national security equation. However, many Guard
and Reserve members are facing increased family stresses and financial
burdens under the current policy of multiple extended activations over
the course of a Reserve career. Many Reserve component leaders are
rightly alarmed over likely manpower losses if action is not taken to
relieve pressures on Guard and Reserve troops.
The Coalition believes it is essential to substantively address
critical Guard and Reserve personnel, pay, and benefits issues--along
with Active-Duty manpower increases--to alleviate those pressures and
help retain these qualified, trained professionals.
The Coalition greatly appreciates this subcommittee's effort to
address several Guard and Reserve priorities with the NDAA for Fiscal
Year 2006. Specifically, the Coalition commends the subcommittee for
implementing limited income replacement authority for mobilized members
and extending fee-based TRICARE eligibility to all drilling Guard and
Reserve members. Still, we believe that more must be done 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 is absolutely dependent on these valuable members of our
national military team to meet ongoing readiness requirements.
Guard/Reserve Health Care
The Military Coalition recognizes Congress' significant progress
over the last 2 years in authorizing ``TRICARE Reserve Select''
coverage for all drilling Guard and Reserve members. Nevertheless, the
Coalition believes strongly the new authority falls short of meeting
the reasonable needs of these members and their families.
We believe the enrollment fees will prove cost-prohibitive for
members who have not been mobilized since September 11, 2001, and the
high fees represent an ill-advised deterrent to members we need to
retain in the Reserve components. Such fees are particularly unfair for
members who do not have access to other health insurance coverage.
The Coalition strongly recommends increasing subsidy levels
for TRICARE coverage for drilling Guard/Reserve members not yet
mobilized and having one set rate for members of the Guard and
Reserve who continue to be drilling members.
The Coalition supports further strengthening rights under
USERRA to permit Reserve component members to retain employer-
sponsored insurance if coverage is terminated due to TRICARE
benefits provided 90 days prior to mobilization.
The Coalition supports extending military dental coverage to
reservists for 180 days post mobilization (during TAMP), unless
the individual's dental readiness is restored to T-2 condition
before demobilization.
Guard/Reserve Retirement Age
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 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 Congress to reduce the age when
a Guard and Reserve member is eligible for retirement pay,
particularly for those members who have experienced extended
mobilizations.
Transition Assistance Services and Protections
Congressional hearings and media reports have documented that many
of the half-million mobilized Guard and Reserve members have not
received the transition services they and their families need to make a
successful readjustment to civilian status. Needed improvements
include, but are not limited to, the following:
Funding to develop tailored Transition Assistance
Program (TAP) services in the hometown area following release
from Active-Duty
Expansion of VA outreach to provide ``benefits
delivery at discharge'' in the hometown setting
Authority for mobilized Guard and Reserve members to
file Flexible Spending Account claims with a civilian employer
for a prior reporting year after return from Active-Duty
Authority for employers and employees to contribute to
401(k) and 403(b) accounts during mobilization
Enactment of academic protections for mobilized Guard
and Reserve students, such as academic standing and refund
guarantees and exemption from making Federal student loan
payments during activation
Automatic waivers on scheduled licensing/
certification/promotion exams scheduled during a mobilization
Reemployment rights protection for Guard and Reserve
spouses who must suspend employment to care for children during
mobilization
Stronger credit protections under the Servicemembers
Civil Relief Act
TMC urges funding of tailored `TAP' services and enactment of
stronger economic, financial, academic, health and legal
protections for Guard and Reserve members and their families.
``Total Force'' Montgomery GI Bill
The Nation's Active-Duty, National Guard, and Reserve Forces are
operationally integrated under the Total Force policy. But educational
benefits under the MGIB neither reflect that policy nor match benefits
to service commitment. TMC is grateful to Congress for significant
increases in Active-Duty MGIB benefits enacted prior to September 11,
2001, but little has been done since then.
For the first 15 years of the MGIB, Reserve MGIB benefits (Chapter
1606, Title 10 USC) maintained almost 50 percent parity with Active-
Duty MGIB benefits. Slippage from the 50 percent level began following
the September 11, 2001 attacks. Today the Guard and Reserve MGIB pays
less than 29 percent of the Active-Duty program. Congress attempted to
address the gap by authorizing a new MGIB program (chapter 1607, title
10 USC) for Guard and Reserve servicemembers mobilized for more than 90
days in a contingency operation. More than a year after the law was
changed, the new ``1607'' program still has not been implemented.
Further, there is no readjustment benefit for MGIB benefits earned by
mobilized reservists. If the benefit is not used during the period of
their Reserve service, it is lost. This is a non-benefit at best, and
false advertising at worst, when members are effectively precluded from
using their MGIB entitlement because of repeated mobilizations.
A ``total force'' MGIB program is needed to integrate all
components of the MGIB under title 38, benchmark benefits to the
average cost of a public college education, and provide equity of
benefits for service rendered. A total force approach to the MGIB will
better support Active and Reserve recruitment programs, readjustment to
civilian life and administration of the program.
TMC supports the integration of all elements of the MGIB
under title 38, restoring benefit rates commensurate with
service performed, and a post-service eligibility period for
Selected Reserve members.
Guard and 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 the global
war on terrorism continues. Reserve component families live in
communities throughout the Nation, and most of these communities are
not close to military installations. These families face unique
challenges in the absence of mobilized members, since they don't have
access to traditional family support services enjoyed by Active-Duty
members on military installations.
Providing a core set of family programs and benefits that meet the
unique needs of these families is essential to 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:
Web-based programs and employee assistance programs
such as 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 families of individual augmentees or those who
are geographically dispersed
Expanded programs between military and community
religious leaders to support servicemembers and families during
all phases of deployments
The availability of robust preventive counseling
services for servicemembers and families and training so they
know when to seek professional help related to their
circumstances
Enhanced education for Guard and Reserve family
members about their rights and benefits
Innovative and effective ways to meet the Guard and
Reserve community's needs for occasional child care,
particularly for preventive respite care, volunteering, and
family readiness group meetings and drill time
A joint family readiness program to facilitate
understanding and sharing of information between all family
members, no matter what the service
TMC urges Congress to continue and expand its emphasis on
providing consistent funding and increased outreach to connect
Guard and Reserve families with these support programs.
overseas rebasing, base realignment and closure issues
Thousands military members and families will be under great stress
in the months and years ahead as a result of rebasing, closure, and
transformation actions. But the impact extends beyond the Active-Duty
personnel currently assigned to the affected installations. The entire
local community--school districts, chambers of commerce, Guard/Reserve,
retirees, survivors, civil servants, and others--experiences the
traumatic impact of a rebasing or closure action. Jobs are lost or
transferred, installation support facilities are closed, and
beneficiaries who relied on the base for support are forced to search
elsewhere.
The Coalition urges the subcommittee to ensure rebasing plans are
not executed without ensuring full support is available to families as
long as they are present at losing installations and before they arrive
at gaining installations. The critical family support/quality-of-life
programs include MWR, childcare, exchanges and commissaries, housing,
health care, education, family centers, and other traditional support
programs.
The Coalition will actively be engaged in ensuring the
implementations of the 2005 BRAC recommendations, Service
transformation initiatives, global repositioning, and Army modularity
initiatives not only take each beneficiary community into
consideration, but also to advocate for beneficiaries significantly
impacted by these initiatives.
The Military Coalition urges the subcommittee to monitor the
implementation of rebasing, BRAC, and service transformation
initiatives to ensure protection of support services for all
military members and their families.
survivor program issues
The Coalition thanks the subcommittee for past support of
improvements to the Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP), especially the NDAA
for Fiscal Year 2005 provision that will phase out the SBP age-62
benefit reduction in the next 2 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 and 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, 2006.
SBP-DIC Offset
The Coalition was extremely disappointed that House and Senate
conferees failed to make at least some progress in the NDAA for Fiscal
Year 2006 to ease the unfair law that reduces military SBP annuities by
the amount of any survivor benefits payable from the VA 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 (about $1,000 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 60,000 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
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
only a $1,000 monthly annuity from the VA. Military members whose
service costs them their lives deserve fairer compensation for their
surviving spouses.
The Military Coalition strongly supports legislation to
repeal the SBP-DIC offset introduced by Senator Nelson (D-FL)
(S. 185) and Representative Brown (R-SC) (H.R. 808),
respectively. Enactment remains a top Coalition goal for 2006.
30-Year Paid-Up SBP
Congress approved a provision in the NDAA 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 2006, a 1972 retiree already will have paid 25 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 to pay 34 percent more than their 1978 counterparts.
We hope that, with only 2 years remaining before the change becomes
law anyway, Congress will provide at least this last modest measure of
relief to ``Greatest Generation'' retirees who already have paid far
more than their fair share of SBP premiums.
The Military Coalition recommends a 2-year acceleration of
the implementation date for paid-up SBP coverage, so that it
takes effect on October 1, 2006.
Final Retired Pay Check
The Military Coalition believes the policy requiring 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 require 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. In
most cases, the latter method is used, which often imposes a sudden,
severe and unexpected financial hardship on the survivor.
The Coalition believes this is an inappropriate and insensitive
policy, coming at the most difficult time for a deceased member's next
of kin. Unlike his or her Active-Duty counterpart, the survivor of a
retiree receives no death gratuity to assist with transition expenses.
Many older retirees have been able to provide little or no financial
cushion for surviving spouses in the case of a sudden demise. Very
often, the surviving spouse already 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 takes extended time and strains the surviving spouse's
ability to meet the immediate financial obligations in the wake of the
death of the average family's ``bread winner.''
The Military Coalition urges Congress to allow survivors of
retirees to retain the full month's retired pay for the month
in which the retired member dies.
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
The Military Coalition applauds the progress the subcommittee has
made in recent years to expand combat-related special compensation to
all retirees with combat-related disabilities and authorize concurrent
receipt of retired pay and veterans' disability compensation for
retirees with disabilities of at least 50 percent.
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.
We recognized that many in Congress are looking to the Veterans
Disability Benefits Commission for recommendations on this issue, and
the Coalition fully expects the Commission will validate the principle
that a military retiree should not forfeit any portion of earned
retired pay simply because he or she also had the misfortune of
incurring a service-connected disability.
But we are concerned that the recent 1-year extension of the
Commission's work can only delay an equitable outcome further. In the
meantime, we believe action is needed on at least two critical areas on
which we believe there should be little question as to their propriety.
As a priority, the Coalition asks the subcommittee to consider
those who had their careers cut short solely because they became
disabled by combat, or combat-related events, and were forced into
medical retirement before they could complete their careers.
Under current law, a member who is shot in the finger and retires
at 20 years of service with a 10-percent combat-related disability is
rightly protected against having that disability compensation from his
or her earned retired pay.
But a member who is shot through the spine, becomes a quadriplegic
and is forced to retire with 19 years and 11 months of service, suffers
full deduction of VA disability compensation from his or her retired
pay. This is grossly inequitable.
For chapter 61 (disability) retirees who have more than 20 years of
service, the government recognizes that part of that retired pay is
earned by service, and part of it is extra compensation for the
service-incurred disability. The added amount for disability is still
subject to offset by any VA disability compensation, but the service-
earned portion (at 2.5 percent of pay times years of service) is
protected against such offset.
The Coalition believes strongly that a member who is forced to
retired short of 20 years of service because of a combat disability
must be ``vested'' in the service-earned share of retired pay at the
same 2.5 percent per year of service rate as members with 20+ years of
service, as envisioned in H.R. 1366. This 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 urges the subcommittee to expand combat-related
special compensation to members who were medically compelled to
retire short of 20 years of service solely because of their
combat-incurred disabilities, as envisioned in H.R. 1366.
The Coalition also believes the subcommittee recognizes the
inequity of the current situation in which members paid as 100 percent
disabled retirees by virtue of being designated by the VA as
``unemployable'' face significant discrimination. For purposes of
combat-related special compensation, they suffer no disability offset,
but those with non-combat disabilities--alone among all other 100
percent-disabled retirees--must wait many more years to see this
inequity end.
In the NDAA for Fiscal Year 2006, Congress reduced their 10-year
wait to 6 years, and the Coalition doesn't want to appear ungrateful
for that progress. However, we are extremely disappointed and perplexed
that such blatant and unwarranted discrimination may be allowed to
continue for 3 more years.
The Coalition urges the subcommittee to end the disability
offset to retired pay immediately for otherwise-qualifying
members rated as ``unemployable'' by the VA.
Former Spouse Issues
The Military Coalition recommends corrective legislation to
eliminate inequities in the Uniformed Services Former Spouse Protection
Act (USFSPA) that were created through years of well-intended,
piecemeal legislative action initiated outside the subcommittee.
The Coalition supports 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; require DFAS
to deduct SBP premiums from the uniformed services retired pay awarded
to a former spouse if directed by a court order; and permit a former
spouse to waive SBP coverage.
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 bare minimum, the subcommittee
should approve those initiatives that have the consensus of all
military and veterans' associations. 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 urges legislation to eliminate
inequities in the USFSPA.
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 in recent years.
The Coalition is eager to continue its 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.
Senator Graham. Mr. Zerr.
STATEMENT OF EDGAR M. ZERR, NATIONAL PRESIDENT, FLEET RESERVE
ASSOCIATION
Mr. Zerr. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Senator Nelson, and
Senator Dole. I appreciate the opportunity to present the FRA's
recommendation on the DOD health care budget. In addition to
our brief written statement, FRA fully supports the more
extensive The Military Coalition (TMC) testimony.
The FRA appreciates the progress in recent years to improve
pay, health care, and other benefits. We thank this
distinguished subcommittee and professional staff for your
great work on these enhancements. The FRA understands the
challenges associated with rising health care costs but opposes
drastic fee increases proposed in the defense budget.
We're at war and the FRA believes there are other cost
saving options as alternatives to this plan. These include
establishing TRICARE as a true second payer to other health
care insurance, negotiating for retail pharmacy discounts,
improving the mail order pharmacy option, and accelerating DOD
and Department of Veterans' Affairs (VA) cost-sharing
initiatives. The fee increases are a major concern in the
retiree communities and also a morale issue within the senior
enlisted ranks. Active-Duty personnel view the plan as an
erosion of their promised benefits before they retire.
After 1 week, hundreds of respondents to the FRA's Web site
health care survey have included comments with their surveys.
One Active-Duty respondent wrote, ``I'm a third generation
Navy, and after 30 years of service I'm extremely concerned
about the erosion of medical and other benefits. The medical
coverage was fundamental for my continued service after my
initial enlistment. This, once again, is simply a break in the
faith.'' Enlisted personnel who retired prior to major pay and
benefit increases enacted since 1999 receive much less retired
pay than those who have retired since.
The FRA believes that funding health care and other
programs for beneficiaries is part of the cost of defending our
Nation and ensuring our freedoms. Military service is also much
different than working in the corporate world and the benefit
packages must reflect this.
Thank you again for the opportunity to express concerns of
our membership and I stand ready to answer any questions you
may have.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Zerr as follows:]
Prepared Statement by Edgar M. Zerr
introduction
Mr. Chairman and distinguished members of the subcommittee, thank
you for the opportunity to present the Fleet Reserve Association's
views on the fiscal year 2007 Defense Health System budget.
The Fleet Reserve Association (FRA) is a congressionally chartered,
non-profit organization, representing the interests of U.S. Navy,
Marine Corps, and Coast Guard personnel with regard to pay, health
care, benefits, and other quality-of-life programs.
The FRA is the oldest and largest association representing enlisted
members of the Sea Services whether on Active-Duty, in the Reserves,
retired or veterans. In addition to its extensive legislative program,
the Association sponsors annual scholarship and patriotic essay
competitions, and recognition programs honoring the Navy Sailors and
Recruiters of the Year, the Marine Corps Recruiters and Drill
Instructors of the Year, and the Coast Guard Enlisted Persons and
Recruiters of the Year.
FRA 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 enhancements represent
great advancements that have significantly improved access to health
care. The FRA particularly appreciates the subcommittee's outstanding
measures to address the needs of standard beneficiaries as well as
provide increased access for members of the Reserve components.
While much has been accomplished, the Association is equally
concerned about making sure the enhancements are implemented and the
desired positive effects actually achieved. FRA also believes some
additional initiatives are essential to providing equitable and
consistent health care for all categories of TRICARE beneficiaries,
regardless of age or geography. The FRA looks forward to continuing our
cooperative efforts with the members of the subcommittee and staff in
pursuit of this common objective.
FRA is a founding member and active participant in the Military
Coalition (TMC) and fully endorses the TMC health care testimony which
has been submitted to this subcommittee.
adequately funding the defense health program
Once again, a top FRA priority is to work with Congress and the
Department of Defense (DOD) to ensure full funding of the Defense
Health Program to meet readiness needs--including 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, and Graduate Medical Education.
A fully-funded health care benefit is critical to readiness and the
retention of qualified uniformed services personnel.
The DOD, Congress, and FRA all have reason to be concerned about
the rising cost of military health care. But it is important to
recognize that the problem is a national one, not military-specific.
It's also important, in these times of focusing on deficits, to keep in
perspective the government's unique responsibility to provide health
care and other benefits for a military force that serves and has served
under extraordinarily arduous conditions to protect and preserve our
freedoms and security. Military service is also much different than
work in the corporate world.
The FRA strongly recommends the subcommittee continue to
ensure full funding of the Defense Health Program.
fra opposes the tricare fee increases
The DOD is proposing a significant increase in fees paid by retired
uniformed services beneficiaries, including doubling or tripling
enrollment fees for TRICARE Prime, and tripling or quadrupling fees for
TRICARE Standard, along with higher prescription co-pays. FRA believes
this plan would result in a drastic increase in retiree costs,
especially during a war and particularly since there have been no
enrollment fee hikes since TRICARE was established in 1995. Providing
and funding health care benefits for all beneficiaries is part of the
cost of defending our Nation.
FRA also strongly opposes the plan to impose a $250 enrollment fee
for veterans in Priority Groups 7 and 8 within the Department of
Veterans' Affairs (VA) Health Care System in fiscal year 2007. The
administration's request also includes a recommendation to nearly
double prescription drug co-payments from $8 to $15, for a 30-day
supply--a plan FRA also opposes.
According to VA estimates, 200,000 veterans would be discouraged
from seeking VA health care, and more than a million veterans currently
enrolled in priority groups 7 and 8 would drop out of the system if
this fee structure were implemented. Beneficiaries in these priority
groups are veterans, and FRA adamantly opposes shifting costs to them
for care they've earned in service to our Nation.
other funding options
FRA believes that the DOD has not sufficiently investigated other
options to make TRICARE more cost-efficient as alternatives to shifting
costs to young retirees.
A detailed list of alternatives to reducing cost is included in the
TMC statement and FRA draws attention to the following:
Promote making TRICARE a true second-payer to other health
insurance. FRA questions DOD's assumptions about driving some
150,000 retirees with other health care coverage away from
TRICARE, and believes there are other ways to achieve this goal
to achieve significant budget savings.
Negotiate with drug manufacturers for retail pharmacy
discounts, or change the law to mandate Federal pricing for the
retail pharmacy network. FRA believes this change could result
in significant savings to the Defense Health System.
Reduce/eliminate all mail-order co-pays to boost use of this
lowest cost option for beneficiaries to receive prescription
medications. The elimination of all co-pays will help drive
many more beneficiaries to this pharmacy benefit option.
Accelerate DOD/DVA cost sharing initiatives to ensure full
implementation of seamless transition, including electronic
medical records and one stop military discharge physicals.
There is confusion about the interpretation of the mandatory
funding aspect of TRICARE for Life and the costs included in the DOD
budget which for fiscal year 2006 totals $38 billion. Office of
Management and Budget requires that TRICARE for Life trust fund
allocation be included in the DOD budget, instead of the Treasury
Department, which significantly increases the total DOD budget.
The proposed future fee adjustments which are pegged to health care
inflation will also significantly erode the value of retired pay,
particularly for enlisted retirees who retired prior to larger and
targeted recent pay adjustments enacted to close the pay gap. Military
service is very different from work in the corporate world and requires
service in often life threatening duty commitments and the associated
benefits offered in return must be commensurate with these realities.
FRA urges DOD to identify other ways to achieve budget
savings without shifting costs to younger retirees and to
implement policy/legislative changes to make TRICARE a second
payer to other health insurance.
troop morale
The proposed health care fee increases are a morale issue within
the senior enlisted Active-Duty communities who view this as reducing
the value of their future retiree benefits. They are aware of the
government's failures to honor past commitments and sensitive to
threats to their retiree benefits.
Eroding benefits for career service can only undermine long-term
retention/readiness. Today's sailors, marines, and coast-guardsmen are
very conscious of Congress' actions toward those who preceded them in
service. Strong support for the enactment of TRICARE for Life was based
in part on the fact that inadequate retiree health care was affecting
attitudes and career decisions among Active-Duty troops. Today, despite
the significant progress in restoring retiree benefits arguing that
funding for retiree health care and other promised benefits negatively
impacts military readiness is fueling resentment and anger in retiree
communities and raising concerns within the senior career enlisted
force about their future benefits.
Health Care Survey Responses
There is a strong negative reaction to the proposed fee increases
within the Senior Enlisted and retiree communities and to gauge our
member's reaction to the plan, FRA launched a Web survey on 2 March
2006. To date, 539 have responded.
One Active-Duty survey respondee reflects these sentiments: ``I am
third generation Navy, and after 30 years of service, I am extremely
concerned about the erosion of medical, as well as other benefits. I
have a very unique historical view of how much benefits that were
believed to be everlasting for both Active and retired servicemembers
have been decreased or terminated. The medical coverage was fundamental
for my continued service after my initial enlistment. This once again
is simply a break in the faith. This philosophy needs to be suspended
and the faith re-affirmed for past present and future military
generations.''
A retiree stated: ``My spouse and I have relied on the Navy and
the Military Health Care System to provide us with all our medical
needs. We expect that health care to continue without monetary
increase, throughout our remaining years. We both provided our country
with a valuable service in the defense posture of this country. We
stood ready at the call without complaint. We now expect the high
quality of care that we were led to believe would be available at no
cost throughout our remaining years if we used the Military Health Care
System and facilities. I do not expect to absorb increasing cost for
health care, when my retired pay does not increase with the cost of
health care increases.''
On the question of the importance of health care benefits on
respondents' decisions to remain in the military, 86 percent indicated
that health care influenced their decision to remain in the military as
of 9 March 2006.
tricare standard issues
The TRICARE Standard option is long recognized as the entry to the
DOD health care benefit per the earlier Civilian Health and Medical
Program of the Uniformed Services (CHAMPUS) Program. Provisions of the
NDAA for Fiscal Year 2006 address the needs of the 3.2 million TRICARE
Standard beneficiaries, many of whom find it difficult or impossible to
find a Standard provider. The FRA is firmly committed to working with
Congress, DOD and the Manage Care Support Contractors (MCSCs) to
facilitate prompt implementation of these provisions. DOD will be
required to track provider participation (including willingness to
accept new patients), appoint a specific official responsible for
ensuring participation is sufficient to meet beneficiary needs,
recommend other actions needed to ensure the viability of the Standard
program, develop an outreach program to help beneficiaries find
Standard providers, educate them about the benefit, and provide problem
resolution services for those experiencing access problems or other
difficulties.
FRA believes one reason for provider non-participation is the lack
of current information, or previous bad experience with TRICARE in
areas that have subsequently seen substantial improvement. DOD is
currently developing an annual newsletter for TRICARE Standard
beneficiaries and FRA recommends the development of a similar
newsletter to providers who have submitted claims to enhance provider
education.
Physicians consistently report that TRICARE is virtually the lowest
paying insurance plan in the country. While TRICARE rates are tied to
Medicare rates, the MCSCs make a concerted effort to persuade providers
to participate in TRICARE Prime networks at a further discounted rate.
Since this is the only information providers receive about TRICARE,
they see TRICARE as even lower paying than Medicare. Congress has acted
to avoid Medicare physician reimbursement cuts for the last 3 years,
but the failure to provide a payment increase for 2006 is another step
in the wrong direction. The underlying reimbursement determination
formula requires a legislative fix.
The FRA 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, and to exert what influence it can to persuade
the Ways and Means/Finance Committees to reform Medicare/
TRICARE statutory payment formula.
pharmacy issues
The current TRICARE Pharmacy co-pays are, Military Treatment
Facility, no cost to any beneficiaries, TRICARE Mail-Order Pharmacy,
generic $3, brand name $9 and non-formulary $22 (up to a 90-day
supply), and TRICARE Retail Pharmacy, generic $3, brand name $9 and
non-formulary $22 (up to a 30-day supply).
As noted above, FRA vigorously opposes increasing retiree cost
shares that were only recently established. The restoration of retiree
pharmacy benefits helped restore Active-Duty and retired members' faith
that their government's promises of health care for life would be
honored.
The FRA very much appreciated the efforts of the subcommittee to
protect beneficiary interests by establishing a statutory requirement
for a Beneficiary Advisory panel (BAP). A member of FRA's National
Headquarters Staff (Bob Washington) serves on the panel which provides
an opportunity for beneficiary representatives to voice concerns about
any medications DOD proposes moving to the third tier ($22 co-pay). The
Association was further reassured when, during implementation planning,
Defense officials advised the BAP that they did not plan on moving many
medications to the third tier.
Unfortunately, this has not been the case. To date, DOD has moved
28 medications to the third tier, with an additional 13 pending
approval. While the BAP did not object to most of these, the BAP input
has been universally ignored with regard to a small number of cases
when it recommended against a proposed reclassification. In at least
one instance, the medications moved to the third tier affected 98
percent of the beneficiaries with prescriptions in that particular
class of drug. The FRA is also concerned that the BAP has been denied
access to information on relative costs of the drugs proposed for
reclassification and the Defense Department has established no
mechanism to provide feedback to the BAP on rationale for ignoring its
recommendations.
FRA believes the subcommittee envisioned that the BAP input would
be given more serious consideration in the Department Uniform Formulary
decision process, but that has not happened.
The FRA urges the subcommittee to continue to reject
imposition of cost shares in military pharmacies and oppose
increasing other pharmacy cost shares that were recently
established.
reserve health care benefits
The extension of the TRICARE Reserve Select (TRS) coverage to all
member of the Selected Reserve in the NDAA for Fiscal Year 2006 is very
important particularly because DOD must rely more heavily upon the
Guard and Reserve personnel to prosecute the war and sustain other
operational commitments. Deployments are also becoming longer and more
frequent and these personnel are indispensable to our Armed Forces and
their benefits should reflect this.
FRA has concerns regarding the manner by which TRS premiums are
set. Currently, the Defense Department adjusts TRS premiums based on
annual adjustments to the basic Federal Employees Health Benefit Plan
(FEHBP) insurance option. The Association believes the Department has a
higher obligation to restrain health cost increases for currently
serving military members who are being asked to leave their families
and lay their lives on the line for their country, and that their
health premiums should be pegged to the level of the Consumer Price
Index.
We believe Congress is missing an opportunity to reduce its health
care costs (for retired members as well as for Selected reservists) by
failing to authorize eligible members the option of electing a partial
subsidy of their civilian insurance premiums in lieu of TRICARE
coverage. Many members would be motivated to elect this option,
especially if their family's current health care provider is reluctant
to participate in TRICARE. Rather than having to find a new provider
who will accept TRICARE, many beneficiaries may prefer a partial
subsidy (at lower cost to DOD) to preserve the convenience and
continuity of their family's health care.
FRA recommends development of a cost-effective option for DOD
to subsidize premiums for member's private insurance as an
alternative to TRICARE Reserve Select coverage, to ensure
consistency of benefits and continuity of care for Guard and
Reserve members and their families in an environment of lengthy
and frequent deployments.
conclusion
As previously noted, FRA strongly supports the more extensive TMC
statement and urges the distinguished subcommittee's attention therein
to consistent benefit access, mental health, and DOD/VA transition
which is especially important to injured service personnel returning
from Iraq and Afghanistan.
The Association reiterates its profound gratitude for the
extraordinary progress this subcommittee has made in advancing a wide
range of health care initiatives for all uniformed services personnel
and their families and survivors. The FRA is eager to work with the
subcommittee to further improve military health care for all
beneficiaries. Thank you again for the opportunity to present the FRA'
views on these critically important topics.
Senator Graham. Thank you all. That was well done.
Senator Nelson?
Senator Ben Nelson. Admiral Ryan, you submitted this list
of 16 suggestions about increasing efficiency within the
program that would help reduce the costs. I wonder if any of
the others of the panel might have a list or suggestions about
improving the efficiency of the program to, once again, hold
the line on cost increases or actually reduce the costs. Ms.
Schmidli?
Ms. Schmidli. Thank you. Our efficiencies are listed in our
statement. Thank you.
Senator Ben Nelson. Admiral McCarthy?
General McCarthy. Senator Nelson, we commented specifically
on the gains that we believe could be made in the pharmacy area
and we certainly concur with that.
Senator Ben Nelson. Admiral Ryan, you've already submitted
yours. Mr. Zerr, do you have any particular thoughts?
Mr. Zerr. We support the list that's in The Military
Coalition statement.
Senator Ben Nelson. Thank you. There's one nuance in the
program that treats medically retired personnel and their
families maybe inequitably. On the one hand, personnel who have
been wounded in action will likely require costly medical
attention throughout the course of their lives. On the other
hand, these same personnel suffer their injuries through
selfless service to the Nation and we owe them and their
families an even greater level of care, yet the increased fees
apply to those who are wounded in action to the same degree
that they apply to all retirees. Should there be a different
enrollment fee and deductibles for military personnel who are
medically retired because of injuries versus those who retired
from conditions not related to combat? That is somewhat of a
loaded question, but I'm eager to get your answers.
Admiral Ryan, do you have any thoughts?
Admiral Ryan. Senator, it's a very good point. I think
that's why some of the other panelists, in prior discussions
that we had with Senator Graham and Dr. Chu, I thought NMFA
elegantly stated why the three-tier system is not appropriate.
Even officers, with folks that are medically retired, or even a
widow that would come under this three-tier system and be
listed as an officer, yet their income is a lot less.
So the tiered system, I think, is one thing that should be
different and certainly anything that impacts folks that have
been retired with a disability, I think they have been
frequently left behind, particularly those that don't earn a
full retirement. We would have to look at that very carefully.
Senator Ben Nelson. Mr. Zerr, do you have any particular
thoughts?
Mr. Zerr. Senator, the FRA believes that the enlisted
personnel have served a career with great sacrifice and low pay
and with the promise of being taken care of for their
sacrifice. This is the reason we adamantly oppose an increase
in fees.
Senator Ben Nelson. Ms. Schmidli?
Ms. Schmidli. Yes, thank you. To support wounded and
injured servicemembers and their families, NMFA recommends that
Congress extend the 3-year survivor health care benefit to
servicemembers who are medically retired and their families,
and direct DOD to establish a family assistance center at every
MTF caring for wounded and servicemembers.
Senator Ben Nelson. Those are my questions, Mr. Chairman,
thank you.
Senator Graham. Thank you all. Thank you, Senator Nelson. I
thought we had a really good meeting a couple of weeks ago. I
got a lot out of it. To give you some kind of overview of my
thinking on this--I'll ask some specific questions here in a
moment, and try to establish a baseline.
Number one, the idea that this is a commercial transaction
is not what I'm about. I don't consider our analysis here as to
whether or not this is a viable commercial benefit. We're not
talking about this in terms of working for a company, we're
talking about serving your country. I consider it part of an
overall national security program that we're trying to develop
for the 21st century. Within that program you have several
things you have to worry about. Recruiting and retention are of
great concern to me, as they are to you, treating those who
have gone before well, and having a sustainable program.
Erosion of benefits is coming. The question is, will it
come in a way that people can afford, and will we have a soft
landing or will we have a hard landing? Because the growth in
the health care budget in the DOD is exponential, according to
them, the idea of having a third person look at it sounds
pretty good to me. I'll sit down with Senator Nelson and see if
we can get an independent third view on this.
Four hundred people have told me Social Security is going
broke--I just can't find anybody in Congress that believes it.
When you ask the American Association of Retired Persons
(AARP), they don't really believe it either, but I do. I'll
just give you that as an example. I think it would be really
good to have someone independent look at the actual nature of
medical costs.
Second, I think your suggestions about how to reform and
bring efficiency about need to be a source of serious debate, a
give and take with the DOD. I will suggest that Senator Nelson
and I host another conference focusing on your list of
suggestions on how to improve care and make the system more
efficient. Every dollar you can save is one less dollar we have
to worry about coming out of the operational budget or coming
out of your pocket. I'm a big believer of cleaning up your act
before you ask for more. We'll see what we can do there.
The last thing is sustainability. I just turned 50 and I'm
feeling it every day, but I've come to this conclusion: why
should I ask someone coming after me to do something I'm
unwilling to do on my watch? That includes Social Security,
Medicare, military health care benefits--you name it. Our
Nation has neglected many problems to the point that now
they're consuming our budget. Fifty-three percent of the
Federal budget is some form of entitlement. This is legally not
an entitlement, but you have a right and every expectation to
be treated fairly and honestly. The tie goes to the
servicemember. As a Nation, we have to make some hard choices.
I want to throw some numbers out and get everyone to
respond to the numbers, if they can, just to see if we can
define the problem. Do you agree with the idea that the
military member, before TRICARE came along, was paying 27
percent of their health care cost and now they're paying 12
percent? Does anybody disagree with that? I've been told that.
I don't know if it's true or not.
General McCarthy. Sir, I'd take that on in the sense that I
don't have, and I don't think very many of us have, the ability
to really independently verify that. To me, those are some of
the central questions--was it really 27 percent at the outset,
was that the intent of Congress, and 27 percent of what? Until
we really get our arms around that, I'm worried about the
numbers.
Senator Graham. I want to get my arms around the numbers--
but the concept of post-1995, that the military health care
budget has increased because the amount of out of pocket has
decreased and see if that dynamic is real.
I guess we'd have the same answer. Do you believe that the
military health care budget is now $38 billion and 10 years ago
it was 4 percent of the budget, and today it's 8 percent. Does
anybody disagree with that?
Admiral Ryan. Mr. Chairman, I think the bottom line on
these questions about percentages--statistics--are kind of like
bricks: you can use them to build a foundation or break a plate
glass window.
Senator Graham. Right.
Admiral Ryan. We don't think there's enough granularity in
their arguments, enough openness in what they're talking about
when they compare a system in 1995 that was CHAMPUS to a system
in 2005 that is TRICARE when they don't talk about the number
of beneficiaries that have come into the system. That level of
trust is not there on the openness of the DOD to explain how
they got these numbers. We can't talk to our members or educate
our members when we don't have trust in the granularity of
their arguments.
Senator Graham. What we're going to have to do is establish
that trust and it'd be a great exercise because I'm pretty sure
the numbers--$38 billion in last year's budget, right? There's
not much debate about the number $38 billion and----
Admiral Ryan. Well, it depends, sir, on what you counted in
1995 versus what you count as the money.
Senator Graham. Fair enough.
Admiral Ryan. The other thing I would say in the costs that
cause a lot of hardships and heartache with our members is when
DOD talks about premiums and costs, they neglect to talk about
the premiums paid upfront by all of these folks have testified
to, in service. They say we're going to catch up, and we're
going to norm these numbers. So they devalue the upfront
premiums that, as you said, civilians don't pay.
Senator Graham. I'm not going to devalue it, because it's
real. It's not a commercial transaction, but I'm not going to
sit here and tell you that I believe the Federal Government has
promised every military retiree free health care, they don't
have to pay a nickel for the rest of your life. There's two
competing concepts here and, to me, the middle ground is the
answer. This is not a commercial business transaction, for me,
and I don't think it is for Senator Nelson. It's a sustainable
program that will help recruiting, retention, and not unfairly
compete with operational needs of the budgets to come, to win
the wars to come.
Do you all agree that retirement pay has increased about 32
percent over the last decade?
Mr. Zerr. Senator, we don't have the data to dispute that.
Senator Graham. Do you all agree that they're asking for a
115-percent increase in premiums?
Admiral Ryan. Somewhere between 100 and 300.
Senator Graham. I figured you might agree with that one.
That's obviously something that I don't think's going to happen
over a 2-year period. I threw out these numbers because that's
what we're going to be working off here. Since 1995 there's
been no premium increases in TRICARE Prime, is that correct?
I'm trying to establish a baseline of what the real facts are
in terms of operational pressure, what we can save through
efficiency and reform, and disease management, best business
practices. We're going to have a real serious discussion about
how to extract savings, then we're going to turn to the groups
and we're going to ask what's a fair way to manage this program
not from commercial benefit comparisons, but from
sustainability in terms of what's fair for the retired force
and what's fair for those who are fighting the wars of the
present and the future.
I appreciate the comments you have all given to the
subcommittee and I will end with this thought. I am convinced
that adjustments need to be made across the board and if we
don't do it now, it will be unbelievably difficult in the
future. It's just not fair to those who are going to serve in
the future and those retirees now, to have it fall on them all
at once. Final plea: let's just work together.
Senator Nelson.
Senator Ben Nelson. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Let me suggest
that the idea of a study makes a great deal of sense. I think
we need to know the statistics here so we know what the
percentages are to begin with. Then I think it's probably
important to do some sort of an actuarial review of what the
experience is so that we know what the base of losses are in
terms of what is being calculated, so we know what we're
dealing with. If we can get that kind of a study, I think we
can satisfy ourselves that we're at least working with the base
numbers to begin with.
The second thing is your suggestions about how to adjust
increases make a great deal of sense. I think we have to see
what those translate to in terms of dollars, but stair-stepping
increases is almost always better than a cliff-drop when you
see it drop after 10 years. The suddenness of this, as well as
the size of it, is enough to significantly impact retirement
planning, and benefits, in reality of people being on retired
income. We have to have a better way of dealing with any kind
of cost increases or, if we should get so lucky with
efficiencies, to have cost decreases, and that it's adequately
reflected in real time over a period of time, rather than all
at once with the suddenness that we've experienced at this
time. I'm looking forward to working with all of you and with
my colleagues to affect that kind of a study and get more
information before any kind of decision is made.
Senator Graham. I'll just bootstrap on what he said and
open it up for any final comments here. Before you would ask
for fee increases, you would want to go down the list of
efficiencies and reforms first. I'm not so sure we've done that
in a collaborative fashion, but we will, I promise you. Get
some idea of what the real needs are after you scrub the system
in a very serious manner. Then the next approach would be, if
their fee increase is necessary, how do you fairly implement
them without degrading retention and recruiting and overly
burdening the retired force and making the program sustainable?
Would you give us some names of independent groups that you
would like to review the numbers? I would like your view of who
would be an independent group to come in and look at all these
budget numbers and see what's apples to apples and what's
oranges to oranges.
Any final comments?
General McCarthy. Mr. Chairman, we mentioned in our written
statement that we thought that the Government Accountability
Office (GAO) could be the group that does a study or review.
I'm sure there are others, but that was our suggestion.
Senator Graham. Is that a consensus suggestion?
Admiral Ryan. My government relations team has a lot of
faith in the Congressional Research Service.
Ms. Schmidli. We would also agree with looking at the GAO.
Senator Graham. Two to one. Well, anyway, bottom line is
that you're very open-minded about having someone within
Congress looking at it. That's probably a good idea.
Any other ideas?
Ms. Schmidli. I would like to encourage you to look over
NMFA's statement, because I believe they have addressed some of
your thoughts and issues and laid out good proposals. Again, I
thank you for this opportunity.
Senator Graham. What we haven't done is gotten everybody in
a room and gone over efficiencies. I want the DOD and all of
you in a room, and I want the proposals out on the table so we
can go through them, literally, one by one, and you can tell us
why you can do that and why you can't do that. At the end of
the day we'll have gone through the list and I hope you'll have
some confidence that people like me and Senator Nelson want to
make sure that fee increases, if they're to come, are looked at
first.
Admiral Ryan. Mr. Chairman and Senator Nelson, I want to
thank you both for your leadership in taking this kind of time
to look at this subject. It truly is important. I think as the
months go on, it's going to become even more important because
the risk to the All-Volunteer Force in this prolonged war is
something that I do not believe the Defense Department has been
articulate enough about the risks that we're incurring.
Anything that sends this in the wrong direction would be
critical to it. The fact that you've taken this amount of time
to look at this subject that's so important to every segment of
the military community sends a very encouraging signal to us in
The Military Coalition.
Senator Graham. I think it's the most important thing I'll
do in my first term. If we don't get it done by my first term
we've missed the window. I have 3 more years left, so that
gives you the time frame, all right?
Mr. Zerr. I'd like to thank the chairman for his service
and for taking the time to hear our statements. Thank you also,
Senator Nelson.
Senator Graham. Anything else? This hearing is to be
continued. We'll set up the next meeting to look at the
efficiencies and reforms not only to save money but to improve
service. The thing about TRICARE Prime that I think people like
is that they're getting more services for their money and I
want to continue down that road.
At this point in time, I'd like to ask that the prepared
statement of Richard M. Dean, Executive Director of the Air
Force Sergeants Association, be submitted for the record.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Dean follows:]
Prepared Statement by CMSGT (Ret.) Richard M. Dean
Mr. Chairman and distinguished subcommittee members, on behalf of
the 130,000 members of the Air Force Sergeants Association (AFSA),
thank you for this opportunity to offer the views of our members on the
fiscal year 2007 priorities of the Department of Defense (DOD). This
hearing will address issues critical to those serving and who have
served our Nation. AFSA represents Active-Duty, Guard, Reserve,
retired, and veteran enlisted Air Force members and their families.
Your continuing efforts toward improving the quality of their lives has
made a real difference, and our members are grateful. In this
statement, I will list several specific goals that we hope this
committee will pursue for fiscal year 2007 on behalf of current and
past enlisted members and their families. The content of this statement
reflects the views of our members as they have communicated them to us.
As always, we are prepared to present more details and to discuss these
issues with your staffs.
health care issues
Defense Health Program Funding
AFSA urges the subcommittee to ensure continued full funding for
Defense Health Program needs. AFSA maintains that this nation can
afford to and must be dedicated to funding the weapons systems and the
military health care system. We strongly recommend against DOD's desire
to establish an annual enrollment fee for TRICARE Standard. We urge the
subcommittee to require DOD to pursue greater' efforts to improve
TRICARE and find more effective and appropriate ways to make TRICARE
more cost-efficient without seeking to shift the burden to those who
have already paid a great price for their retirement health care
benefits. Additionally, the DOD plan is based upon questionable
assumptions of prospective changes in human behavior-a dangerous way to
steer a fiscal course. Furthermore, if the assumptions upon which the
DOD TRICARE plan is based are incorrect, military beneficiaries would
likely face an ever-increasing cost for benefits they already paid for
by facing unlimited liability for an entire career. We can tell you
that when DOD broadcast that it can save retiree health care dollars by
driving hundreds of thousands of retirees away from TRICARE, many heads
were shaking in incredulity and disgust.
Morale, Retention, and Recruiting is On the Line.
AFSA representatives often visit Air Force bases. Since DOD's plans
were ``leaked'' in November, then formally proposed coincident with the
President's budget, we have witnessed an ever-growing furor among the
currently serving members of the military. Frankly, those who are
already career committed are disgusted and extremely upset about DOD's
plans. The health care benefit is particularly important for enlisted
(noncommissioned) retirees who generally have less education, lower
retirement pay, and are more dependent on the value of their retirement
benefit-particularly health care. The DOD TRICARE Plans have just let
those who are already career-committed know that the value of their
earned retirement will be dealt a severe blow if DOD has its way. Those
who are at the mid-career point and making the very important
reenlistment decision (the one that will lead to a career) are
reassessing their plans. The feeling of many is that if DOD can make
such a draconian change for those currently serving, there is no reason
to believe that DOD will not assault other retirement benefits. Of
course the lower-ranking soldiers, sailors, airmen, and marines see how
their bosses are being treated, decreasing the probability that they
will make the military a career. Finally, we anticipate a definite
recruiting impact should the DOD plans be approved. It has been said
that easily half of those who enter the military came from military
families. That being the case, one can only imagine what advice the
moms and dads will give their kids about serving in the military for a
company that cannot be trusted and does not advocate in their best
interests.
Promoting TRICARE Standard Providers
One of the great problems with TRICARE itself is that many doctors
refuse to participate because it is not worth their while. AFSA urges
this subcommittee to require DOD to eliminate TRICARE-unique
administrative requirements that deter provider participation and thus
contribute to denying beneficiaries access to care. Further, DOD should
be instructed to launch a vigorous education outreach effort for
providers who will not see TRICARE patients, highlighting specific
improvements in claims/payment processing timeliness. Finally, it is
extremely important that reimbursement rates for providers be increased
to encourage provider participation.
Range of Covered Services
We urge the subcommittee to align TRICARE coverage to at least
match that offered by Medicare in every area. The current system is
confusing and very limiting for beneficiaries. Both Medicare and
TRICARE are government health care programs, and it makes sense that
both programs offer identical covered services.
Pharmacy Copayments
AFSA asks the subcommittee to prevent DOD plans to once again
change the copayment rates for prescriptions until all medications are
available in the mail order program and limiting any future pharmacy
copayment increases to the lesser of the percentage increase in basic
payor retired pay, rounded down to the next lower dollar. The coalition
recommends eliminating beneficiary copayments in the mail-order
pharmacy system for generic and brand name medications to incentivize
use of this lowest-cost option and to generate substantial cost
savings.
Oldest Retirees
Without question, for decades military career counselors enticed
members into staying in the military by promising certain career
benefits. DOD maintains that such promises were invalid and nobody was
authorized to make these promises. One promise was free, lifetime
health care for the retiree and spouse. While those promises were made
and, subsequently unfulfilled, Congress' passage of TRICARE for Life in
the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for Fiscal Year 2001 was
a major boon to military retirees, especially for the noncommissioned
members we represent. However, as evidenced in Colonel Bud Day's
lawsuit on the retiree health care promise, the courts agreed that
while such promises were no doubt made, it would be up to Congress to
remedy the situation. While not under the purview of this committee,
AFSA supports the provisions of S. 407 and H.R. 602 which would exempt
those retirees who entered military service prior to December 7, 1956,
from having to pay Medicare Part B.
Health Care Options
An alternative way for DOD to reduce its health care mission
expenses would be for Congress to open up the Federal Employees Health
Benefits Plan coverage to military retirees. If this is done, however,
in order to protect the earned military career benefit, military
retirees and their families should be required to pay no more than they
would for TRICARE.
Dental Care Support
AFSA asks this committee to take a serious look at the dental care
program for military members and their families. Some members report
that the reimbursement rates for providers are not adjusted to the
various regions. That being the case, dentists avoid participation in
the program. The situation in Alaska, in particular, has been brought
to our attention; however, the situation needs to be examined across
the board to determine where there are inadequate providers to support
the families of military members and the retirees in each region.
Optometry Benefit for Retirees
The earned career military benefit does not include a funded
retiree optometry benefit. This is certainly fundamental to the health
and well-being of those who have served, and AFSA requests this
subcommittee's consideration toward directing the implementation of
such a benefit.
education issues
A Montgomery G.I. Bill Enrollment Opportunity for Veterans
Educational Assistance Program-Era Military Members. The education
program for military members that preceded the Montgomery G.I. Bill
(MGIB) was the Veterans Educational Assistance Program (VEAP). This was
a program where you put in up to $2,700 and the government matched the
amount you used for education on a two-for-one basis. The maximum
government contribution was $5,400. Hundreds of thousands of military
members declined enrollment in that program due to very poor
educational counseling. Many tell us they were advised by education
officials not to enroll in the VEAP since a better program was coming
along. Unfortunately, when the MGIB came along, those who didn't enroll
in the VEAP were not allowed to enroll in the far-more-beneficial MGIB.
DOD estimates last year indicated that there are still serving between
50,000 and 70,000 servicemembers who declined enrollment in VEAP. S.
2091, sponsored by Senator Tim Johnson would correct this unfortunate
situation. These members served since the mid 1980s, helped preserve
peace, and deserve an opportunity to enroll in the MGIB program. AFSA
urges the subcommittee to provide that opportunity.
Correct MGIB Enrollment Procedures
At basic military training or boot camp, new servicemembers must
make a decision. If they want to enroll in the MGIB, they must agree to
have $100 per month deducted from their pay for each of their first 12
months of military service. This is twice as difficult for
noncommissioned members because they make roughly half the pay of a
newly commissioned officer. We urge the subcommittee to either
eliminate the $1,200 user fee or allow enlisted members to make the
payments over a 24-month period.
Standardize the MGIB for all Enrollees
Realizing the far-more-beneficial aspects of the MGIB, in recent
years, Congress gave those who were once enrolled the VEAP an MGIB
enrollment opportunity. Unfortunately, these former VEAPers were
excluded from one aspect of MGIB enrollment: the ability to pay more to
get more educational coverage. We urge the subcommittee to extend the
``buy up'' option to all MGIB enrollees.
Allow Transferability of MGIB Benefits to Family Members
AFSA believes the MGIB benefit is earned, and military members
ought to also be able to share the benefit with their family members,
if they chose to do so. It would certainly serve to improve the quality
of the lives of noncommissioned families. Transferability could be
offered as a career incentive, should the subcommittee choose to act on
this. For example, transferability could become an aspect of the
program for all enrollees after they complete 12 or 13 years in
service.
Full Impact Aid Funding
Impact Aid is supplemental funding provided to local school
districts to compensate for the impact of having military members in
that community. Local schools are primarily funded through property
taxes. Those military members who reside on base do not pay into the
property tax base. Recognizing this, each year Congress has provided
supplemental dollars to such school districts. This funding is critical
to quality education and the protection of the finances of military
families; AFSA urges the subcommittee to continue the great work it has
done on this front in recent years.
In-State Tuition Rates for Military Members
Military members are relocated from one military reservation to
another at the pleasure of the government. Of course, servicemembers
serve the entire Nation, and every State benefits from their service.
We urge the subcommittee to do what it can to urge States to provide
immediate in-State tuition rates at State colleges and universities as
soon as military members and their families are relocated into that
State. This should apply to the military members, their spouses, and
their children.
compensation and permanent-change-of-station (pcs) issues
Senior Noncommissioned Officer Pay Targeting
AFSA urges the subcommittee to consider further pay targeting
toward the senior noncommissioned ranks. These members are critical to
the success of the military mission, and their roles and
responsibilities have increased significantly in recent years. It is no
exaggeration to state the many jobs formerly handled by commissioned
officers are now handled by senior enlisted members. As such, it is
important for the subcommittee to take a critical look at the military
pay charts and increase the pay levels of senior noncommissioned
officers (NCOs).
Standard Reenlistment Bonus
Each time military members reenlist, they commit to subjecting
themselves to unlimited liability--putting their lives at risk, if need
be, to defend the interests of this Nation. As all men and women, these
people are choosing to devote a significant portion of their days on
Earth to freedom. The current reenlistment bonus structure is strictly
a force manipulation mechanism to adequately man hard-to- fill jobs.
AFSA urges the subcommittee to consider a standard reenlistment bonus
each time a military member extends their military commitment.
Reform the Basic Allowance for Housing System
DOD's current Basic Allowance for Housing (BAH) methodology is
absolutely unfair to enlisted members. Those in the lower ranks are
assigned a square-footage standard (regardless of their family status)
which is used to determine what local properties are included in a
housing survey to determine the various levels of BAR paid. The
surveyed properties for lower-ranking servicemembers, therefore, are
very small apartments--generally the type that do not appreciate in
value at the same rate as the properties surveyed for higher-ranking
military members. Therefore, as each new survey is conducted, those
receiving the highest levels receive even greater amounts, while the
lower ranking members do not see such appreciation and BAH increases.
The BAR system was certainly designed to support the quality-of-life of
those holding the highest ranks in our military. We are not talking
about military pay, but rather the well-being of enlisted members.
Therefore, AFSA urges the subcommittee to take a serious look at
reforming the BAR system to protect the well-being of noncommissioned
military members.
Tax Exemption for Health Care and Child Care Fees
Although not under the purview of this subcommittee AFSA urges that
you act to influence the applicable committees to enact the required
legislation to provide a tax exemption for fees, copayments; and
deductibles military members pay for TRICARE Prime, TRICARE Standard,
the Active-Duty and retiree dental plans, and long-term care.
Additionally, the fees paid for child care (which is so critical to
military members) should also be tax exempt. These changes would, in
part, put military members in the same status as nonmilitary Federal
employees.
Increased Household Good Weight Allowances for Senior NCOs during Moves
AFSA thanks this subcommittee for the modest increase in household
goods (HHG) weight allowances for senior NCOs. However, we urge that
you increase these allowances even further. Currently, the highest
ranking enlisted members (E-9s) who are generally career-committed and
have served the Nation for over two decades are afforded approximately
the same HHO weight allowances as a commissioned officer who has served
only 4 years. An E-7, probably at the average career point of 15 years,
is given roughly the same HHG weight allowance as an O-1, just entering
military service. HHG weight allowances should have some relation to
average time in service, family size, probably accumulation of goods as
a family grows, etc. It certainly should not be significantly different
for commissioned and enlisted members. We believe the ethical, common-
sense, way to provide this allowance would be parallel increases
between the commissioned and enlisted rank charts with an E-1 and O-1
receiving the same HHG Weight Allowance, an E-2 receiving the same
allowance as an O-2, etc. Again, this is not a pay issue; it is a plea
to this subcommittee to put some sanity into the assigning of HHG
weight allowances during PCS moves.
guard and reserve issues
Age-55 Retirement
What has been true for years has become particularly evident in
recent years--that members of the Guard and Reserve are full players in
the defense of this Nation. Yet they are the only Federal employees
that have to wait until age-60 to enjoy their retirement benefits. As
it is, their retirement pay is a fraction of that received by retired
Active-Duty members. Guard and Reserve retirement is based on an
accumulation of service points. AFSA believes the right thing to do for
the members of the Guard and Reserve is for this subcommittee to act to
change the law and allow these members the receipt of their retirement
pay at age-55.
Health Care
In recent years, this subcommittee has made great strides in
address the Guard and Reserve health care situation. We urge that you
continue along this path and provide a robust plan by expanding the
current provisions and decreasing the fees for TRICARE Reserve Select.
Tax Credits for Employers
AFSA urges this subcommittee to influence the applicable committees
that deal with taxation to provide tax credits to those who employ
members of the Guard and Reserve. Also, such credits should be extended
to self-employed citizens who serve in the Guard and Reserve. The
impact of such service, and the willingness of employers to
patriotically support the military duty of their employees should be
rewarded.
Change the Above-the-Line Deduction for Overnight Travel Expenses of
Guard and Reserve Members
Restoration of full tax-deductibility of non-reimbursable expenses
related to military training was addressed in the NDAA for Fiscal Year
2004 by setting the reimbursable travel distance at 100 miles. As other
government agencies use 50 miles for travel compensation, AFSA believes
that title 10 should be reworded so that ``the deductions allowed . . .
for any period during which such individual is more than 50 miles away
from home in connection with such services.'' AFSA urges the
subcommittee to enact or move to influence this change during this
Congress.
retirement/veteran/survivor issues
Seamless DOD-Veterans' Administration Transition
AFSA urges the subcommittee to continue to examine common use of
medical records between DOD and the Veterans Administration (VA), and
to support other aspects of the transition from military service to
veteran status. You have made great strides in recent years, and AFSA
appreciates them. The issue of a common-sense transition from one
status to the other, and the funding of programs to support it, has
become even more critical during the time of the global war on
terrorism. AFSA offers the subcommittee its support of your important
efforts in this regard.
Concurrent Retirement and Disability Pay and Combat-Related Special
Compensation
This subcommittee has made progress on this matter in each of the
last 5 or 6 years, and AFSA urges that it continue. We ask that you act
to immediately provide full Concurrent Retirement and Disability Pay
(CRDP) to those rated by the VA at 100 percent disabled due to
unemployability. Also, we ask that you support Combat-Related Special
Compensation (CRSC) for those Chapter 61 retirees (medically retired)
who, through no fault of their own, were unable to complete 20 years of
service. We recommend that you tie any such change to those with the
highest disability ratings rather than years of service. This would
most effectively address those with the most serious disabilities and
help to serve those fighting in the current actions in Iraq and
Afghanistan.
Make the Survivor Benefit Plan Paid-up Feature Immediate for Those Who
are age 70 and Have Been Enrolled in Survivor Benefit Plan for
at Least 30 years
This subcommittee acted on this several years ago by making this
paid up feature effective in 2008. Some of these retirees have now been
paying into Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP) for many more years than 30. We
urge the subcommittee to implement the paid-up provision effective
October 1, 2006.
Eliminate the SBP--Dependency and Indemnity Compensation Offset
Currently, survivors receiving Dependency and Indemnity
Compensation (DIC) from the VA see a dollar-for-dollar reduction in
their SBP payments (provided by DOD). Similar to the CRDP issue, this
is a matter that we hope the subcommittee can address this year.
Allow DIC Survivors to Remarry after age 55 Without Losing their DIC
Entitlement
Congress provided some relief to these survivors for setting the
remarriage age without losing DIC entitlement at 57. To parallel other
Federal programs, we urge the subcommittee to change the allowable
remarriage age for these survivors at 55.
Repeal or Greatly Modify the Uniformed Services Former Spouses
Protection Act
AFSA urges this subcommittee to support some fairness provisions
for the Uniformed Services Former Spouses Protection Act (USFSPA)--P.L.
97-252. While this law was passed with good intentions in the mid-
1980s, the demographics of military service and their families have
changed. As a result, military members are now the only U.S. citizens
who are put at a significant disadvantage in divorce proceedings.
Because of the USFSPA, the following situations now exist:
1. A military member is subject to giving part of his/her
military retirement pay (for the rest of his/her life) to
anyone who was married to him/her during the military career
regardless of the duration of the marriage.
2. The divorce retirement pay separation is based on the
military member's retirement pay--not what the member's pay was
at the time of divorce (often many years later).
3. A military retiree can be paying this ``award" to multiple
former spouses.
4. It takes a military member 20 years to earn a retirement;
it takes a former spouse only having been married to the member
(for any duration, no matter how brief) to get a portion of the
member's retirement pay.
5. Under this law, in practice judges award part of the
member's retirement pay regardless of fault or circumstances.
6. There is no statute of limitations on this law; i.e.,
unless the original divorce decree explicitly waived separation
of future retirement earnings, a former spouse who the military
member has not seen for many years can have the original
divorce decree amended and ``highjack'' part of the military
member's retirement pay.
7. The former spouse's ``award'' does not terminate upon
remarriage of the former spouse.
8. The ``award'' to a former spouse under this law is above
and beyond child support and alimony.
9. The law is unfair, illogical, and inconsistent. The
member's military retired pay which the government refers to as
``deferred compensation'' is, under this law, treated as
property rather than compensation. Additionally, the law is
applied inconsistently from State to State.
10. In most cases, the military retiree has no claim to part
of the former spouse's retirement pay.
11. Of all U.S. citizens, it is unconscionable that military
members who put their lives on the line are uniquely subjected
to such an unfair and discriminatory law.
12. While there may be unique cases (which can be dealt with
by the court on a case-by-case basis) where a long-term, very
supported former spouse is the victim, in the vast majority of
the cases we are talking about divorces that arise which are
the fault of either or both parties--at least half of the time
not the military member. In fact, with the current levels of
military deployments, more and more military members are
receiving ``Dear John'' and ``Dear Jane'' letters while they
serve.
13. This is not a male-vs-female issue. More and more female
military members are falling victim to this law. These are just
a few of the inequities of this law. We believe this law needs
to be repealed or, at the least, greatly modified to be more
fair to military members. We urge the subcommittee to take
action on this unfair law--for the benefit of those men and
women who are currently defending the interests of this nation
and its freedom.
Mr. Chairman and subcommittee members, we appreciate your
contribution to the quality of the lives of those serving and who
devoted their lives to military careers. We thank you for this
opportunity to present the views of this association and ask that you
seriously consider enacting some of the changes detailed in this
statement.
Senator Graham. God bless. Thank you for coming. We are
adjourned.
[Whereupon at 3:15 p.m., the subcommittee adjourned].
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION FOR APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR
2007
----------
THURSDAY, MARCH 30, 2006
U.S. Senate,
Subcommittee on Personnel,
Committee on Armed Services,
Washington, DC.
RESERVE COMPONENT PERSONNEL POLICIES
The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:00 p.m. in
room SD-106, Dirksen 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;
Diana G. Tabler, professional staff member; and Richard F.
Walsh, counsel.
Minority staff members present: Jonathan D. Clark, minority
counsel; Gabriella Eisen, research assistant; and Gerald J.
Leeling, minority counsel.
Staff assistants present: Benjamin L. Rubin, Jill L.
Simodejka, and Pendred K. Wilson.
Committee members' assistants present: Christopher J. Paul,
assistant to Senator McCain; Mackenzie M. Eaglen, assistant to
Senator Collins; Clyde A. Taylor IV, assistant to Senator
Chambliss; Meredith Beck, assistant to Senator Graham; and Eric
Pierce, assistant to Senator Ben Nelson.
OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR LINDSEY O. GRAHAM, CHAIRMAN
Senator Graham. The committee will come to order. I
apologize for being late. I apologize to Senator Nelson. I got
held up, but we'll get the show on the road here.
Good afternoon. The subcommittee meets today to receive
testimony on Reserve component personnel policies and in review
of the National Defense Authorization Request for Fiscal Year
2007.
We're now more than 4 years beyond the terrorist attacks of
September 11, and our Guard and Reserve have been on a wartime
footing for a period that is already longer than the period
between Pearl Harbor and V-J Day in World War II. To those men
and women in the Guard and Reserves, you could not have done
better. You've given more than you've ever been asked to give.
We all appreciate it.
This is truly a long war. We're witnessing a historic time
and a fundamental change in the way we think and use the Guard
and Reserve.
In terms of an overview of today's hearing, here are some
of the issues before our subcommittee.
Many of our Guard and Reserve units, and certainly
individuals with highly sought after skills in civil affairs,
military police (MPs), intelligence, translators,
communications, combat engineers, logistics, and C-130 crews,
have deployed in support of operations in Afghanistan and Iraq
multiple times. The Department of Defense's (DOD) policy is not
to involuntarily recall members of the Guard and Reserve for
more than 24 months, cumulative. We would like to hear about
the health of the Guard and Reserve under these strains and
your ability to recruit and retain America's young men and
women. How can we sustain our commitments and the rotation plan
that will allow our Guard and Reserve to continue to play a
major role in this long war?
I must also say that I was surprised, along with Senator
Nelson, by the recommendations of the Quadrennial Defense
Review (QDR), the first undertaken during an ongoing war that
is being fought with an All-Volunteer Force, that recommended
major force-structure reductions in the Reserve components of
both the Army and the Air Force. The QDR recommends cuts of
17,000 in the National Guard, and 5,000 in the Army Reserve.
The QDR also recommends cuts of 40,000 full-time equivalents
across the total Air Force, which translates to about 22,000
people cut from the Air National Guard and Air Force Reserves
across the Future Years Defense Plan (FYDP).
I would like for you to comment on this rationale, as you
understand it. For those cuts to come at this time, when the
Guard and Reserve has never been asked to do more, not only in
war, but also in homeland defense, homeland security, and
disaster response, I'm dying to hear your thoughts about that.
I would also like to know what you're hearing about the new
health care benefits for all members of the Guard and Selected
Reserve. I really want to know about that, since we helped
create it. How are we going to get the word out? Do people know
the benefit exists? What effect is the benefit having among
those who do know?
I welcome our witnesses, beginning with our first panel,
Secretary Tom Hall. Thank you for your dedicated service and
for being here today, Mr. Secretary. We look forward to your
testimony. I also welcome, as a member of our first panel, the
Chief of the National Guard, Lieutenant General Steve Blum. You
have been standing duty in tough, but exciting, times. Thank
you both for your service and your testimony here today.
The second panel we'll get to, just as soon as we're done
with the first.
So, without further ado, Senator Nelson?
STATEMENT OF SENATOR E. BENJAMIN NELSON
Senator Ben Nelson. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I want to
thank you for holding this very important hearing today. I join
you in welcoming our witnesses, the civilian military
leadership responsible for our Guard and Reserve Forces.
I understand that two of our witnesses from the second
panel, General Helmly and General James, will both be leaving
their positions in the very near future. General Helmly will go
to a new assignment overseas, and General James will retire.
I'd like to take this opportunity to publicly thank them for
their service to the Army Reserve and the Air National Guard,
and for their candid testimony to this committee over the
years. These have been trying times for our leaders of our
Reserve components, and these officers have met the challenge.
General Helmly and General James, I thank you for your
service, and I wish you the best of luck in your new endeavors.
Mr. Chairman, our Guard and Reserve Forces have responded
magnificently in answering our Nation's call to service,
despite some significant challenges. At one point, they
constituted 46 percent of our troops in combat theaters. Most
of our Reserve component personnel volunteered for service in
the National Guard or Reserves with the understanding that they
were joining a military force that would serve as a strategic
reserve to be called upon only during a major war, when our
Active Forces needed additional support and reinforcement. Over
the last decade, as our Active-Duty Forces were downsized
significantly, our Reserve component forces have gradually
become part of the operational force, picking up many missions
that Active Force was no longer able to accomplish. As a
result, Reserve component personnel have been called upon for
military service far more frequently than anyone ever
anticipated.
While we were mobilizing our Reserve components at an
unanticipated rate, the DOD did not have the systems in place
to support this increased usage of the National Guard and
Reserve personnel. Our mobilization processes were not very
effective at the beginning of the major troop call-ups. Many
Reserve component personnel were ordered to Active-Duty with
very short notice, sometimes just a matter of a few days. This
obviously created havoc for military families and civilian
employers.
Our pay systems weren't designed for large numbers of
activated Reserve and Guard personnel, and this resulted in
numerous pay problems. The Government Accountability Office
looked at this and concluded that the pay system for mobilized
Guard and Reserve personnel was so cumbersome and complex that
personnel ``could not be reasonably assured of timely and
accurate payroll payments.''
Support systems for the families of deployed Guard and
Reserve personnel weren't in place when they started large-
scale mobilization of the Reserve components. Although Guard
and Reserve families have many of the same issues as Active-
Duty families, they have unique needs, because they are less
familiar with the military, and many live in civilian
communities located some distance from support networks
normally found around military installations.
Medical care for the families of deployed Guard and Reserve
personnel was problematic, because the families had difficulty
navigating the TRICARE health care benefit. Many health care
providers didn't accept TRICARE, and many families didn't want
to interrupt their continuity of care by changing health care
providers.
Most of these problems have been successfully addressed
over time, but we still have to keep our eyes on them to
prevent them from recurring as we continue to use the Reserve
components in new and creative ways.
The recently completed QDR states, ``The Reserve component
must be operationalized so that select reservists and units are
more accessible and more readily deployable than today.'' If
the Reserve components are even more accessible and
deployable--more deployable than they are now, we have to be
ever vigilant to ensure that the servicemembers and their
families are paid on time, that they receive the quality health
care they deserve, and that their families receive the support
they need as the servicemembers continue to serve our Nation so
magnificently.
Mr. Chairman, I believe that the Nation has yet to answer
the question about the future role of our Reserve components,
and some of the questions that you've asked are similar to
mine. What's 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?
I can say, as a former Governor, I understand the concerns
of our current Governors about whether their National Guard
personnel will be available to them to respond to State
emergencies. States with a high risk of hurricanes, wildfires,
and other natural disasters, including snowstorms in Nebraska,
must have assurance that National Guard Forces will be
available when they're needed.
Two years ago, we authorized a Commission on the National
Guard and Reserve to help us to understand and address issues
like these. The members of this commission have just begun
their task, and I'm hopeful that this commission will help us
gain a better understanding of the role and needs of our Guard
and Reserve Forces, and give us a roadmap for legislation to
ensure they're fully supported.
Mr. Chairman, we're all fully aware that our Nation cannot
successfully conduct a significant military operation without
the participation of our National Guard and Reserve personnel.
I look forward to the testimony of our witnesses regarding
the future of our Guard and Reserve units and how we can
address the problems together that they are currently facing.
Thank you very much.
Senator Graham. Thank you, Senator Nelson. Well said.
Secretary Hall.
STATEMENT OF HON. THOMAS F. HALL, ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF
DEFENSE FOR RESERVE AFFAIRS
Mr. Hall. Yes, sir. Thank you.
Before I start my statement, I would like to recognize
someone. I'd like for Command Sergeant Major Holland to please
stand. He is my command sergeant major, and he is concluding 37
years of service. He's going to retire this year. He's a combat
veteran of Afghanistan, and a combat veteran of Iraq. We also
deployed his wife. He's served with great distinction and
honor, and I just wanted him recognized as he closes out a
distinguished military career. [Applause.]
Senator Graham. Thank you so much for your service. We're
proud of you. I'll bet you support the age 55 Reserve
retirement eligible bill. [Laughter.]
Mr. Hall. Thank you.
Chairman Graham and Senator Nelson, I want to thank you for
this opportunity to offer my thoughts on our Reserve component
personnel policies and the 2007 National Defense Authorization
Request.
I'd like to make an opening statement. Then General Blum
has an opening statement. We would request that our written
statements be entered into the record.
The Secretary and I are deeply grateful for your strong
support, which is crucial to sustaining a strong Guard and
Reserve. The men and women of the Guard and Reserve know they
can count on you for your continued assistance.
As Assistant Secretary of Defense for Reserve Affairs, I
consider it my personal responsibility to visit as many of the
1.2 million Reserve component members in the field as I can.
They are proudly and professionally performing vital national
security missions at home and around the world in superb
fashion. Their most urgent concerns are predictability and,
when activated, parity with the Active Force concerning
educational benefits, bonuses, and special pays.
We're still in the midst of one of the longest periods of
mobilization in our history, and we have worked diligently, and
sought your assistance, to correct areas that need improvement.
Our Reserve Forces are certainly stressed, as you would expect
when our Nation is at war. We have reduced our Reserve
component activation to, as of today, 110,000, a drop of 70,000
since this time last year, which means 70,000 more guardsmen
and reservists than at this time last year are at home, on the
job, and with their families. We are, in fact, helping to
reduce some of the stress on the force. I might add, that
figure is going to go lower.
Recruiting and retention are improving, but remain very
demanding tasks, given today's environment. For this year to
date, four of our six Reserve components are essentially on
track with their recruiting objectives. The Naval Reserve and
the Air Guard are lagging a bit in recruiting, and the chiefs
of those components will discuss their improvement plans during
the next panel.
The changes you authorized to the Reserve enlistment and
affiliation bonus in the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2006 are making a difference. Just as an aside,
every trooper I re-enlisted in theater, everywhere I went, took
the bonus, tax free. Personally, I think that's why we're
retaining more people and our attrition rates are the lowest
since 2000. People are staying, in ever-increasing numbers.
Senator Graham. I hate to interrupt, but if you're
enlisting and you don't take the money, we need to look at
whether or not they should re-enlist. [Laughter.]
Mr. Hall. I did--these are very smart troopers, and I
didn't find one that did not do that, Senator.
Through January 2006, enlisted attrition is on track to
remain below the established ceilings.
The Secretary of Defense expressed the need to promote
careful use of Reserve components by rebalancing the force, and
you mentioned this in your opening statement. We are
simultaneously rebalancing and transforming the force to meet
the challenges of the 21st century and still maintain a wartime
footing. The Services continue to improve their Active and
Reserve component mix by rebalancing approximately 29,000
spaces in 2005, for a total of about 70,000. We have 55,000
more to go between 2006 and 2011.
We continue to closely monitor the impact of the ongoing
mobilization of our Guard and Reserve members, their families,
and employers. We are aggressively implementing bonus
authorities, implementing the new TRICARE authorities,
increasing efforts in recruiting and retention, using the new
education benefit for the mobilized Guard and Reserve members,
assisting our military families, and ensuring our employers are
informed and aware of Reserve service. Legislative proposals we
are submitting as part of this year's package will also help.
Collectively, my colleagues and I look forward to your
questions, and, again, thank both of you for the opportunity to
appear here and for what you contribute, in your positions.
Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Hall follows:]
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. 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.
duties of the assistant secretary of defense for reserve affairs
The principal duty 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 Department of
Defense (DOD). I make it a priority, as does my staff, to visit with
our Reserve component members in the field, and during those visits we
see America's finest 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 personally
seen the men and women in our Guard and Reserve at hundreds of sites
throughout the world. In fact I have visited nearly 200 sites and
spoken to over 205,000 personnel during my 3+ years in the job. During
these visits 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, and have seen how heavily engaged they are.
The stress on the force has been high but shows signs of lessening
somewhat. We are continuing to monitor closely the impact of the stress
that remains on our Guard and Reserve members, on their families, and
their employers. In December 2004 there were just over 183,000
reservists mobilized from all Services. Today that figure stands at
118,000, a drop of 65,000. We are relieving stress on the force.
In the 4\1/2\ years since September 11, 2001, our Reserve
components have performed superbly in missions ranging from high
intensity combat operations; to humanitarian assistance; to rescuing
the victims of hurricanes; and in the case of the National Guard, other
State missions, as well. At the same time, these operations have
presented a number of challenges, particularly for our ground forces,
who carry the weight of our security and stabilization efforts in
Afghanistan and Iraq, as well as continuing to respond to the range of
missions at home. The most pressing challenge is to sustain our
military forces for the current operations while meeting our other
worldwide commitments whatever and wherever they might be.
purpose of the reserve components
Last year you modified the purpose of our Reserve components as
defined in law to reflect more accurately the shift from a strategic
reserve--one to be used only in the event of a major war; to an
operational Reserve that supports day-to-day defense requirements. The
QDR proposes a Reserve component that must be more accessible and more
readily deployable. Becoming an operational Reserve is comprehensive in
scope, and is empowering the Reserve components to make significant
contributions to defense missions. They are now more relevant than ever
to the warfight. Predictability is fundamental to sustaining an
operational Reserve. To achieve this, we expect to utilize the Reserve
components to support military mission requirements in a predictable,
cyclic, or periodic manner. The transition to an operational Reserve
began when we called Reserve component members up for Operations Desert
Shield and Desert Storm. Since then, changes in force management have
been made to reflect this transition toward an operational Reserve.
Several legislative initiatives passed by this subcommittee have helped
significantly in that transition. The objective remains the same; to
recruit, train, equip, compensate, and employ Reserve component units
and members for service in the Active component, wherever and whenever
needed, in accordance with current laws and policies. This is an
evolutionary effort and we will need your help and appreciate your
continued support.
We thank you for this committee's support for legislation you
passed in the most recent National Defense Authorization Act:
especially for expanding eligibility criteria and increasing the
maximum allowable payments under many of the bonuses and special pays
for Reserve component members; enhancing the TRICARE Reserve Select
Program; allowing mobilized reservists to receive full housing
allowance if called to Active-Duty for more than 30 days; increasing
the number of Army Reserve and Army Guard Reserve Officer Training
Corps scholarships; and improving the educational assistance program
for activated Guard and Reserve members, just to mention a few.
reserve component missions today
By far the most demanding operations continue to be Operation
Enduring Freedom and Operation Iraqi Freedom. Reserve components
currently furnish approximately 20 percent of the troops in theater.
That is down from 30 percent just a year ago. The Reserve components
remain an integral player in homeland defense, and in Operation Noble
Eagle. They responded immediately and superbly to the Gulf Coast
hurricane disasters, with the National Guard leading the way, having
over 50,000 guardsmen providing needed assistance and support. The
National Guard will remain a dual-missioned force performing both State
and Federal missions
The Reserve components continue to perform a variety of non-
traditional missions in support of the global war on terror. One such
mission is the training of the Iraqi and Afghan national armies. The
Reserve components have provided 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.
policies
Judicious and prudent use of the Reserve components in support of
the global war on terror remains the cornerstone of our policy in that
effort. Our personnel policies state those reservists:
Be given a minimum of 30 days notice prior to
mobilization. We try to give at least 90 days notice when
possible, so they can take full advantage of the early
eligibility for TRICARE benefit. (Today, early notifications
are now the norm, not the exception.)
Called to involuntary Active-Duty under the current
partial mobilization authority shall serve no more than 24
cumulative months on Active-Duty. There are no plans to expand
the mobilization period to a policy of 24 consecutive months.
May serve voluntarily for longer periods of time in
accordance with Service policy. (Currently about 20,000 members
are in a volunteer status.)
May be released prior to the completion of the period
of service for which ordered based on operational requirements.
Should receive equitable treatment, when being
considered for mobilization--considering the length and nature
of previous service, family responsibilities, and civilian
employment.* Are entitled management of individual
expectations, considering morale and retention, by ensuring
they: are performing essential and meaningful tasks; are
provided as much predictability as possible.
Within this framework, we will continue to manage the Reserve
components, and assess the impact mobilization and deployments have on
Guard and Reserve members, their families and employers, and adjust our
policies as needed.
stress on the force
Discussion continues about the stress that the global war on terror
is placing on the force--both Active and Reserve. From my perspective,
the dominant question still remains, ``How extensively can we use the
Guard and Reserve and still maintain a viable long-term 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 2006 to support the global war on terror, and then describe
the effect that this 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. They consistently tell me this when I visit
them in the field. But we must also be mindful not to over-commit them;
we must use the Reserve Force wisely. We must 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 more than 485,000 Guard
and Reserve members (475,000 Selected Reserve members and approximately
10,000 IRR members) were mobilized between September 11, 2001 and
December 31, 2005. That means that about 39 percent of the 1,215,641
members who have served in the Selected Reserve during this period were
mobilized during the current contingency.
The other way to look at mobilization is in terms of today's total
Reserve component force--those who are currently serving in the
Selected Reserve. Looking at today's Selected Reserve Force of 825,427
serving, as of December 31, 2005, we have mobilized 381,311 Reserve
component members, or 46 percent of the current force. Of this force,
69,946 (or 8.5 percent of all members who are currently serving) have
been mobilized more than once. Of the 69,946, a total of 53,763 (6.5
percent) have been mobilized twice, 11,118 (1.4 percent) have been
mobilized three times and 4,995 (0.6 of 1 percent) have been mobilized
more than three times. No reservist has been involuntarily mobilized
for more than 24 cumulative months, and nearly all (98.8 percent) of
those remobilized were volunteers.
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
terror) through 2003, the Reserve components in the aggregate were at
or slightly above 100 percent of their authorized end strength. In
fiscal year 2004 the Reserve components in the aggregate were slightly
below their authorized end strength achieving 98.4 percent. That trend
continued in fiscal year 2005 with end strength achievement at 95.2
percent. In fiscal year 2006 we expect the end strength achievement to
go up from the fiscal year 2005 levels.
Recruiting Results
In a very challenging recruiting environment, the DOD Reserve
components cumulatively achieved 85 percent of their fiscal year 2005
recruiting objectives, as compared to the 96 percent achievement in the
previous year. Two of the six DOD Reserve components achieved their
recruiting objectives--the Marine Corps Reserve and the Air Force
Reserve. The Army National Guard fell short by 12,783 (achieving 80
percent of its recruiting objective), the Army Reserve fell short by
4,626 (achieving 84 percent), the Navy Reserve fell short by 1,703
(achieving 85 percent), and the Air National Guard fell short by 1,413
(achieving 86 percent). End strength results were better because of
continued low attrition rates in the majority of the components.
Fiscal year 2006 will continue to be a challenging year for Reserve
recruiting--particularly in the Reserve components of the Army, but
many initiatives have been undertaken to mitigate the challenges.
During the first 4 months of fiscal year 2006, four of the six DOD
Reserve components, including both the Army National Guard and the Army
Reserve, met or exceeded their recruiting objectives. We continue to
monitor the quality of our recruits against the goals we established.
We see no indicators in the performance of young men and women being
recruited today that concerns us. They remain America's finest. The
changes you authorized to the Reserve enlistment and affiliation bonus
in the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2006 should
continue this upward trend. Thank you for your support!
Retention
The requirements to support the global war on terror--particularly
our commitment in Iraq--have placed a strain on the Reserve Force.
Nonetheless, measuring those who reenlist at the completion of their
current contract, we find that reenlistments were higher (by over
2,000) in fiscal year 2005 than they were in fiscal year 2004, up from
95.5 percent of goal in fiscal year 2004 to 100.1 percent of goal in
fiscal year 2005. This is a very positive trend over the past 2 years
and we believe it will continue in fiscal year 2006. 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 are pleased to report that enlisted attrition generally
remained below established ceilings throughout fiscal year 2005, also a
very positive trend. Through December, 2005 enlisted attrition is on
track to remain below the fiscal year 2006 ceiling established by each
Reserve component.
Mitigation Strategies
Of all the strategies to help reduce the stress on the force, the
first and perhaps most important is rebalancing. Its purpose is to
adjust the force to be responsive and produce the capabilities needed
in balanced portfolios across all components. The old force was
balanced 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
decreasing capabilities in both the Active and Reserve components that
are in lesser demand, and increasing them in areas of higher demand,
changing lower priority structure to higher priority structure, and
producing a new Active component/Reserve component mix. As outlined in
the report Rebalancing Forces: Easing the Stress on the Guard and
Reserve, 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 continued to improve their Active/Reserve component
mix by rebalancing approximately 29,000 spaces in fiscal year 2005, for
a total of about 70,000 to date. The Services have planned and
programmed an additional 55,000 spaces for rebalancing between fiscal
year 2006 and 2011. The amount and type of rebalancing varies by
Service. By 2011 we expect to have rebalanced about 125,000 spaces. We
expect the Services to revisit their rebalancing plans in response to
directives from the Quadrennial Defense Review. The Department will
continue to work closely with the Services as they review and modify
their rebalancing plans. Easing stress on the force includes more than
just rebalancing the military.
A second initiative is the conversion of military spaces to DOD
civilian positions or contractors. The purpose of this initiative is to
move military personnel 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. The Services have an aggressive
program to convert military-to-civilian over the next few years. The
Services converted about 16,000 military spaces to civilian manning in
fiscal year 2005 and plan to convert over 18,000 additional from fiscal
year 2006 to fiscal year 2011. This greatly aids the ability of the
Reserve components by providing more spaces for rebalancing.
Third, to ease the burden on some high demand, low density units
and skills, we have employed innovative joint concepts and technology
to spread mission requirements across the entire force. For example,
Navy and Air Force personnel now augment ground forces in Iraq and
technology is now being used on Air force installations to replace the
need to use military personnel to perform surveillance functions.
A fourth area is innovative force management under our continuum of
service construct. This approach maximizes the use of volunteers,
provides greater opportunities for reservists who are able to
contribute more, and offers innovative accession and affiliation
programs to meet specialized skill requirements.
Under the old rules, end strength and controlled grade accounting,
and the requirement for officers to compete for promotion against
Active-Duty personnel suppressed the number of volunteers and limited
the length of their duty. reservists were reluctant to volunteer for
extended periods of Active-Duty. We are extremely grateful to Congress
for removing these barriers and adding more authorizations to the new
Reserve component operational support strength accounting category.
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 contribute more to defense
missions to do so.
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.
However, we must balance the use of volunteers from the Selected
Reserve with pending unit deployments and the need for unit cohesion.
Retiree and Individual Ready Reserve (IRR) members also provide sources
of volunteers.
Compared to Operation Desert Storm when we mobilized 30,000 IRR
members, we have used fewer IRR members to support the global war on
terror. In the past 4 years, we have mobilized about 10,000 IRR
members. The further utilization of the IRR remains a viable option for
meeting both near-term and long-term commitments. But, we must
establish the proper expectations for our Reserve component members,
their families, their employers, and the public in general. We have
undertaken a program to establish the expectations of reasonable
service requirements for the 21st century based on the frequency and
duration of military duty, and predictability.
For the long term, we will continue to energetically pursue these
transformation strategies. Rebalancing the force will continue, as will
the conversion of military to civilian positions. The Department's
transformation to a capabilities-based force should help relieve stress
on the force. The overall objective is to have an enduring flexible
force, capable of meeting diverse mission requirements.
national guard utilization
The National Guard is a vital and integral part of the Army and Air
Force total force mission capability. As a dual-missioned force,
fulfilling both Federal and State roles is vital to the National
Security Strategy, Homeland Defense, and the survival of the Nation.
Much has been said about the Army National Guard being cut, both
end strength and units. While it is true the fiscal year 2007 budget
submission reflects an actual number of troops on board, the Army
leadership is on record in testimony before the House and Senate that
they are committed to funding the Guard to the level to which they can
recruit, up to their congressionally authorized end strength of
350,000. The Guard will remain at 106 total brigades (28 brigade combat
teams and 78 support brigades of varying types). For modernization
alone, the Army has budgeted approximately $21 billion from 2005 to
2011, a four-fold increase over the level of funding for equipment
modernization from the 1999 period. This organization, manning, and
funding will permit the Army National Guard to support the Nation's
global operations, prevail in the global war on terror, and conduct
expanded State and homeland security missions.
The Army and Air National Guard will continue to have 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, Commonwealth, 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 36 of the 55 congressionally authorized WMD-CSTs
as being operationally ready. The remainder of the teams should be
certified by third quarter, fiscal year 2007.
The Air National Guard will continue to consult with the Air Force
to organize, train and equip their total forces more effectively and
efficiently. The Air Force is developing new initiatives that will
allow recapitalizing key weapons system capabilities and organizing the
force to better support the combatant commanders. Participation of the
Air National Guard in these discussions is critical to ensure an
appropriate balance of capabilities in all components of our total
force. Air Reserve component restructuring is part of the ongoing
discussions in the development of the fiscal year 2008 budget.
The response to the hurricanes on Gulf coast, the brush fires in
the south central States, or the flooding throughout the United States,
shows the National Guard is a crucial element in a Governor's response
to natural disasters. The National Guard will continue to have a
prominent role in supporting local and State authorities in their
efforts to manage the consequences of a domestic terrorist attack or
natural disaster.
family programs
The Department is sensitive to the hardships and challenges that
the families of Guard and Reserve members face, especially when the
guardsman or reservist is away from home for an extended period. The
better care we take of the family, the more likely the member will stay
with us.
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 issue, the Department has 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 rather they are available to the
family of any servicemember.
One way we are reaching out to families is with a 24-hour/7-day-a-
week toll-free family assistance service--Military OneSource. Military
OneSource can assist with referrals for every day problems such as
childcare and how to obtain health care. Additionally, the Department
has contracted with a health network of professional consultants
available in local communities to assist military families with daily
living challenges resulting from deployment and separation.
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 family
benefits guide and a tool kit 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.
We are particularly concerned about post-deployment and we are
focusing on enhancing support programs and services for Reserve
component members and their families following mobilization with
programs such as the Marriage Enrichment Program, and a non-sectarian
Prevention and Relationship Enhancement Program conducted by trained
chaplains. These and other programs are made available on weekends
throughout the States and territories for returning Guard and Reserve
military members and their spouses at no charge. Commands have been
proactive in partnering with the VA and other State and Federal
agencies to provide additional services to reservists and their
families such as relationship/readjustment counseling.
reserve component health benefit enhancements
The Department has fully implemented the premium-based ''TRICARE
Reserve Select'' program, which offers TRICARE Standard and medical
treatment facility space-available coverage to Selected Reserve members
and their families following the member's service in support of a
contingency operation. The member must commit to continued service in
the Selected Reserve and agree to share the premium cost. We appreciate
Congress's support in providing reservists' additional time after
demobilization to make an enrollment decision and amending the program
parameters so reservists can take advantage of the full period of
earned benefit if they are subsequently called to Active-Duty. These
changes make the program more attractive and allow reservists more time
to consult with their spouse before making an enrollment decision.
We are also developing implementing guidance for the new provision
that gives all Selected Reserve members, and their families, access to
TRICARE Standard, regardless of the member's duty status--the TRICARE
Reserve Select 50/85 plans. Selected Reserve members who are self-
employed, who are eligible unemployment compensation recipients or who
are not eligible for health care under an employer-sponsored health
benefit plan can enroll in TRICARE Reserve Select 50 plan, under which
the member must pay 50 percent of the premium. Selected Reserve members
who do not meet those eligibility criteria for the TRICARE Reserve 50
plan and are not eligible for TRICARE Reserve Select, can enroll in the
TRICARE Reserve Select 85 plan, under which the member must pay 85
percent premium.
employer-reservist relations
We respond to all inquiries we receive from an employer, family
member, or individual guardsmen or reservist. Employer Support of the
Guard and Reserve (ESGR) is the DOD's employer outreach agency tasked
to gain and maintain support from all public and private employers for
the men and women of the National Guard and Reserve. ESGR also reaches
out to both employers and servicemembers to ensure the requirements of
the Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployments Rights Act (USERRA)
are both understood and applied. Service members and employers may
resolve USERRA conflicts via free mediation and ombudsman services
provided by ESGR. Since October 2003, ESGR shows a continuing decline
in the number of cases opened (from 486 per month average in fiscal
year 2004 to a 335 per month average for fiscal year 2005 to an average
of 214 per month for first quarter fiscal year 2006).
equipment and facility readiness
Equipment Readiness
The Services are acquiring interoperable equipment needed to meet
joint training and operational mission requirements; as necessary for a
seamlessly integrated Total Force.
The Reserve components were appropriated about $4.13 billion in
fiscal year 2006 for equipment procurement, as compared to $2.4 billion
on average in past years. The fiscal year 2007 President Budget request
for Reserve components is $3.55 billion. The Army's Reserve components
are resourced at approximately 70 percent of required equipment. Legacy
equipment accounts for 30 percent of equipment on hand. The Army
programmed $48 billion for the modularity initiative and includes $19.2
billion for the Army National Guard (ARNG) and $3.7 billion for the
U.S. Army Reserve over the fiscal years 2006-2011 time frame.
In the short term, the Army's immediate requirements have been
resolved by cross leveling equipment among units, or having units
utilize equipment remaining in theater as Stay Behind Equipment (SBE).
These actions have an equipment availability and training impact on the
units remaining or returning to their home station.
As a long-term goal, the Services' developed strategies that
include development of blended or augment units to share modern
equipment with the active components, like the Air Force's Total Force
Integration and the Army's Modularity plan.
The Army has developed a transformation strategy that establishes a
means of providing force elements that are interchangeable, expandable,
and tailored to meet the changing needs of the combatant commanders.
This initiative, along with the global war on terror requirements,
resulted in the Army's development of a new strategy that guarantees
mobilized units to be equipped at 100 percent and non-mobilized Army
Reserve and Army Guard units to be equipped with training sets, and
identified ARNG units to meet the homeland defense requirements at
higher equipping rates. This strategy is a unit rotation model called
the Army Force Generation Model (ARFORGEN). ARFORGEN consists of
progressive and sequential levels of increasing readiness from reset/
train, to a ready force available to deploy. While the optimal rotation
rates of Active component and Reserve component forces will differ
(Active component=one deployment in 3 years, Reserve component=one
deployment in 6 years), the necessary planning, resourcing, and
training validation process is to be synchronized so that the Army can
generate ready forces from both components to achieve a steady state
deployment capability.
Military Construction
The Reserve components' military construction programs will provide
new readiness centers, called Joint Armed Forces Reserve Centers,
vehicle maintenance facilities, organizational maintenance shops, and
aircraft maintenance facilities for Reserve component missions. Future
budget requests will 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
The Department is increasing the ``sustainment'' and ``restoration
and modernization'' funding levels in order to ensure that facilities
are available, and deliver full functionality 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 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 including 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
Even prior to base realignment and closure requiring joint
construction and basing, the Reserve components have been at the
forefront of creating innovative ways to manage scarce military
construction 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 2007 legislative initiatives
The following legislative proposals are contained in the Omnibus
bill submitted with the President's budget.
A provision that raises from $10,000 to $25,000 the special pay for
Reserve component health professionals who are on Active-Duty for at
least 1 year. This increase in special pay for Selected Reserve health
care professionals in critically short wartime specialties supports
efforts to meet vitally important retention goals.
Budget Impact
The funding for this proposal is discretionary; the budget
submission will contain the funds to support the programs envisioned.
All special pay bonus authorities must stay within the original
appropriation and require no extra funds. Other proposals are in final
coordination/approval within the administration.
conclusion
The National Guard and Reserve continue to be a mission-ready
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 role as an operational
reserve in all facets of the total force. The nation continues to call
and the Reserve components continue to answer that call. But in
answering that call, we cannot lose sight of the need to balance their
commitment to country with their commitment to family and civilian
employers. That is why our efforts to: relieve stress on the force is
absolutely essential; continue to rebalance the force is so crucial;
and ensure that utilization not turn into over-utilization is so
critical. I am mindful that the path forward will not be easy, but
together we will ensure operational, fully ready, and outstanding
Reserve components. 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.
Senator Graham. Lieutenant General Blum.
STATEMENT OF LTG H. STEVEN BLUM, USA, CHIEF, NATIONAL GUARD
BUREAU
General Blum. Chairman Graham, Senator Nelson, members of
the subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to discuss the
status of personnel within the National Guard.
Soldiers and airmen make up your Army and Air National
Guard. Citizen soldiers and citizen airmen have once again
demonstrated their ability to simultaneously operate across the
entire spectrum of military operations, from close combat in
Afghanistan and Iraq to a response to homeland security or
homeland defense here, or natural disasters, such as you
witnessed in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina.
I would now, with your permission, present 2 distinguished
citizen soldiers and citizen airmen that are representative of
the 460,000 citizen soldiers and airmen that make up your Army
and Air National Guard.
The first that I'd like to introduce this morning is Master
Sergeant Kerry Miller. Please stand. Master Sergeant Miller is
a pararescue team leader from Kentucky Air National Guard. He
is married. He has two small children--Ian, 6, and Kirsten, 4.
He's a family man, a citizen soldier activated and called to
active duty in Afghanistan, pararescue man who went in at
11,500 feet in the Hindukush Mountains to recover a special
operations crew, CH-47, that was down. The crew was surrounded
by hostiles. Without any regard to his personal safety, he flew
in with a team of Rangers and other elements, went into the
mountainous region of Afghanistan to save these people. Their
helicopter was shot out from under them. We lost a second
helicopter, CH-47. He fought on the ground. Almost immediately,
seven Rangers were killed coming off of the crippled aircraft.
He and a few others fought for 7 hours, an enemy that was
determined to kill every one of them, in ranges as close as I
am to you, for 7 hours, to include calling in close-air support
as close as 50 feet away from their position. This bravery, his
concern for his fellow men, his leadership, his courage under
fire in saving his fellow soldiers that he was involved with,
in motivating and leading those who were there, redistributing
ammunition, coordinating close-air support, and getting the
remainder of those bodies out, and those that were alive out,
have resulted in him being awarded the Silver Star for Valor.
We're very proud of him. [Applause.]
Senator Graham. Very impressive, indeed.
General Blum. The second citizen soldier is from Indiana,
and he also found himself, the way we do business, not having
full-up units and having to cross level, serving with the
Kentucky National Guard in a military police unit--not in
Afghanistan; this time, in Iraq. He and 9 other members of the
Kentucky National Guard were riding around in 4 Humvees,
patrolling their area, their sector in Iraq, when a convoy of
over 30 foreign-national vehicles was ambushed by a determined
anti-Iraqi coalition group of 50 insurgents, 50 attacking an
unarmed convoy. The only thing that kept them from total
annihilation was Sergeant Tim Nein, this individual standing
before you. He's also married. He also has young children--Sam,
10, and Ian, 5. He has a lot invested here. He, as a citizen
solder, left his family to be called up for the global war on
terrorism. He threw his MP squad between certain death for
these foreign-national truck drivers and these 50 insurgents
that had a determined attack with small arms, mortars, rocket-
propelled grenades. This force of 10 took on 50 people, and,
for the next period of intensive fighting, to include going
back to vehicles, reloading, reallocating ammunition,
evacuating the wounded, calling for reinforcements, he was the
squad leader that was in charge of the ground force, and it
resulted in 27 killed in action on the part of the enemy. It
resulted in six wounded on the part of the enemy. It resulted
in one combatant being captured and a total defeat of this
determined ambush. He also was awarded the Silver Star for his
courage under fire and his leadership and dedication. We have a
lot to be proud of here, too. [Applause.]
The Directors of the Army and Air National Guard, General
Vaughn and General James, will, in the second panel, give you
all of the detail that you may want as we peel back any issues
that come up before this subcommittee, but I'd like to set the
ground rules early on this, or at least set the stage for where
we are in the Army and the Air National Guard.
Both the Army and the Air National Guard face recruiting
challenges. Admittedly, there are challenges, but I am
absolutely confident that both the Army and the Air National
Guard will achieve their end strength goals this year. There's
no doubt in my mind. That is largely due to the fact that we're
a word-of-mouth recruiting organization. Many of our troops are
now back home. They are staying with us, and they are immensely
proud of what they have accomplished. They thought what they
did in Afghanistan and Iraq and around the world made a
difference, and they want other members to be part of their
team, because they never want to go to war again without a unit
that's totally fully-manned. That means all of the positions
filled.
Recruiting and retention take on a much greater meaning
once you've been to war and you understand what it means to
fight shorthanded. They also understand what it means to fight
under-equipped. So, it's very significant to us that these
magnificent citizen soldiers and airmen have the equipment in
their hands that they need to train with, because that is also
a factor in retention and recruiting. It is very difficult to
attract someone to a unit that doesn't have equipment or keep
their interest when we have the kind of quality soldiers and
airmen we have today. They have to have modern equipment in
their hands if they're going to train on it and remain
interested in what we expect them to do. They must have that
equipment if the Governors call them out tonight or the
President calls them out for next week.
The issue of changes to Army end strength and force
structure has received a great deal of attention by the Senate
recently. There's been a lot of public discussion. General
Vaughn will address this. I want to be clear on one issue right
up front. We ask this body to again authorize and resource the
Army National Guard at an end strength of 350,000. That's what
this country needs. That's what the State Adjutants General and
the Governors believe is the right size force. That's what the
Adjutants General believe that we will achieve between now and
the end of the year.
The senior leadership of the Army has committed to fund the
Army Guard up to that level, and I would like to make sure we
all hold them to that promise.
It is great that our Members of Congress understand that
recruiting and retention are linked to equipment and the
mission. Our people are more likely to stay in the Guard when
they have a clear mission and they have quality equipment in
the right quantities to do their missions. As we talk today
about recruiting and retention, we should remain mindful that
these equipment shortages in the aftermath of Base Realignment
and Closure (BRAC)-related mission disruptions absolutely
compounded our strength challenges and make what we're doing
now even more difficult than it needed to be.
Capability really comes from three things. It's having
people that are trained, and it's having the equipment in the
hands of these people that are trained to use that equipment.
If either the people aren't there or the training isn't there
or the equipment isn't there, the capability isn't there. We
don't want to confuse, as General Schoomaker often says,
enthusiasm with capability. We need to make sure we have
capability.
Our homeland capabilities must support the warfight, but
they must also protect our citizens here at home. The National
Guard has taken several initiatives to provide the Governors of
the States with what we feel to be 10 critical or essential
capabilities. Your National Guard's homeland readiness is
rooted in these 10 essential capabilities. They're aviation,
engineering, civil support teams, which Congress has provided,
security forces, medical forces, transportation, maintenance,
logistics, a command-and-control (C2) apparatus--which really
isn't command and control, it's really coordination and
communication when we're talking about a joint interagency
effort here in the United States. You still need that C2 piece,
however, and the joint force headquarters in each State
absolutely do that superbly--and communications. You have to
have the hardware to be able to communicate--the radios and the
satellite phones and the satellite dishes and so forth.
We are leveraging existing combat capabilities that are
resident in the Army and the Air Guard, the units that we have,
but we're also making them even better and more relevant to
what we may be called upon, on no notice, here at home to do.
We have established a Joint Force Headquarters and have a Joint
Operations Center that operates 24/7, 365 days of the year, so
that we can provide situational awareness immediately to the
commanders in chief of the States and the Commander in Chief of
the Nation, and to the combatant commanders, the Joint Staff,
the Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD), the Departments
of the Army and the Air Force, and whoever else may need to
share that information, to include the Department of Homeland
Security.
We also have weapons of mass destruction (WMD),
counterterrorism, and consequence management response teams
that we call chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear, or
high-yield explosive enhanced response force package teams. As
a matter of fact, on April 4, 2006, at the DC Armory, about 3
miles from this location, we will be exercising one of those,
and we invite your attendance. We will have three or four
iterations of training. It will not be a demonstration; it will
be truly watching these force packages absolutely go through
the training that we put them through so that they're ready in
case we need them. This will happen on April 4, 2006, at the DC
Armory, between the hours of 11 a.m. and 1 p.m. We'd invite
anyone's attendance who's interested.
In closing, the successful integration of civilian and
military organizations and their capability have long been a
strength of the National Guard. Our members live in both
worlds. Our forces operate in both worlds. We are proud to be
able to bring these community organizations and capabilities
together and render our fellow citizens essential help when
it's needed most.
Sir, I'll close now, and look forward to your questions.
[The joint prepared statement of General Blum, General
Vaughn, and General James follows:]
Senator Graham. Thank you, General. Thank you, Secretary
Hall.
We're supposed to vote around 3:00, and I think we may have
more than one vote, so we can stay until about 3:15. My goal is
to ask meaningful questions, hear the testimony, and let you go
on about your business, and see if we can get it all wrapped up
by 3:15. I'm going to start and then let Senator Nelson take
over.
Let's get directly to the point, the bottom line of your
testimony, in a couple of areas. Number one, money and benefits
matter when it comes to recruiting and retention. Have we
proved that if you increase the benefits and you increase the
pay and the bonuses that it has a positive effect? Is that true
or not?
Mr. Hall. I think it's true if you increase them in the
areas that you want to target them towards. I think we need to
target the benefits towards those bearing the brunt today.
Sometimes when we target the benefits that are deferred
compensation, we're not focusing on that trooper and their
families serving today. That's where it's making the
difference.
Senator Graham. General?
General Blum. Sir, the money speaks for itself. You hit on
it earlier. Those that are re-enlisting in record numbers are
all taking advantage of this bonus. Because of that, they're
re-enlisting for a longer period of time. So, what we are
getting from these bonuses is the most experienced, committed
force that this Nation has ever had in its Reserve component.
Senator Graham. I would like to add to that, in terms of
knowing where we'll be in the future--if you had asked anybody
at this table 5 years ago, ``Would we have been at war for 4\1/
2\ years? Would we have had multiple deployments? Would we have
the Silver Star winners among the Guard and Reserve?'', most
people wouldn't have anticipated the future and our needs. So,
my comment to you, Secretary Hall, is, the one thing I've found
is that money and benefits matter, and we don't know who we're
going to need next, and we don't know how much we're going to
use them. I'm going to try, while my time is here as a
committee chairman, to spread the benefits around to the whole
force, and focus them effectively on the people who are bearing
the brunt. The people bearing the brunt of this war are those
in uniform. Every member of the Guard and Reserve is subject to
leaving their family, and subject to being called up,
domestically and internationally. That's why I believe TRICARE
eligibility for every guardsman and reservist who is subject to
deployment is important.
No one would argue that these two gentlemen you've just
pointed out to us General Blum and their families should be
denied the ability to have eligibility for full-time health
care benefits, given their sacrifice to their country. They
represent the best in us all. There a lot of people out there
like me. I'm not deployable, so don't count me. There are a lot
of people out there that haven't received Silver Stars, but
they spend 1 weekend a month, 2 weeks a year, and who knows
what comes their way? My message to the force at large is that
you're appreciated, and the benefits need to be to the force at
large, not just to a few who have sacrificed greatly.
Now, about equipment, what effect has this war had on our
equipment accounts? What do we need to do differently to make
sure the Guard and Reserve have the equipment they need to meet
their demands and to make sure that doesn't hurt us,
recruiting-and-retention wise? Where are we on equipment?
Mr. Hall. I'll start, and then turn to General Blum.
You've hit it right on the head. We have at least five
areas in which we have to have equipment addressed and that's
the reset of equipment, the repair of equipment, the equipment
for modularity, the equipment for homeland defense, and then
the overall equipment for training for the Guard and Reserve.
In fact, we will need to add more money. From testimony before
there's $21 billion in the Guard account, which is
unprecedented, to address those needs, but I would say,
candidly, there needs to be more. The President's budget this
year has about $1.5 billion more for equipment than last year.
Along with supplementals, we have started the effort, but my
testimony would be that we need to sustain that. We need to
look in 2008, when the budget comes up, to see that that $21
billion is added onto. General Schoomaker, before these
committees, has stated that the goal now, as it has not been in
the past, is to make sure that the Guard and Reserve are
equipped with the same equipment and the same amounts of
equipment as the Active-Duty Forces. That is his commitment.
That statement carries a lot of money with it. I think
that's our goal. Our challenge is to make sure that we follow
through on that goal.
Senator Graham. That is welcome news, and I really
appreciate your candor. I couldn't agree with you more. We're
going to have to find the money, because we're not going to
send people to war without the best equipment possible. We're
not going to have the redheaded-stepchild-approach anymore to
the Guard and Reserve, because you're just as subject to
getting killed in the Guard and Reserve as you are on Active-
Duty.
General Blum. Sir, there's another dimension to that. I,
too, welcome that. That's an unprecedented, historic commitment
on the part of the DOD and the Department of the Army and the
Department of the Air Force to adequately resource their
Reserve components. My concern is that the good intent of
Congress and the good intention of the commitment of the senior
leadership still has to go through that path, through that
long, snakelike Pentagon process that is not built to make sure
that the congressional intent actually gets in the hands of the
people that the aid was supposed to get to. I have absolutely
no confidence that I have a way to track the $21 billion and
make that match a serial number on a truck that ends up in Iowa
or it ends up in some readiness center around the country. If
that could be addressed, as well as the commitment, that would
be hugely helpful.
Senator Graham. That's a great suggestion.
I have one last question and I'll turn it over to Senator
Nelson.
You said that we need 350,000 Reserve component people
funded, General Blum. The President's budget doesn't quite get
there. Do you agree, Secretary Hall, that that's what we need?
Mr. Hall. I do. After the budget was sent over, testimony
from Secretary Harvey, General Schoomaker, and General Cody
also agreed with the Secretary, that the Department is
committed to funding a National Guard at the level they grow
into including 350,000. That has developed since the budget was
sent over. The number, as General Blum said, is 350,000. I
think he's probably at about 337,000 right now, and growing. I
am confident, also, with the incentives that they have put in,
and that General Vaughn is pursuing, that they will get
350,000. That is the number which is to be funded to.
Senator Graham. Thank you very much.
Senator Nelson.
Senator Ben Nelson. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Secretary Hall, the recently released QDR concludes that,
``The Reserve component must be operationalized so that select
reservists and units are more accessible and more readily
deployable than today.'' To do this, the QDR proposes to
increase the period authorized for the Presidential Reserve
Call-up from 270 days to 365 days. What's the underlying
rationale for extending the Presidential Reserve Call-up to 365
days? The President already has authority to mobilize Guard and
Reserve members up to 24 months under his partial-mobilization
authority.
Second, if this proposal is enacted, will you give us your
assurance that the Department will not use it to circumvent the
24-cumulative-month limit on mobilization under the President's
partial-mobilization authority?
Mr. Hall. I talked to all of the Guard and Reserve Chiefs
before we came over, to get their view, and also to General
Blum, because he has commanded under a Policy Review Committee.
I asked each and every one of them, ``If you had the authority
to have 365 days, rather than 270 days, what would that do for
you in the field?'' In fact, I'll ask General Blum to tell you
his experience in Bosnia and Kosovo. Each and every one of them
said the same word, it gives more ``flexibility.'' Many times,
270 does not fit the year that you need people. I think the
short answer is, it provides more flexibility for all of them.
I'll let them comment on that.
On the second point, the commitment--and, by the way, my
personal view is 24 cumulative months ought to be the time. I
know the word is ``consecutive,'' but I think we need to track
that, and that we do not have anybody serving involuntarily
recalled beyond that 24-month cumulative months. That's my
personal view.
General Blum. Sir, I support expanding that authority to
365 days. It doesn't mean you have to use the whole year, but I
personally experienced a task force made up of personnel from
21 States of multicomponent Active, Guard, and Reserve, and it
would have been highly useful for me to have a slightly wider
window to make all of those task forces that time-phase in.
Everybody doesn't come in on the same day, and they don't all
leave on the same day. You have elements of the task force that
literally start months ahead, and some that come out months
later, so it's very useful to have a couple of months on the
end of 6 months, either way, so that you don't have risk for
the ground commander, or the Joint Force Commander over there.
He shouldn't have to assume risk because we're racing against
the calendar. If we need a couple of more days, it is much more
useful to provide those days. If it's not abused, I think it's
a magnificent tool, or an additional arrow in the quiver of the
Secretary of Defense and the President.
Senator Ben Nelson. Thank you. General Blum, as we're all
aware, the administration surprised us with the proposed
authorized end strength of 350,000 soldiers for the Army
National Guard, with funding for only 333,000 soldiers, all
without coordination with the Governors who would be affected
by this reduction in funding. In response to this proposal,
Senator Graham and I introduced a resolution that was adopted
by the Senate honoring the service of our National Guard
members and requesting consultation by the Secretary of Defense
with Congress and the State Governors prior to offering
proposals to change the National Guard force structure. The
Army has subsequently promised to fund whatever end strength
the Army Guard achieves up to the authorized 350,000. The Army
Guard is on a path to reach its authorized end strength.
Are you confident that the Army can find the funds to
support the end strength above 333,000? Has the Army made a
commitment to provide the equipment needed for the increased
Army Guard end strength?
General Blum. Secretary Harvey and General Schoomaker
personally have committed to me that it is their full intention
to restore the full $788.8 million that was taken out of the
2007 budget for the Army National Guard. That would be about
$200 million, roughly, for personnel, a little over $200
million for operation and maintenance, and about $62.5 million
for the Defense Health Program. What I never understood, but
they have demonstrated a commitment to restore, is the over-
$318 million worth of equipment and procurement that were taken
out as part of that personnel reduction. They all, together,
add up to $788.8 million for 2007. That will fix 2007, but I am
concerned that 2008 through 2011 need to be addressed, as well,
because if we follow the programmatics through the FYDP, the
National Guard does not stop at 342,000 or 333,000; it ends up
going as low as 324,000 in 2011. I don't think anyone here
foresees a National Guard the size of 324,000 5 years from now,
so why would we fund it at that level? I would like that looked
into, please, or addressed carefully.
Senator Ben Nelson. Thank you.
Senator Graham. Very good questions.
I'd like to end on this note. The idea of reducing the
Reserve component by--what is it? 20,000? 22,000?
Mr. Hall. Well, it would be 17,000, and then 5,000 for the
Army Reserve, for 22,000, total.
Senator Graham. Does that make sense?
Mr. Hall. I think the testimony by the Army leadership we
have referenced shows, in retrospect, it does not, and their
commitment is to fund it to what they grow to. You've heard the
General say that he is absolutely convinced that they will grow
to 350,000, and that's what needs to be funded.
Senator Graham. What a great answer. A good way to end.
Secretary Hall, thank you for your service. I know there's
probably a lot of things you could do. You're a talented guy. I
appreciate your helping us with our Reserve component issues
and what you've done at the DOD.
General Blum, thank you for your candor. We're going to
follow the money, too. We're going to make sure the equipment
gets to the people who would be subject to needing it.
I feel pretty good, I really do. I think the money we've
spent and the benefits we've redesigned are paying off. The
challenges of this war are long from over. As a Nation, we've
learned from this experience, and we're beginning to adapt.
It's because of people's willingness to come up here and tell
us the truth and provide us honest testimony about their needs.
So, thank you both.
Second panel, please come forward. [Pause.]
Thank you all very much. Our second panel consists of
Lieutenant Clyde A. Vaughn, Director of the Army National
Guard; and Lieutenant General Daniel James III, Director of the
Air National Guard.
I want to add my congratulations to a long and
distinguished career. I hate to see it come to an end, but you
should be very proud of what you've done for our Nation. Thank
you for your service, General James.
Lieutenant General James R. Helmly, you're going on to
something new, but you can be proud of what you've done here.
You have been an honest broker, and I will be forever in your
debt about coming up here and telling us the truth as you see
it.
Vice Admiral John G. Cotton, Chief, Navy Reserve;
Lieutenant General John W. Bergman, Commander, Marine Force
Reserve; and Lieutenant General John A. Bradley, Chief, Air
Force Reserve, thank you all for coming, and we'll see if we
can do this in 30 minutes.
We'll start from my left and go to my right.
STATEMENT OF LTG CLYDE A. VAUGHN, ARNG, DIRECTOR, ARMY NATIONAL
GUARD
General Vaughn. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and Senator Nelson.
First of all, I'd like to introduce my Command Sergeant
Major John Gipe, from Kentucky, sitting with two great Kentucky
Silver Star winners, by the way. There's a deal going over
there or something.
Senator Graham. Anybody else in the Guard, other than
people from Kentucky? [Laughter.]
General Vaughn. If the rest of them are like that, that's
what we need. [Laughter.]
Senator Graham. There you go. It seems like they're pretty
tough in Kentucky.
General Vaughn. Sir, thanks for your great support. These
States have met all mission requirements this year from the
high of Iraq in combat, in combat support, and in combat
service support. You've heard all the details, how many brigade
combat teams and all that were downrange.
We've had all these enduring requirements for some time in
Kosovo, in Bosnia, and the Multinational Force and the
observers in the Sinai, and it goes on and on and on, and, also
with Hurricanes Katrina and Rita. Your great support for
recruiting and retention initiatives and what you've done in
this committee has made it possible for us to reach 350,000 end
strength. I know we're in a hurry, but I really look forward to
your questions, and I'd just like to thank you again for your
great support.
STATEMENT OF LT. GEN. DANIEL JAMES III, ANG, DIRECTOR, AIR
NATIONAL GUARD
General James. I, too, would like to make my remarks brief.
It has been quite a challenging tenure for the Air National
Guard. We have been an operational Reserve, along with the Air
Force Reserve. We've gone through that transition to
operational Reserve. We've been funded at C-1 status, and we
have very well-trained and very experienced units, but our
equipment is getting a little old. Consequently, the Air Force
would like to see it retired, and we're working very hard to
replace older equipment with new missions or newer equipment.
Recapitalization is important.
I think one of my proudest moments in the Air National
Guard occurred last year with Hurricane Katrina, when I, along
with my colleague here to my right, General Vaughn, moved over
40,000 soldiers and airmen into the New Orleans area. In 9
days, we flew over 2,000 sorties, tens of thousands of tons of
cargo, and, as I said, multiple thousands of soldiers. To me,
those 9 days really proved the worth in the surge capability of
the Guard. It didn't just stop right after that. We continued
to supply that very much needed endeavor. I think it was a
proud moment. Those 9 days reminded me of the Berlin airlift.
We had tankers and 130s and all kinds of airplanes going in
there. We had air-traffic controllers. We had people serving
over 11,000 hot meals a day. We had civil engineers, security
forces, communications specialists--everybody pitching in--and
it was a proud moment.
As was mentioned earlier, I am challenged by recruiting and
retention, and I'll go into more depth on those areas after my
colleagues have a chance to make their opening remarks and
answer any questions.
It has been my great privilege to serve this Nation, and I
am very proud to be an American.
Senator Graham. Thank you.
STATEMENT OF LTG JAMES R. HELMLY, USA, CHIEF, ARMY RESERVE
General Helmly. Chairman Graham, Senator Nelson, thank you
very much for the opportunity to be with you today.
I'm Ron Helmly. I'm an American soldier, and very proud of
it. I thank you very much for your complimentary remarks. I've
been proud to serve in this position.
I wish to say, in front of the committee, that I could not
be prouder were I to be an enlisted member of the Army Guard,
Air Guard, or any of the other Services you see represented
before you. You're correct, we are, indeed, privileged to have
the magnificent young Americans who populate all of our Armed
Forces. I'm very proud to be a member of that force.
I wish to introduce to you two of our heroes from the
United States Army Reserve today. With us today are Captain
Jason Rawnsborg and Sergeant Jesse Smee. I'd ask them to stand,
please.
Captain Rawnsborg completed a tour as commander of a
transportation truck company at al Asad, where his unit
maintained--I did not believe this myself--in excess of a 90-
percent operational readiness rate, riding the roads from al
Asad to Jordan, and supporting our comrades in the United
States Marine Corps out of al Asad Combat Base. That was true.
I was fortunate to visit with his unit last summer. They are,
indeed, magnificent Americans.
Sergeant Smee was a truck driver out of Tikrit in Iraq,
where he drove 5,000-gallon fuel tankers, a favorite target of
the insurgents. We're privileged to have both of these
noncommissioned officers (NCOs) and officers in our ranks. They
represent the immensely strong, capable, character-strong
Americans who populate our Services.
Thank you very much. [Applause.]
There is no doubt, Mr. Chairman, in my mind that our
greatest challenge is manning the force. In fact, some years
ago I was asked to speak at a breakfast here on Capitol Hill,
and I remarked that I felt then that our three greatest
challenges were manning the force, manning the force, and
manning the force. That is simply because, in the some 33 years
since we wisely moved to an All-Volunteer Recruited Force in
our Armed Forces, this is the first extended-duration stress
that we've placed on that force. Candidly, with regard to
benefits and entitlements and those kind of things, in my own
professional judgment, it is not so much the amount as the fact
that we constantly are aware that it does play a role and that
we move ahead of time to modernize those with the cost-of-
living and with other entitlements and benefits provided to the
Active Force, as well as in private life. What we found early
in this conflict was that our recruitment and re-enlistment
benefits, entitlements, educational benefits, TRICARE, et
cetera, had not been modernized in over 5 years' time. They had
been taken for granted, and they were not prepared to withstand
the stress on the force.
So, I look forward to your questions about such matters,
and thank you very much for your interest and your leadership
in addressing those very important matters.
Thank you.
[The prepared statement of General Helmly follows:]
STATEMENT OF VADM JOHN G. COTTON, USNR, CHIEF, NAVY RESERVE
Admiral Cotton. Chairman Graham and Senator Nelson, and, in
particular, the hardworking staffers on the back wall--and a
couple of them are actually busy reservists; they also serve
our Nation, and we're proud of them. I don't know which
reservist to bring here today, but I will tell you that we have
over 22,000 Navy reservists fully integrated with the Navy, our
fleets, and our combatant commanders on duty right now around
the world. They're on either 1-day or 365-day orders. It
doesn't matter. They're working for us somewhere deployed,
fully integrated, and doing a great job.
While it's true that the Navy Reserve might be a little
understrength right now, we are emphasizing quality and global
war on terrorism skill sets rather than just quantity. Our end
strength today is slightly above the requested end strength for
2007, so we do feel very comfortable, especially because we're
working so closely with the United States Navy in Active/
Reserve integration. We've never had such good working
relationships, especially with the incentives, the sailor-for-
life culture that we're borrowing from the Marines, and also a
continuum of service. It's not about a race to get 20 years of
perfect attendance. It could be 20 years of service over 40
years, with on-ramps and off-ramps to service. We're bringing
good skill sets back into the war right now, as you say, which
is a long war.
The Navy Reserve is adapting. At home, we quickly respond
to disasters, to Northern Command requirements, as well as to
Navy requirements. We deploy to support combatant commanders.
We look forward to your questions, sir.
[The prepared statement of Admiral Cotton follows:]
Prepared Statement by VADM. John G. Cotton, USN
i. introduction
Chairman Graham, Senator Nelson, distinguished members of the
subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to speak today about the
Navy and its Navy Reserve.
Our Navy Reserve continues its transformation to better support
combat and combat service support missions throughout the world. Navy
reservists are no longer solely a strategic force waiting for the call
to mobilize in a war between nation-states. They are operational and
forward, fighting the global war on terror as Seabees in Iraq, civil
affairs sailors in Afghanistan, customs inspectors in Kuwait,
logistical aircrew and Joint Task Force staff in the Horn of Africa,
and as relief workers in disaster recovery operations in the United
States and around the world.
Your support in this transformation from a strategic reserve to an
operational reserve is greatly appreciated. Congress passed legislation
in the 2006 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) that provided
force-shaping tools allowing the Navy to best distribute sailors within
the Total Force. You authorized the flexibility to transfer funds from
Reserve Annual Training (AT) accounts to Reserve Active-Duty (AD)
accounts. These changes enable our sailors to spend more time at their
supported operational commands and more time fighting the war on
terror.
Reserve component sailors are serving selflessly and are fully
integrated throughout the Department of Defense (DOD), with our
coalition partners and with every civil support agency. Our sailors and
their families continue to earn our respect and gratitude for their
service and their many sacrifices. As part of the All-Volunteer Force,
they reserve again and again, freely giving of their skills and
capabilities to enhance the Total Force team. On behalf of these brave
men and women and their families, thank you for your continued support
through legislation that improves benefits for their health and
welfare.
Single Manpower Resource Sponsor
Navy is taking a Total Force approach to delivering the workforce
of the 21st century. The Total Force consists of active and Reserve
military, civil service, and contractors. The Total Force will deliver
a more responsive workforce with new skills, improved integrated
training and will be better prepared to meet the challenges of the Long
War. As the Chief of Naval Personnel testified, the Navy is
concentrating this effort in a single resource sponsor: the Manpower,
Personnel, Training, and Education (MPT&E) enterprise. Our Navy Reserve
is an integral part of the MPT&E and is working closely with the Chief
of Naval Personnel to best leverage all Navy resources to produce the
greatest warfighting capabilities possible.
Our ``One Navy'' goal is to be better aligned to determine the
future force (capabilities, number, size, and mix) based on DOD and
Department of Navy (DON) strategic guidance and operational needs.
Specifically, the new MPT&E domain will deliver:
A Workforce Responsive to The Joint Mission: Derived
from the needs of Joint Warfighters.
A Total Force: Providing a flexible mix of manpower
options to meet warfighting needs while managing risk.
Cost Effectiveness: Delivering the best Navy workforce
value within fiscal constraints and realities.
Strategy for Our People
To accomplish the optimal distribution of trained sailors
throughout the Total Force, the MPT&E is developing a ``Strategy for
Our People.'' This strategy will provide the guidance and tools to
assess, train, distribute, and develop our manpower to become a
mission-focused Total Force that meets the warfighting requirements of
the Navy.
Each Navy reservist fills a crucial role in the Total Force,
providing skill sets and capabilities gained in both military service
and civilian life. For example, a sailor who learned to operate heavy
equipment on Active-Duty, and who is currently employed as a foreman in
the construction industry, brings both military and civilian skill sets
to his unit or individual augmentee assignment.
Additionally, Reserve component sailors can perform the same
mission while training at home as they do when deployed. For instance,
harbor patrol sailors use the same core skill sets training in
Portland, Boston, Charleston, and Jacksonville harbors as they use in
Ash Shuaybah, Kuwait. Sailors also use these skill sets when acting as
first responders within the United States. While Hurricane Katrina was
still crossing Louisiana and Mississippi, Navy Reserve Seabees were
driving their personal vehicles in the eye of the hurricane to provide
search and rescue capabilities followed by their traditional ``can do''
reconstruction efforts. After a tornado hit Evansville, Indiana, at
night, the local Navy Operational Support Center served as a
communications and emergency triage headquarters, and sailors
immediately responded with search and rescue teams, saving lives.
``Continuum of Service'' and ``Sailor for Life''
Our Active component and Reserve component sailors receive valuable
experience and training throughout their careers, and our vision for
the future is to create a ``Continuum of Service'' system that enables
an easy transition between statuses. We are building a personnel system
in which sailors can move between Active component and Reserve
component based on the needs of the Service and availability of the
member to support existing requirements. To make these transitions
seamless, the Navy will develop smooth ``on ramp'' and ``off ramp''
opportunities. Sailors will serve on Active-Duty for a period of time,
then train and work in the Reserve Force and, with minimal
administrative effort, return to Active-Duty. The Navy will offer
experienced sailors the ability to transition between statuses when
convenient, while incentivizing rate changes and service assignments at
the right time and place, all in a ``Continuum of Service'' throughout
their careers. All reservists, Full Time Support (FTS), Selected
Reserve (SELRES) and even our important Individual Ready Reserve
members, will benefit from increased opportunities to serve and re-
serve.
ii. changing demand signals--new and nontraditional missions
Navy sailors continue to support the global war on terror in
Southwest Asia, around the world and at home. Over 5,000 Reserve
component sailors are currently mobilized and serving in various
capability areas such as Navy Coastal Warfare, Seabees, Intelligence,
cargo airlift, cargo handlers, customs inspectors, civil affairs, port
security, medical (including doctors, nurses, and hospital corpsmen),
and on the staff of every combatant commander (COCOM).
Operational Support
Mobilization alone does not reflect the total contribution of the
Navy's Reserve. On any given day, an additional 15,000 Reserve
component sailors are providing support to the Fleet, serving in a
variety of capabilities, from flight instructor duties to counter
narcotics operations, from standing watch with the Chief of Naval
Operations staff to relief support for Hurricane's Katrina, Rita, and
Wilma. Sailors have provided over 15,000 man-years of support to the
Fleet during the past year. This support is the equivalent of 18 Naval
Construction Battalions or 2 Carrier Strike Groups.
To define the Total Force requirements and maximize operational
support, Commander, Fleet Forces Command commenced a continuous Reserve
Zero-Based Review process in 2004. Navy and joint mission requirements
were prioritized, followed by a thorough analysis of Reserve component
manpower available to meet those requirements. The ZBR continues to
facilitate Active Reserve Integration (ARI), placing Reserve component
billets in various Active component units where the requirement for
surge capabilities and operational support is predictable and periodic.
This capabilities-based review also enabled the Fleet to develop
mission requirements that were inclusive and dependent upon skill sets
and capabilities resident within its aligned Reserve component.
The Navy supports 21 joint capability areas, built on the
foundations of Sea Strike, Sea Shield, Sea Basing and FORCEnet, and the
Navy Reserve component is fully integrated in all enterprises.
Excellent examples of ARI are highlighted in Central Command, where 50
percent of the Navy individual augmentee requirement is being met by
Reserve component sailors. Operational Health Support Unit Dallas
deployed with 460 medical and dental specialists for 11 months, during
which the unit maintained health clinics in Iraq and hospitals in
Kuwait. These sailors relieved an Army unit, set up their medical
capabilities in the Army Camp, and provided integrated joint health
care to all Services.
Navy's newly established Navy Expeditionary Combat Command
integrates the Reserve component expeditionary and combat service
support capabilities into one Total Force command. The Naval
Construction Force has 139 units comprised of Active component and
Reserve component sailors, and Naval Coastal Warfare continues to
rebalance Active and Reserve personnel to meet COCOM requirements.
Fleet Response Units (FRU) are directly integrated with Active
component aviation units. FRU sailors maintain and operate the same
equipment as Fleet personnel, supporting the Fleet Response Plan by
providing experienced personnel who are qualified and ready to rapidly
surge to deployed Fleet units. This ARI initiative reduces training
costs by having all sailors maintain and operate the same equipment. No
longer are the Active and Reserve components using different
configurations for different missions.
Another ARI initiative is the Squadron Augmentation Unit, which
provides experienced maintenance personnel and qualified flight
instructors to Fleet Replacement Squadrons (FRS) and Training Commands.
Experienced Reserve component technicians and aviators instruct both
Active component and Reserve component sailors to maintain and fly
current fleet aircraft at every FRS.
The Reserve Order Process
One constraint to these initiatives is the Reserve order processes.
The current system has multiple types of Reserve orders: InActive-Duty
for Training (IDT), InActive-Duty for Training-Travel (IDTT), Annual
Training (AT), Active-Duty for Training (ADT), and Active-Duty for
Special Work (ADSW).
In addition to multiple types of orders, the funding process for
these various types of orders can be equally complex. Navy is currently
evaluating process options that will streamline the system and make
support to the fleet more seamless. In fact, efforts such as the August
2005 conversion of Navy Reserve Order Writing System to ADSW order
writing have already improved the situation for sailors and the fleet
by allowing the same order writing system to be used for both ADT/AT
and ADSW. Additionally, the Navy Reserve is also addressing these
issues by emphasizing and increasing ADSW usage, which is simply
``work'' funding for operational support to the Fleet, rather than the
previous way of doing business with training orders for work. The
baseline data call of required work was initiated in 2005 with an
implementation goal of accurately funded ADSW accounting lines in
fiscal year 2008. COCOMs continue to review operational support
requirements and the appropriate level of funding for the global war on
terror and surge operations. Emphasizing ADSW will be a significant
evolution in the Navy's effort to integrate its Reserve Force
capabilities by aligning funding sources and accurately resourcing the
accounts responsible for Navy Reserve operational support.
iii. size and shape of the force
The total number of Navy reservists, both SELRES and FTS, is
requested to be 71,300 for fiscal year 2007. The ongoing ZBR and
effective ARI continue to optimally integrate the capabilities of the
Total Force, which optimizes the force mix of Active component and
Reserve component sailors needed to support the Fleet while still
providing effective surge operational support.
Common Active Component/Reserve Component Pay System
A common pay and personnel system that provides for a seamless
transition from Active component to Reserve component is essential to
the success of our ``Continuum of Service'' and ``Sailor for Life''
programs. Ideally, manpower transactions will someday be accomplished
on a laptop with a mouse click, and data will be shared through a
common data repository with all DOD enterprises. Navy fully supports
the vision of an integrated set of processes and tools to manage all
pay and personnel needs for the individual, and provide necessary
levels of personnel visibility to support joint warfighter
requirements. The processes and tools should provide the ability for a
clean financial audit of personnel costs and support accurate, agile
decisionmakings at all levels of the DOD through a common system and
standardized data structure.
The Defense Integrated Manpower and Human Resource System (DIMHRS)
is expected to be that system. A Deputy Secretary of Defense assessment
is currently underway to determine the best course of action for the
Department. The assessment will conclude in early summer.
iv. recruiting
Accessions
Navy Reserve accessions are drawn from multiple sources, but we are
increasingly focused on the trained and experienced Navy veteran. Our
leadership is constantly emphasizing a ``Continuum of Service'' and
``Sailor for Life'' themes that enable sailors to more easily
transition between components. The entire Total Force chain of command
is committed to changing the culture of service and REservice by
continually educating Active component sailors about the benefits of
continued service as members of any of the Reserve components.
National Call to Service
A relatively new accession source is the National Call to Service
(NCS), with contracts that include both Active component and Reserve
component service as part of a recruit's initial military obligation.
Congress first authorized this program in the NDAA 2003. The NCS
program is enjoying considerable success, and is helping to mitigate
some of the prior-service shortages in ratings that are critical to the
prosecution of the global war on terror. Under this program, a recruit
enlists for an Active-Duty commitment of 15 months after training. At
the end of the commitment, the individual can either extend on Active-
Duty or commit to 2 years of drilling in the SELRES. Navy has been
particularly aggressive in recruiting Masters at Arms and Hospital
Corpsmen for this program, and the first recruits are completing their
Active component service and will begin drilling in the Navy Reserve
this year. Navy's success in attracting recruits for this program is
steadily growing. We assessed 998 recruits in 13 ratings in fiscal year
2004, and 1,866 recruits in 23 ratings in fiscal year 2005. Navy has a
goal of 2,340 NCS recruits in 45 different ratings this year, and will
continue this successful program in fiscal year 2007.
Attrition
Attrition and recruiting are a crucial part of maintaining the
Total Force. Fortunately, the global war on terror is not having an
appreciable affect on attrition. Navy Reserve attrition is currently 27
percent and has remained at approximately the same level for the past 5
years.
Enlisted Recruiting
Fiscal Year 2006 Navy Reserve enlisted recruiting continues to be
challenging, with 3,415 recruits attained out of a goal of 11,180 as of
February 28, 2006. Although the Navy Recruiting Command has focused
every Active and Reserve recruiter on the Reserve component mission, it
only accessed 85 percent of the fiscal year 2005 Reserve component
enlisted goal, recruiting 9,788 against a target of 11,491. Navy
attributes the recruiting shortfalls to several causes, primarily the
continued strong retention of Active component sailors. The global war
on terror has caused an increase in the number of recruits needed by
the Army and Marine Corps, with competitive bonuses offered by all
services. Civilian unemployment rates remain low, and public opinion
influencers, such as friends and family, are less likely to recommend
military service as a career.
To address Navy Reserve recruiting challenges and to promote
continued success in recruiting the active force, Navy is increasing
the amount of enlistment bonuses for both prior service and non-prior
service Reserve accessions. Congress raised that legislative cap to
$20,000 for the non-prior service program and $15,000 for the prior
service program. These programs will enhance the attractiveness of
service in the Reserve for those currently in our targeted ratings.
Other measures being taken to address the Reserve recruiting
shortfall include implementation of expanded authorities provided by
Congress in the NDAA for Fiscal Year 2006. These include: authority to
pay Reserve Affiliation Bonuses in lump sum, enhanced high-priority
unit assignment pay, and increases in the amount of the Reserve
Montgomery G.I. Bill. Navy is also applying force-shaping tools to
attract non-rated Reserve sailors to undermanned ratings.
Officer Recruiting
Reserve officer recruiting continues to fall short, and the Navy
has failed to meet its Reserve Officer Recruiting Goal since 2002. The
primary market for Reserve component officers is Navy veterans and as
in enlisted recruiting, high retention of Active component officers
reduces the pool of available candidates. Reserve Medical Officer
Programs are especially hard hit in today's environment, with multiple
factors affecting recruiting:
High competing civilian salaries
Larger number of nontraditional students with a
decreased propensity toward military service
Long tours of duty overseas, 6-18 months, increase the
risk of losing civilian practices while deployed
v. readiness
In addition to having the right sailor assigned to the right
billet, all sailors must be ready to answer the call to serve. They
must be medically, physically, and administratively ready to deploy.
Medical Readiness
Navy Reserve is a leader in medical readiness. In 2002, the Navy
Reserve developed the Medical Readiness Reporting System (MRRS) as a
comprehensive tracking system for Individual Medical Readiness (IMR).
MRRS, a web-based application with a central aggregating database,
links with existing authoritative data systems to reduce data input
requirements and improve data accuracy. MRRS gives headquarters staffs
and leadership a real-time view of force medical readiness, and
received the 2005 DON CIO Information Management/IT Excellence Award
for Innovation. It is being adopted throughout the Department of the
Navy to give commanders the Web-based tool they need to more
effectively and efficiently measure and predict IMR.
Navy Reserve continues to be a DOD leader in percent of personnel
who are fully medically ready (FMR). In October 2004, Navy Reserve
reported 44 percent FMR personnel and, with an ongoing emphasis on MRRS
utilization by all commands, showed a dramatic improvement in January
2006 to 73 percent FMR per DOD IMR standards.
Physical Readiness
Navy Reserve is actively participating in Total Force solutions to
address physical readiness. The CNO's ``Fitness Board of Advisors'' is
exploring methodologies for changing the culture of fitness in the Navy
to ensure a ready, fighting force. The Secretary of the Navy's ``Health
and Productivity Management'' group is addressing the impact of a fit
force on work productivity. Many participants are members of both
groups in order to facilitate the exchange of good ideas. Further, Navy
Reserve is working with BUPERS to revise the Physical Readiness
Information Management System to more accurately capture fitness
testing data.
Administrative Readiness
Navy Reserve tracks administrative readiness with the ``Type
Commander Readiness Management System--Navy Reserve Readiness Module,''
which provides a scalable view of readiness for the entire Force. This
Navy Reserve developed system has served as the prototype for the
``Defense Readiness Reporting System,'' and links to many DOD systems.
Navy Reserve leaders have utilized accurate data for all categories and
elements since the first data call in 2003, and can quickly determine
readiness information for individuals, units, activities, regions, and
any other desired capability breakouts.
vi. transformation
Navy Reserve continues to lead DOD Reserve component
transformation. Through the Base Realignment and Closure process, Navy
Reserve Centers are consolidating into larger, more centralized Navy
Operational Support Centers on military bases, while maintaining
presence in all 50 States and reducing excess capacity by 99 percent.
Consolidation of smaller facilities provides a better return on
investment of precious RPN and OM&NR funding, with better utilization
of administration and staff support for SELRES, while aligning with
Navy regional commanders instead of separate Reserve component Regions.
Whenever possible, our Reserve component sailors have indicated a
strong desire to ``flex drill'' at their Active component supported
commands, which achieves a greater level of readiness and operational
support, as well as Total Force integration.
vii. summary
Navy Reserve is evolving from a dispersed strategic force of the
Cold War to an adaptive and responsive operational force that will be
required to meet the surge requirements for future asymmetric threats.
Change of this magnitude is not easy and challenges both Active
component and Reserve component leadership to rapidly become more
integrated while thoroughly communicating the vision to the Total
Force. We greatly appreciate the full support of Congress as we
implement initiatives that will better align Active component and
Reserve component personnel and equipment, providing additional
resources to recapitalize the Navy of the future.
Our dedicated Reserve component sailors continue to volunteer to
serve and re-serve, and we are developing a ``Continuum of Service''
program to ensure that they can quickly support operational missions,
with easy transitions on and off Active-Duty. We are simplifying the
order writing and funding processes, while allowing the customers, the
Fleet and COCOMs, to control the resources through their Operational
Support Officers. These initiatives will greatly reduce the
administrative burden on both the ready sailor and the chain of
command, ensuring the right sailor is in the right place at the right
time with the right skill sets. Navy will continue to improve readiness
tracking and reporting systems so that the sailor will be ready to
deploy when called, physically, medically, and administratively.
The future success of our Navy and the Nation requires dominance of
the maritime domain, and will be dependent upon a Reserve Force that is
ready, relevant, and fully integrated. Our Navy Reserve is busy
transforming its processes, becoming more integrated with both Navy and
joint forces, and is more ready than ever for any tasking. We are
providing global operational support, and our Reserve component sailors
have and will continue to answer the call to ``be ready'' to support
the combatant commanders and prevail in the Long War.
STATEMENT OF LT. GEN. JOHN W. BERGMAN, USMCR, COMMANDER, MARINE
FORCES RESERVE
General Bergman. Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman and Senator
Nelson.
It's an honor to be here today. This is my first time
before this committee.
Having taken command June 10, we almost got a few boxes
unpacked before we evacuated out of New Orleans for Hurricane
Dennis. Then we came back and unpacked a few more boxes before
evacuating for Hurricane Katrina.
Having said that, even though you evacuate, that doesn't
mean Marine Forces Reserve and Marine Forces North stop doing
business. Within about 5 or 6 days, we were operational, but
displaced, between places such as Fort Worth, Kansas City, and
Atlanta. By Thanksgiving, we were fully operational back in New
Orleans, thanks to the great support of a lot of folks, but
especially our brothers and sisters of the Navy, who really did
spectacular work to get our facilities ready for us. We were
fortunate in our particular geographical area. We were right
next to devastation, but not necessarily affected by it, from a
business standpoint, although several of our members, quite
honestly, lost everything. Today we are down to two families
who are in temporary motel lodging at this point, who have not
secured future lodging.
Marine Corps Reserve is 39,600, stable and strong. Ninety-
seven percent of our units have been activated at least once
since September 11. Seventy percent of our current members have
been activated, and 30 percent are first-timers--their turn
will come soon. There are thousands on second deployment.
Retention is up. Recruiting is challenging, but it's on track.
We probably spend about 12 hours with a young future potential
marine and their influencers, as opposed to, historically,
probably 4 to 5 hours in the past.
I look forward to your questions, sir. Thank you.
[The prepared statement of General Bergman follows:]
Prepared Statement by Lt. Gen. Jack W. Bergman, USMC
introduction
Chairman Graham, Senator Nelson, and distinguished members of the
subcommittee, it is my honor to report to you on the state of your
Marine Corps Reserve as a partner in the Navy-Marine Corps team. Your
Marine Corps Reserve remains firmly committed to warfighting
excellence. The support of Congress and the American people has been
indispensable to our success in the global war on terror. 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 committee for your continued support.
your marine corps reserve today
The last 5 years have demonstrated the Marine Corps Reserve is
truly a full partner in the Total Force Marine Corps. I assumed the
responsibility as the Commander of Marine Forces Reserve (MARFORRES) on
June 10, 2005, and I can assure you the Marine Corps Reserve remains
totally committed to continuing the rapid and efficient activation of
combat-ready ground, air, and logistics units and individuals to
augment and reinforce the Active component in the global war on terror.
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 United States, supporting all aspects of the global war on
terror. At home, our Reserve marines are pre-positioned throughout the
country, ready to defend the homeland or assist with civil-military
missions such as the type of disaster relief conducted recently in the
wake of hurricanes Katrina and Rita.
Reserve marines understand the price of protecting our
constitutional rights to freedom, and even though many have paid the
ultimate price in Operations Enduring Freedom and Iraqi Freedom, they
continue to step forward and volunteer to serve their fellow Americans.
The Marine Reserve Force remains strong and constant due to the
committed marines in our ranks, our high retention and recruiting
rates, and the ever-increasing benefits that Reserve marines and their
families enjoy.
As the tactics and warfighting equipment continue to change and
evolve, an ever-increasing level of readiness for future challenges
needs to be maintained. Reserve ground combat units, aviation squadrons
and combat service support elements are able to seamlessly integrate
with their active component comrades in any Marine Air Ground Task
Force (MAGTF) environment because they attend the same schools and are
held to identical training standards. A strong inspector-instructor
system and a demanding Mobilization and Operational Readiness
Deployment Test program ensures Marine Corps Reserve units achieve a
high level of pre-mobilization readiness. Marine Reserve units continue
to train to challenging, improved readiness standards, reducing the
need for post-mobilization certification. This ensures that these
combat capable units undergo a seamless transition to the gaining force
commander.
As we progress into the 21st century, we have seen historic and
tragic events that have impacted our country and MARFORRES in ways that
will reverberate for years to come. When hurricanes Katrina and Rita
battered the Gulf Coast, MARFORRES was part of both the evacuation and
the relief efforts in the area. Due to the storms, MARFORRES
Headquarters, along with our subordinate headquarters, were forced to
evacuate the New Orleans area and set up temporary commands in Texas
and Georgia. It was from these locations that we mobilized and deployed
units to the affected areas to support the relief efforts. In some
cases marines were serving in their own communities that were
devastated by the storms.
As of early February 2006, over 6,400 Reserve marines were
activated in support of Operation Enduring Freedom, Operation Iraqi
Freedom, and Horn of Africa operations. Of these marines, approximately
5,400 were serving in combat-proven ground, aviation, and service
support units led by Reserve marine officers and non-commissioned
officers. The remaining 1,000+ 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 39,000 Reserve marines, and more than 97 percent of
all MARFORRES units.
Since the beginning of the global war on terror, it has become
necessary for the Marine Corps Reserve to increase support required for
operations against the backdrop of a rapidly changing world environment
accented by asymmetrical warfare and continuing hostilities. As new
warfighting requirements have emerged, we have adapted our units by
creating Anti-Terrorism Battalions from existing infantry units, as
well as provisional civil affairs groups (CAGs) in support of our
efforts in Iraq. We continue to refine our Reserve capabilities.
Through assessment, projection, and careful planning, we shift valuable
resources to enhance our ability to provide required war fighting
capabilities, intelligence gathering capabilities, homeland security
efforts, and ongoing civil affairs missions.
return on investment
The Marine Corps is committed to the Total Force Concept as
evidenced by the overwhelming success of Marine Reserve units serving
in support of the global war on terror. Activated Marine Reserve units
and individuals are seamlessly integrating into forward deployed Marine
Expeditionary Forces and regularly demonstrate their combat
effectiveness. Since March 2005, approximately 8,500 Reserve marines
have deployed in support of two troop rotations to Iraq. The combat
effectiveness of all Reserve marines deployed in support of Operation
Iraqi Freedom is best illustrated by the following examples of a few
Reserve units:
Force Units
MARFORRES has provided Provisional Civil Affairs Units, Air and
Naval Gunfire Liaison Company (ANGLICO) Detachments and
Counterintelligence Teams in support of Operation Iraqi Freedom.
The Marine Corps has two civil affairs units and, in 2005, formed
two provisional CAGs. The decision was made to expand the Corps' civil
affairs capability for the Iraqi conflict by creating a provisional 5th
and 6th CAGs of nearly 200 marines each. The 5th and 6th CAGs were
created to ease the deployment cycles of the 3rd and 4th CAGs and to
create additional civil affairs assets. Fourth Combat Engineer
Battalion from Baltimore provided the nucleus for the 5th CAG, which
was established in late 2004. The unit was rounded out by marines from
across the country, to include two previously retired marines.
The 5th CAG began its tour of duty in Iraq when the commanding
officer and sergeant major unfurled the unit's colors at a transfer of
authority ceremony with the 4th CAG at Camp Fallujah on March 10, 2005.
Col. Steve McKinley, 5th CAG commanding officer, and Sgt. Maj. John A.
Ellis stood at attention as the 4th CAG commander and sergeant major
cased their unit's colors. Lt. Gen. John F. Sattler, I Marine
Expeditionary Force Commanding General, thanked the CAG marines and
sailors for their accomplishments during their tour, such as helping to
establish the Civil Military Operations Center in Fallujah. The 5th CAG
assumed 4th CAG's area of responsibility and operated throughout Al-
Anbar Province coordinating civil affairs projects with the goal of
restoring critical infrastructure and facilitating the transition into
a self-governing people. The 6th CAG, led by Col. Paul Brier and Sgt.
Maj. Ronnie McClung, relieved 5th CAG in September 2005. After a
successful 7-month tour, they are redeploying to the United States this
month..
In addition to the contribution of CAGs, MARFORRES has provided
detachments from both 3d and 4th ANGLICO-based in Long Beach, CA, and
West Palm Beach, FL, respectively--in support of Operation Iraqi
Freedom. The last detachment returned mid-December 2005. During its
tour, the unit supported the multinational division headed by the
Polish Army and consisting of troops from 14 countries. The unit was
involved in various missions in the three provinces south of Baghdad.
Duties ranged from radioing in fire support for the coalition partners
to providing protection for convoys. The marines were credited with
rounding up 390 insurgents and criminals in addition to recovering
50,000 pounds of ordnance.
Fourth Marine Division
The 3rd Battalion, 25th Marines, led by Lt. Col. Lionel B.
Urquhart, USMCR, a manager for Roadway Transportation Services--and his
senior enlisted advisor Sgt. Maj. Edward C. Wagner, USMCR, supported
Regimental Combat Team 2 during Operation Iraqi Freedom 04-06.1. During
this time, the battalion cleared the city of Hit, establishing two
permanent firm-bases there and introduced Iraqi Armed Forces in the
city to begin the process of independent Iraqi control. Hit was the
only city to be liberated from anti-Iraqi forces control by the 2d
Marine Division. In all, the battalion acted as the regimental main
effort in 15 named combat operations and provided support to 5 more
named operations in an area covering 4,200 square kilometers. The
scheme of maneuver entering the town of Kubaysah employed the first
heliborne and mechanized combined assault in Area of Operations
``Denver''. The battalion's efforts resulted in 46 detainees being
convicted to confinement at Abu Grahb Prison, 160 confirmed enemy
killed-in-action, and 25 confirmed enemy wounded-in-action. This
battalion--which coalesced from reservists spread across more than
seven States--acted as a center of gravity for RCT-2 during Operation
Iraqi Freedom 04-06.1 enabling the regiment to achieve it's greatest
successes.
Fifth Battalion, 14th Marines (-) Reinforced, commanded by John C.
Hemmerling, USMCR, an attorney for the City of San Diego, with Sergeant
Major Jose Freire, a U.S. Postal Carrier, as his senior enlisted
advisor, was assigned the mission as a provisional military police
battalion in the Al Anbar Province of Iraq. The Marines of 5/14
exemplified the total force concept as it transitioned from a Reserve
artillery battalion into a composite battalion. The battalion was
comprised of 15 Active and Reserve units and detachments and integrated
Active and Reserve marines down to the fire team level that totaled
more than 1,000 strong. Furthermore, drawing from its ranks of
reservists in civilian law enforcement and Active-Duty military
policemen at its core, the battalion was task organized to conduct
military police missions of convoy security operations; law and order
on the forward operating bases; operate five regional detention
facilities; force protection of Camp Fallujah; conduct criminal
investigations; recruit Iraqi security forces through the Police
Partnership Program; and control 57 military working dog teams. The
battalion is credited with processing over 6,000 detainees, without
incident, consisting of suspected insurgents, terrorists and criminals;
safely escorted over 300 convoys throughout the Multinational Force
West area of operations; occupied and defended Camp Fallujah and
approximately 100 square kilometers of battle space surrounding it; and
recruited over 1,000 Iraqi Police candidates.
Fourth Marine Logistics Group
4th Marine Logistics Group (MLG) continued to provide the Active-
Duty component and combatant commanders tactical logistics support
throughout the six functional areas of Combat Service Support and the
personnel necessary to sustain all elements of the operating force in
multiple theaters and at various levels of war.
4th MLG has a well-established reputation for providing
professional, dedicated and highly skilled marines and sailors to
augment and reinforce the active components in support of Operations
Iraqi Freedom (OIF) and Enduring Freedom (OEF). During the past year's
semi-annual relief of forces, 4th MLG deployed approximately 1,000
Reserve marines and sailors to conduct tactical level logistics
missions.
Additionally, 4th MLG provided the following support to the
operating forces when requested by combatant commanders:
- During January of 2005, 4th MLG deployed approximately 130
marines and sailors to support Marine Forces Central Command's
Logistics Command Element located aboard Camp Lemonier,
Djibouti. These marines and sailors from various 4th MLG
battalions provided vital logistical and operational support to
a mission focused on detecting, disrupting, and ultimately
defeating transnational terrorist groups operating in the Horn
of Africa region.
- In April 2005, on short notice, 4th MLG deployed 13
maintenance personnel in support of Marine Corps Systems
Command (MARCORSYSCOM) to a forward operating base in Iraq to
assist with the installation of armor kits on tactical
vehicles. Their mission proved invaluable in mitigating the
personnel and equipment loss attributed to an emergent IED
threat.
- During May 2005, 4th MLG provided health services support
consisting of 20 sailors from 4th Medical Battalion to II
Marine Expeditionary Force (II MEF) for detainee operations in
Iraq that included medical services for personnel in temporary
detainee facilities; maintenance of medical supplies and
equipment; health and sanitation inspections, pre- and post-
interrogation health assessments; and coordination of medical
evacuations in accordance with the Geneva Convention.
- June 2005 saw 4th MLG provide the nucleus staff for the
provisional 6th CAG.
Regardless of the mission, the Reserve marines and sailors of 4th
MLG have proven to be both responsive and flexible. Their level of
professionalism and training enabled them to easily integrate with
their Active-Duty counterparts. Their contributions and sacrifices in
the global war on terror are a testament of their value to our great
Nation.
Fourth Marine Aircraft Wing
4th Marine Aircraft Wing (MAW) units participated in a wide variety
of operations in locations across the country and around the world in
support of the global war on terror.
Operation Iraqi Freedom activations consisted of units in their
entirety, detachments, as well as individual augments providing
invaluable support to the Active component in the conduct of these
operations. Marine Fighter/Attack Squadron 142 deployed 12 F/A-18 A+
Hornet aircraft in support of OIF, where they accomplished 100 percent
of their tasking sortie requirements. These assets were the first 4th
MAW F/A-18s to deploy in support of OIF and the first Marine F/A-18s to
deploy the Advanced Targeting Pod (LITENING) in a combat environment.
Marine Medium Helicopter squadrons 764 and 774 deployed to Iraq in
support of OIF for their second tour. The deployment of these units
required the transfer of 19 aircraft from east to west coast to
facilitate training of the unit that was continental United States
(CONUS) based while the other deployed. This monumental task was
accomplished safely and efficiently. Marine Light Attack Squadron
(HMLA) 775 returned from Iraq and immediately went to work accepting 16
AH-1N and 9 UH-1N aircraft from 3rd MAW. Immediately upon acceptance,
they transferred 6 of the AH-1Ws and 4 of the UH-1Ns to HMLA-775
Detachment A, which then repositioned all aircraft to Johnstown, PA.
Additionally, Heavy Marine Helicopter (HMH) Squadron 772 was chosen to
conduct the initial NVG flight training evolution designed for Navy MH-
53E aircrew, allowing them to deploy in support of Operation Iraqi
Freedom. This marked the first time Navy CH-53 pilots were trained on
NVGs in a desert environment. Marine Air Control Group (MACG) 48
provided numerous detachments, including Air Traffic Controllers, to
support the OIF. Marine Wing Support Group (MWSG) 47 provided continual
ground refueling support to OEF. They continue to provide detachments
of engineers, refuelers, and firefighters to OIF.
Hurricane Katrina made landfall on 29 August 2005 east of New
Orleans. As a result of the ensuing devastation to the gulf coast
region, HMH-772 was the first marine squadron to participate in the
rescue efforts in New Orleans on August 31, 2005. The unit deployed
four aircraft, which transported 348,000 pounds of cargo, 1,053
passengers, and 720 evacuees. Marine Aerial Refueler Transport
Squadrons (VMGR) 234 and 452 and their KC-130 aircraft provided direct
support to Special Purpose Marine Air/Ground Task Force Katrina in the
form of troop, cargo lift, and humanitarian assistance to the gulf
coast region. 1,562 passengers and 1.5 million pounds of cargo were
transported during 263 sorties totaling 535 hours. They also performed
the same mission during the aftermath of Hurricanes Rita and Wilma. In
addition to HMH-772, HMLA-773 provided direct support to SMAGTF Katrina
in the form of civilian evacuation and humanitarian relief, operating
out of Eglin AFB and JRB Belle Chasse. MACG-48 and MWSG-47 brought
their own specialized assistance in the form of aircraft controllers
and logistical support. 4th MAW continued to support Katrina relief
efforts until October 2005.
activation philosophy
Sustaining the force has been consistent with Total Force Marine
Corps planning guidance. This guidance continues to be based on a 12-
month involuntary activation with a 7-month deployment, followed by a
period of dwell time and, if required and approved, a second 12-month
involuntary reactivation and subsequent 7-month deployment. This force
management practice has provided warfighting and sustainment capability
within MARFORRES with well-balanced and cohesive units ready for
combat. This activation philosophy has proved to be an efficient and
effective use of our Reserve marines' 24-month cumulative activation
time limit.
activation impact
As of December 2005, the Marine Corps Reserve began activating
approximately 2,200 Selected Marine Corps Reserve (SMCR) unit marines
in support of the next Operation Iraqi Freedom rotation and 290 SMCR
unit marines in support of Operation Enduring Freedom. 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 careers. In total, approximately 4,790
Reserve marines have been activated more than once; about 1,875 of whom
are currently activated. We also know that, as of February 2006,
approximately 65 percent of the current unit population and 72 percent
of the current IMA population have been activated at least once. About
1.5 percent of our current IRR population has deployed in support of
OIF/OEF. If you include the number of marines who deployed in an Active
or SMCR component and have since transferred to the IRR, the number
reaches 61 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, such as
artillery, have been cross-trained to reinforce identified critical
specialties such as civil affairs and linguists.
Although supporting the global war on terror 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 Program allows the Marine Corps to fill these
short-term, full-time requirements with Reserve marines. For example,
as of this month we have almost 4,600 marines on Active-Duty under this
program. 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 enlisted force. 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 2005, but the long-term impact of recent activations
is not yet known. 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 2005, the Marine Corps' Selected Reserve
was over 39,600 strong. Part of this population is comprised of Active
Reserve marines, Individual Mobilization Augmentees, and Reserve
marines in the training pipeline. Additionally, nearly 60,000 marines
serve as part of the Individual Ready Reserve, representing a
significant pool of trained and experienced prior service manpower.
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. 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 investment tools that will sustain the Force in the
years ahead.
Support to the global war on terror has reached the point where 70
percent of the current Marine Corps Reserve officer leadership has
deployed at least once. Nevertheless, the Marine Corps Reserve is
currently achieving higher retention rates than the benchmark average
from the last three fiscal years. As of January, the OSD attrition
statistics for Marine Corps Selected Reserve officers is 8.4 percent
compared to the current benchmark average of 11.7 percent. For the same
time period, Reserve unit enlisted attrition is 6.2 percent compared to
8.5 percent average.
In fiscal year 2005, the Marine Corps Reserve achieved 100 percent
of its recruiting goal for non-prior service recruiting (5,921) and
exceeded its goal for prior service recruiting (3,132). For our Reserve
component, junior officer recruiting remains the most challenging area.
We are expanding Reserve commissioning opportunities for our prior-
enlisted marines in order to grow some of our own officers from
MARFORRES units and are exploring other methods to increase the
participation of company grade officers in the Selective Marine Corps
Reserve. We are also developing some bold new changes in our junior
officer accession programs and expect to incorporate some of the
changes during fiscal year 2007 and plan to fill 90 percent of our
company grade officer billets by fiscal year 2011. We thank Congress
for the continued support of legislation to allow bonuses for officers
in the Selective Marine Corps Reserve 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 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, you heard testimony from my predecessor that there were
no laws offering academic and financial protections for Reserve
military members who are college students. I am 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 Congress's efforts in protecting a military member's college
education investments and status when called to duty.
More than 1,300 MARFORRES marines and sailors chose to use Tuition
Assistance in fiscal year 2005 in order to help finance their
education. This Tuition Assistance came to more than $3 million in
fiscal year 2005 for more than 4,200 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 G.I. Bill benefits for
Reserve and National Guard service members, 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. The National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2005 included a new education
assistance program for certain Reserve and National Guard
servicemembers. I heartily thank you for this initiative and its
implementation by the Department of Veterans Affairs, as it has
positively impacted the quality of life for Marine reservists and other
servicemembers.
childcare 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 ``Operation Military Childcare,'' a joint initiative
funded by the Department of Defense and operated through cooperative
agreements with the Boys and Girls Clubs of America, and the National
Association of Childcare 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 MARFORRES 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 Reunions, 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.
Military 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,
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 O&M accounts.
managed health network
Managed Health Network, through a contract with the Department of
Defense, is providing specialized mental health support services to
military personnel and their families. This unique program is designed
to bring counselors onsite at Reserve Training Centers to support all
phases of the deployment cycle. MARFORRES is incorporating this
resource into Family Days, Pre-Deployment Briefs and Return & Reunion
Briefs and further incorporating them in the unfortunate event of
significant casualty situations. Follow-up services are further
scheduled after marines return from combat at various intervals to
facilitate onsite 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.
Since April 2005, TRICARE Reserve Select has been providing eligible
Guard and Reserve veterans 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. Participation in the program has greatly
benefited those Reserve marines who have served and who continue to
serve. This provides optional coverage for Selected Reserves after an
activation, at the rate of 1 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 1 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 the 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 healthcare benefits to family members and extend
benefits up to 90 days prior to their activation date and up to 180
days after deactivation.
Reserve members are also eligible for dental care under the Tri-
Service Dental Plan for a moderate 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. These initiatives will further improve
the healthcare 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. Currently, MARFORRES conducts
approximately 93 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 that we treat with more
importance. However, the duties of our casualty assistance officers go
well beyond notification. We ensure they are adequately trained,
equipped, and supported by all levels of command. Once an officer or
staff noncommissioned officer is designated as a casualty assistance
officer, 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. This support remains in place as long after
the funeral and is maintained regardless of personnel turnover. The
Marine Corps Reserve also provides support for military funerals for
veterans of all Services. The marines at our Reserve sites performed
more than 7,500 funerals in calendar year 2005.
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 Marine For Life program is available
to provide support for the approximately 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 Marine For Life 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, and more than 30,000 marines have
been assisted since January 2004. Assistance from career retention
specialists and transitional recruiters helps transitioning marines 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 the 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. To that end we
enthusiastically support the efforts of the National Committee of the
Employer Support of the Guard and Reserve (ESGR) and have joined with
them in Operation Pinnacle Advance, which seeks to further develop
personal relationships with our marines' employers.
equipment
Our readiness priorities continue to be the support and sustainment
of our forward deployed forces and, second, ensuring units slated to
deploy in follow-on rotations possess adequate levels of equipment for
training. Currently, the Marine Corps has approximately 30 percent of
its ground equipment and 25 percent of its aviation 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, MARFORRES, MARCORSYSCOM procurements, the Maritime
Prepositioned Force as well as equipment from Marine Corps Logistics
Command stores and war Reserves. Our contributed major items of
equipment (principally communications equipment, crew-served weapons,
optics and a Reserve infantry battalion's equipment set) remain in
theater in support of rotating Marine forces, which fall in on these
assets in-theater.
Maintaining current readiness levels will require continued support
as our equipment continues to age at a pace exceeding peace time
replacement rates. The global war on terror 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 weight of added armor and unavoidable
delays of scheduled maintenance due to combat, is degrading the Corps'
equipment at an accelerated rate. If this equipment returns to CONUS,
extensive service life extension and overhaul/rebuild programs will be
required in order to bring this equipment back into satisfactory
condition prior to re-issue to an operating force.
As we continue to aggressively train and prepare our CONUS-based
marines for possible future deployments, we have maintained ground
equipment readiness rates exceeding 90 percent. The types of equipment
held by Reserve Training Centers are the same as those held within the
Active component. However, as a result of the aforementioned movement
of equipment into theater as well as the Marine Corps' efforts to
cross-level equipment inventories to support home station shortfalls
(both Active and Reserve), MARFORRES will experience some equipment
shortfalls of communication and electronic equipment. This specific
equipment type shortfall will be approximately 10 percent across the
Force in most areas, and somewhat greater for certain low density
``big-box'' type equipment sets. However, communications equipment
procured by Headquarters, U.S. Marine Corps (HQMC) (fiscal year 2005
supplemental funding) and National Guard and Reserve Equipment
Appropriations (NGREA) (fiscal year 2005) are currently being fielded
and mitigate many communications equipment shortfalls. Although the
equipment shortfalls will not preclude sustainment training within the
Force, this equipment availability is not optimal.
strategic ground equipment working group
Due to global war on terrorism demands on the entire Marine Corps
equipment inventory, HQMC established a Strategic Ground Equipment
Working Group (SGEWG) with the mission 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 MARFORRES, leading to an increase in overall
supply readiness of approximately 5 percent in most equipment
categories. 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 here
at 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 member of MARFORRES deployed over the past year in support of the
global war on terror, along with those currently deployed into harm's
way, were fully equipped with the most current Individual Combat
Clothing and Equipment and Individual Protective Equipment. Your
continued support of current budget initiatives will ensure we are able
to properly equip our most precious assets--our individual marines.
critical asset rapid distribution facility
In order to ensure equipment is available to our deploying forces,
we created the MARFORRES 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 MARFORRES. Equipment such as the Small Arms Protective Insert,
Improved Load Bearing Equipment, Lightweight Helmet and Improved First
Aid Kit has been sent to the CARDF for secondary distribution to
deploying units. This system worked extremely well, and we plan to
continue its use for the foreseeable future. Furthermore, as tactical
clothing and equipment requirements continue to emerge, we have
expanded the CARDF's inventory to stock additional OIF-related
individual issue equipment items such as WILEY-X Ballistic goggles,
Ballistic hearing protection, and balaclavas to better equip our
deploying forces.
training allowance
The total wartime equipment requirement for MARFORRES is called the
Table of Equipment (T/E). For MARFORRES, the T/E consists of two parts:
a Training Allowance (T/A) and In-Stores assets. The T/A is the
equipment MARFORRES units maintain at their training sites. MARFORRES
units have established T/As that is on average approximately 80 percent
of the established T/E. 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. The establishment of training allowances allows MARFORRES
to better cross-level equipment to support CONUS training requirements
of all units of the Force with a minimal overall equipment requirement.
The amount of T/A each unit has is determined by training requirements,
space limitations, and staffing levels at the unit training sites. Of
course, this concept requires the support of the Service to ensure that
the ``delta'' between a unit's T/A and T/E is available in the event of
mobilization and deployment. The current Headquarters Marine Corps
policy of retaining needed equipment in theater for use by deploying
forces ensures that mobilized MARFORRES units will have the Primary End
Items necessary to conduct their mission.
modernization
The Marine Corps Reserve remains currently engaged in a two-pronged
programmatic requirement strategy--fine tuning force structure while
simultaneously determining the corresponding equipment requirements.
Our main effort consists of resetting today's Force with today's
equipment while seeking to determine future equipment requirements--all
with the goal of building the most lethal, and best protected, marine
and Marine Corps. I am extremely pleased to report to you that your
Marine Reserve component continues to evolve and adapt to best prepare
and face the full spectrum of threats.
As with all we do, our number one focus is the individual marine
and sailor. Our efforts to equip and train our most valued resource
have resulted in obtaining the most appropriate individual combat and
protective equipment: M4 rifles, Advanced Combat Optic Gunsight 4X32
scopes, Lower Body Armor, and Night Vision goggles, to name a few.
Our most noteworthy structure-related accomplishments are those
associated with the Marine Corps Force Structure Review Group (FSRG).
As part of a Total Force effort, the Marine Corps Reserve is
transforming underutilized legacy units into new units with higher
threat-relevant capabilities while providing operational tempo relief
in high-demand areas: Intelligence, Anti-Terrorism, and Light Armored
Reconnaissance. In last year's testimony we reported the results of the
2004 Force Structure Review Group, which called for decreasing
artillery and tank capability while increasing civil affairs,
intelligence, mortuary affairs, and light armored reconnaissance
capabilities within the Reserve component over a 3-year period (fiscal
years 2005-2007). With fiscal year 2005 actions largely complete and
fiscal year 2006 actions well underway, the Reserve component is better
postured to sustain the long war while simultaneously achieving a
greater irregular warfare capability.
national guard and reserve equipment appropriation
The NGREA continues to provide invaluable procurement support 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. Fiscal year 2006 NGREA provided $30 million, which enabled
us to craft a fiscal year 2006 procurement plan consistent with those
of fiscal year 2005: tactical communications/power generating devices
and training enhancements.
Specifically, fiscal year 2006 NGREA will procure four Virtual
Combat Convoy Trainers-Marine (VCCT-M) and two LAV Combat vehicle
training simulators. These simulators provide realistic convoy crew
training and incidental driver training to your marines. Two of these
systems will be deployed to Camp Lejeune and two will be reserved for
units in the pre-deployment pipeline.
Additional items identified for fiscal year 2006 NGREA procurement
include: the Integrated Intra Squad Radio, the Ground Laser Target
Designator, Intransit Visibility Management Packages, the Defense
Advanced GPS Receiver, Marine Expeditious Power Distribution Systems,
and PRC-148 Radios. Each year, NGREA enables us to gain the necessary
ground needed to establish and maintain interoperability and
compatibility with the Active component.
Looking forward, my top modernization priorities as described in
the fiscal year 2007 National Guard and Reserve Equipment Report and
other documents, remain the procurement of Light Armored Vehicles,
tactical communications, initial issue equipment, and training
enhancement devices.
infrastructure
MARFORRES is and will continue to be a community-based force. This
is a fundamental strength of MARFORRES. 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. MARFORRES units are currently located at 185
sites in 48 States, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico; 34 sites
are owned or leased by the Marine Corps Reserve, 151 are either tenant
or joint sites. Fifty-four percent of the Reserve centers we occupy are
more than 30 years old and of these, 46 are over 50 years old. The
fiscal year 2007 budget fully funds sustainment of these facilities and
we are working through a backlog of restoration and modernization
projects at centers in several States.
The age of our infrastructure means that much of it was built
before Antiterrorism/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. We appreciate the
congressional support provided for our Military construction program in
fiscal year 2006 as it provided for construction to replace the Reserve
Center in Charleston, South Carolina, a complex of buildings dating to
1942, and joint construction with the Alabama Army National Guard in
Mobile, Alabama. While two Marine Corps owned Reserve centers,
Lafayette, Louisiana and Galveston, Texas, sustained very minor damage
from the Hurricanes Katrina and Rita, the hurricanes' impact on
construction costs in the south has negatively affected our ability to
award these two fiscal year 2006 projects. Absent fiscal relief, final
completion of these projects will be delayed significantly.
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. With the changes in
Force structure resulting from the Marine Corps Force Structure Review
in 2004, extensive facilities upgrades are required at a few locations.
Our top priority sites are San Diego, California; Windy Hill
(Marietta), Georgia; and Camp Upshur (Quantico), Virginia.
brac 2005
BRAC 2005 moved us toward 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 developed Reserve basing solutions that further
reduce restoration and modernization backlogs and AT/FP vulnerability.
Twenty-three of the 25 BRAC recommendations affecting the Marine Corps
Reserve result in joint basing of our units. Implementation of these
recommendations will be a challenge across the Future Year Development
Plan. Of the other two, the Federal City in New Orleans appears both
promising and challenging. We look forward to working with the State
and local governments in this unique venture. The final BRAC-
recommended move is from a Navy-hosted facility in Encino, CA, to a
Marine Corps Reserve-owned facility in Pasadena, CA.
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 MARFORRES. 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 vital part of the Marine
Corps Total Force Concept. Supporting your Reserve marines at the 185
sites throughout the United States, by ensuring they have the proper
facilities, equipment and training areas, enables their selfless
dedication to our country. Since September 11, your Marine Corps
Reserve has met every challenge and has fought side by side with our
active counterparts. No one can tell the difference between the Active
and Reserve--we are all marines.
The consistent support from Congress for upgrades to our
warfighting equipment has directly affected the American lives saved on
the battlefield. However, as I stated earlier, much of the same
equipment throughout the force has deteriorated rapidly due to our
current operational tempo.
Although we currently maintain a high level of readiness, we will
need significant financial assistance to refresh and/or replace our
warfighting equipment in the very near future. Also, as the MARFORRES
adjusts its force structure over the next 2 years, several facilities
will need conversions to create proper training environments for the
new units. Funding for these conversions would greatly assist our
warfighting capabilities.
As I have stated earlier, NGREA continues to be extremely vital to
the health of the Marine Corps Reserve, assisting us in staying on par
with our Active component. We have seen how the NGREA directly improved
our readiness in recent operations, and we look forward to your
continued support of this key program.
My final concerns are for Reserve and Guard members, their families
and employers who are sacrificing so much in support of our Nation.
Despite strong morale and good planning, we understand that activations
and deployments place great stress on these praiseworthy Americans.
Your continued backing of ``quality of life'' initiatives will help
sustain Reserve marines in areas such as education benefits, medical
care and family care.
My time thus far leading MARFORRES has been tremendously rewarding.
Testifying before congressional committees and subcommittees is a great
pleasure, as it allows 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.
STATEMENT OF LT. GEN. JOHN A. BRADLEY, USAF, CHIEF, AIR FORCE
RESERVE
General Bradley. Senator Graham, Senator Nelson, thank you
for your hearing. Thank you for your leadership and all the
help that you've given us over the last many years.
You and your colleagues have provided our airmen in the Air
Force Reserve, as well as our other servicemembers, many
benefits, bonuses, and pay raises, which have had a huge impact
on the lives of our people.
I'm proud to represent our airmen in the Air Force Reserve,
who are working very hard for this Nation. We're providing
tactical and strategic airlifts through C-130s and C-17s by
mobilizing people and sending them to the Central Command
(CENTCOM) area of responsibility. We're providing close-air
support for soldiers and marines frequently flying F-16s and A-
10s in Iraq and Afghanistan. I've welcomed hundreds of people
home from the war, and I'm very proud of what they've done.
Those folks are doing it as volunteers; they're not mobilized.
I love the way the Air Force has structured our deployments so
that we can plan it, and people know what to expect, and they
want to be a part of it. We have no shortage of volunteers.
Our end strength is good. We're 102 percent manned. We are
at about 103 percent of recruiting goal, year to date. I feel
good about that. I worry all the time about retention. It's
something always on my mind, but thanks to you and the many
things that you provided us, the tools, in the way of bonuses
and so forth, we are able to hold onto our people. I think even
more than the money, it is just the pride in what they're doing
and believing they're contributing to something important.
I'm proud of our folks. Our response overseas has been
tremendous. On the Gulf Coast, we had search-and-rescue folks
save over 1,000 lives. We had hurricane hunters, whose homes
were destroyed in Gulfport and Biloxi, continue to fly missions
while their families were trying to get their lives back in
order.
We have a lot to be proud of in the Air Force Reserve, as
all of my colleagues are proud of their soldiers, sailors,
airmen, and marines.
I'll look forward to your questions, sir.
[The prepared statement of General Bradley follows:]
Prepared Statement by Lt. Gen. John A. Bradley, USAF
Mr. Chairman, and distinguished members of the subcommittee, I
appreciate the opportunity to appear before you today. I want to thank
you for the support you have shown us these past few years and I am
happy to report it's making a difference. At a Reserve Chief's hearing,
we were recently asked how Guard and Reserve members compare to Active-
Duty when they were mobilized. Due to your committees continued
legislative support, we unanimously replied that when a Guard or
Reserve member is activated they are indistinguishable from the Active-
Duty.
We anticipate last year's provision to expand Selected Reserve
member eligibility under TRICARE standard will increase medical
readiness for mobilization. With so much attention on mobilization we
appreciate the committee's interest in initiatives that encourage
volunteerism because the Air Force Reserve relies heavily upon this
means of support to meet contingency and operational requirements. In
particular, eliminating Basic Allowance for Housing rate difference for
orders greater than 30 days addresses a long-standing issue that
Reserve members have identified as a deterrent to volunteerism. Another
barrier was eliminated with support of authorized absences of members
for which lodging expenses at temporary duty location must be paid.
This change applied the Active-Duty standard to Guard and Reserve
members when they are on Active-Duty orders. In the coming year we will
continue to seek ways to facilitate volunteerism as the primary means
of providing the unrivaled support on which the Air Force has come to
rely.
mission contributions 2006
Air Force Reserve accomplishments since September 11 and, more
specifically, in the last fiscal year, clearly show that the Air Force
Reserve is a critical component in the security of our Nation. The Air
Force Reserve has made major contributions to the global war on terror
with more than 80,000 sorties (360,000 flying hours) flown in support
of Operations Noble Eagle, Enduring Freedom (OEF), and Iraqi Freedom
(OIF). The Air Force Reserve has flown almost 52,000 sorties in support
of OIF since 2003, with 14,658 of those (55,781 flying hours) in fiscal
year 2005. Our Air Force Reserve members have flown more than 28,000
sorties in support of OEF since 2002, contributing 5,328 sorties
(25,409 flying hours) in fiscal year 2005. Here at home, the Air Force
Reserve has flown more than 10,000 sorties supporting the vital
Operation Noble Eagle mission since 2002; 150 sorties (906 flying
hours) in fiscal year 2005. These contingency support missions fighter
support, Combat Search and Rescue, Special Operations, Aerial Refueling
and Tactical and Strategic Airlift--mirroring and in conjunction with
Total Force operations. This past year, C-130 and C-17 aircraft flew
the majority of Air Force Reserve missions in the area of
responsibility (AOR). As you may know, 61 percent of the Air Force's C-
130s are assigned to the Air Reserve component. In a recent trip,
Senator Lindsey Graham witnessed this preponderance of Reserve
component airlift first hand and mentioned it at the Guard and Reserve
Commission hearing on March 8, 2005. Of the 20 sorties he flew in the
OEF and OIF AOR, he stated Active-Duty crews only flew one.
homeland contingency support
The onslaught of hurricane strikes to the coastal United States in
2005 required a response unlike anything seen in our modern history.
The Air Force Reserve was fully engaged in emergency efforts; from
collecting weather intelligence on the storms to search and rescue,
aeromedical and evacuation airlift. Hurricanes Katrina, Ophelia, Rita,
and Wilma drew heavily on the expert resources of our component to
assist in relief efforts. Almost 1,500 Air Force Reserve personnel
responded to these efforts within 24 hours, with some of these members,
from the 926th Fighter Wing at New Orleans, Louisiana, and the 403rd
Airlift Wing at Keesler Air Force Base (AFB), Mississippi, struggling
to protect their own unit's resources from storm damage.
Two units that stood especially tall amongst our reservists were
the 53rd Weather Reconnaissance Squadron also known as the Hurricane
Hunters based at Keesler AFB and the 920th Rescue Wing based at Patrick
AFB in Florida. The Hurricane Hunters flew 59 sorties with their new
WC-130J aircraft into the eye of hurricanes and tropical storms to
determine the strength and path of the weather systems even while their
homes were being destroyed. Even after they had lost everything, they
continued to perform their mission flawlessly from Dobbins, GA. The
920th Rescue Wing, the first unit on the scene, flew more than 100
sorties recovering 1,044 people who were threatened by the rising
water.
During the same time other Reserve airlift units from around the
country were responding with medical and evacuation teams that assisted
in the transfer of more than 5,414 passengers and patients within and
from affected areas. In fact, the Air Force Reserve accounted for more
than 80 percent of aeromedical evacuations. Combined rescue and airlift
missions over the 60-day period of these storms surpassed 500 sorties
and transported 3,321 tons of relief cargo. Additionally, to combat
insect-borne illnesses such as malaria, West Nile virus and
encephalitis that often gain footholds during natural disasters, our
910th Airlift Wing from Youngstown, Ohio utilized their C-130s to spray
10,746 gallons of insecticide across 2.9 million acres. This is an area
roughly the size of the State of Connecticut and spanned locations from
Texas to Florida. Interagency coordination with State and Federal
organizations also resulted in the Air Force Reserve assisting in the
areas of communications, civil engineering, security forces, food
services, public affairs, and chaplaincy support to aid in overall
relief efforts.
our people: mobilization vs. volunteerism
The backbone of the Air Force Reserve is our people because they
enable our mission accomplishment. These patriots, comprised of unit
reservists, individual mobility augmentees, Air Reserve technicians,
Active guard reservists, and civilians, continue to dedicate themselves
to protecting the freedoms of the American people. The operations tempo
to meet the combatant commanders' requirements since September 11
remains high and is not expected to decrease significantly in the near
future. A key metric that reflects this reality is the number of days
our Reserve aircrew members are performing military duty. In calendar
year 2005, each of our aircrew members served an average of 91 days of
military duty. This is a significant increase compared to an average 43
days of military duty per aircrew member in calendar year 2000, the
last full calendar year before the start of the global war on
terrorism.
In order to meet the continuing Air Force requirements since
September 11 and having maximized the use of the President's Partial
Mobilization Authority, the Air Force Reserve has begun to rely more
heavily on volunteerism versus significant additional mobilization.
There are several critical operational units and military functional
areas that must have volunteers to meet ensuing mission requirements
because they are near the 24-month mobilization authority. These
include C-130, MC-130, 8-52, HH-60, HC-130, E-3 AWACS, and Security
Forces. Over calendar year 2005, the Air Force Reserve had 6,453
members mobilized and another 3,296 volunteers who serve in lieu of
mobilization to support global war on terror. As the 2005 calendar year
closed, the Air Force Reserve had 2,770 volunteers serving full-time to
meet global war on terror requirements and 2,553 reservists mobilized
for contingency operations. We expect this balance to become
increasingly volunteer-based as this ``Long War'' continues.
Flexibility is the key to increased volunteerism and will enable us
to bring more to the fight. To eliminate barriers to volunteerism, the
Air Force Reserve has several ongoing initiatives to better match
volunteers' desires and skill sets against the combatant commanders'
mission requirements. For example, the Integration Process Team we
chartered to improve our volunteer process recently developed a
prototype Web-based tool. It gives the reservist the ability to see all
the positions validated for the combatant commanders and allows the Air
Force Reserve to see all qualified volunteers for placement. We must
have the core capability to always match the right person to the right
job at the right time. We also expect to positively affect volunteerism
as a result of the National Defense Authorization Act of Fiscal Year
2005. This Act fosters more continuity in volunteerism because it
liberated end strength rules and provided equal benefits for mobilized
personnel. Facilitating the reservists' ability to volunteer provides
more control not only for the military member, but also for their
family, employer, and commander. The predictability, in turn, allows
for more advanced planning, the least amount of disruption, and,
eventually, more volunteer opportunities.
shaping the reserve force
As an equal partner in the Air Force Transformation Flight Plan
(PBD720), the Air Force Reserve plans to realign resources so it can
transform to a more lethal, more agile, streamlined force with an
increased emphasis on the warfighter. In this process, we plan to
eliminate redundancies and streamline organizations, which will enable
a more capable force of military, civilians, and contractors while
freeing up resources for Total Force recapitalization. There will be no
personnel reductions as a result of Air Force Transformation Flight
Plan in fiscal year 2007. Our reductions begin in fiscal year 2008.
Over the FYDP the Air Force Reserve is planning for an end strength
reduction so that at the end of fiscal year 2011, the end strength will
be 67,800 personnel.
recruiting and retention
The Air Force Reserve has enjoyed unprecedented levels of
retention, while simultaneously meeting our recruiting goals, for a
fifth consecutive year. I am proud of the fact that our reservists are
directly contributing to the warfighting effort every day. When our
Reserve airmen are engaged in operations that employ their skills and
training, there is a sense of reward and satisfaction that is not
quantifiable. I attribute much of the success of our recruiting and
retention to the meaningful participation of our airmen.
That being said, the 10 percent reduction in personnel planned over
the FYDP, coupled with the impact of BRAG initiatives, may present
significant future recruiting and retention challenges to the Air Force
Reserve. With the personnel reductions beginning in fiscal year 2008
and the realignment and closure of Reserve installations due to Base
Realignment and Closure (BRAC), approximately 20 percent of our force
will be directly impacted by the planned changes through new and
emerging missions as well as mission adjustments to satisfy Air Force
requirements. In light of all these challenges, we expect the
recruiting and retention environment will be turbulent and dynamic.
Unlike the Active-Duty, the Air Force Reserve does not have a
robust assignment capability with command-leveling mechanisms that
would assist in the smooth transition of forces from drawdown
organizations into expanding organizations. In drawdown organizations,
the focus will be on maintaining mission capability until the last day
of operations, while also trying to retain as much of the force as
possible and placing them in other Air Force Reserve organizations. At
the same time, we will need to employ some transition assistance
measures, which will provide our affected units with options to retain
our highly trained personnel. This contrasts greatly with the
organizations gaining new missions and/or authorizations. We need to
remember that the Air Force Reserve is a local force and that growing
units will face significant recruiting challenges when considering the
availability of adequately qualified and trained personnel. As has
always been the case, we will focus on maximizing prior service
accessions. Regular Air Force reductions over the FYDP could prove to
be beneficial since the regular component critical skills closely match
those in the Reserve. Other prior service individuals accessed by the
Reserve will inevitably require extensive retraining which could prove
costly. The bottom line is that retaining highly trained individuals is
paramount. Retention must be considered from a total force perspective,
and any force drawdown incentives should include Selected Reserve
participation as a viable option. Legislation should not include any
disincentives to affiliate with the Reserve component.
base realignment and closure
Recruiting and retention are particularly important when
considering the significant impact of the 2005 BRAC Commission
recommendations. We had seven bases realigned and one, General Billy
Mitchell Field in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, closed. To our Reserve airmen,
a base realignment, in many cases, is essentially a closure. When BRAC
recommended the realignment of our wing at Naval Air Station New
Orleans, our airplanes were distributed to Barksdale AFB, Louisiana and
Whiteman AFB, Missouri, while the remaining Expeditionary Combat
Support was sent to Buckley AFB, Colorado. In another example, BRAC
recommended the realignment of our wing at Selfridge Army National
Guard Base, Michigan and directed the manpower be moved to MacDill AFB,
Florida to associate with the Regular Air Force. Selfridge, Michigan to
Tampa, Florida, is a challenging commute for even the most dedicated
person. These are just a few examples of the impact base realignments
can have on our reservists. In the majority of the realignments, their
ability to serve is hindered due to the distances they must travel to
participate. In this post-BRAC environment, we continue to strive to
retain the experience of as many of our highly-trained personnel as
possible. We are working closely with the Air Force and the Office of
the Secretary of Defense on initiatives, which will encourage those who
were impacted by BRAC decisions to continue to serve.
one tier of readiness
We, in the Air Force Reserve, pride ourselves in our ability to
respond to any global crisis within 72 hours. In many cases, including
our response to the devastation during the hurricane season, we are
able to respond within 24 hours. We train to the same standards as the
Active-Duty for a reason. We are one Air Force in the same fight. With
a single level of readiness, we are able to seamlessly operate side-by-
side with the Regular Air Force and Air National Guard in the full
spectrum of combat operations. As an equal partner in day-to-day combat
operations, it is critical we remain ready, resourced, and relevant.
family support
The military commitment that reservists make has a profound effect
on their families. There is no denying the military lifestyle; the
possibility of unexpected deployments, often into areas where there is
unrest, can play havoc on a family unit. Family Readiness offers a
variety of services to support military families during these stressful
times. Family Readiness offices provide the following services for the
families of deployed reservists:
Family Readiness Data Card completed by member at
deployment for special needs
Information and Referral services to appropriate
support agencies
Video Telephones available at deployed site and unit
site
Assistance with financial questions and concerns
FAMNET (Family Support global communication network)
available at 63 countries (Internet access not required)
Telephone Tree Roster for communication to the
families from the unit
Joint interservice family assistance services
Family Support Groups
Crisis Intervention Assistance
Morale Calls
Volunteer opportunities
Letter Writing kits for Children
Reunion activities
E-mail
What is amazing is that there are 21 full-time positions throughout
the Air Force Reserve to handle all these responsibilities. Family
Readiness offices support Reserve component members during times of
mobilization but also with operational missions. In May 2005, Dobbins
Air Reserve Base, Georgia, held a recognition event for family members
and brought agencies from across the spectrum to answer questions. A
few months later they found themselves playing host to displaced
Reserve component members and their family from Hurricane Katrina.
In 2005 there was a 12-percent increase in usage of Air Force
Reserve Family Readiness support. According to the Family Readiness
Office at Headquarters Air Force Reserve Command (AFRC), family members
are displaying the effects of mobilization and seeking assistance from
readiness offices and organizations like OneSource.
AFRC Top Issues:
Emotional well-being
Stress from repeated deployments and length
OneSource Top Issues:
Emotional well-being
Financial
Personal and family readiness issues
Parenting and everyday issues
Education (suddenly being military)
The command has seen a 38-percent usage of face-to-face counseling
service through free developmental counseling of six sessions offered
per issue at no cost. The provider is found within 30 miles of
residence rather then just at the closest military installation. In
these sessions there is a focus on grief and loss, reintegrating
couples in their relationship and achieving work/life balance.
Improving family readiness programs by making connections with the
family stronger, helping them become better prepared, and having a
proactive outreach program to ensure both unit and individual and
family readiness are a few of the necessary developments.
Just as Reserve component members are participating at far greater
rates, our Family Readiness is a 365-day a year program. We now have
demobilization training and that is harder to get our arms around
because members want to get home. When they finally recognize they need
help, we are left scrambling for providing assistance. This is
additionally harder in places like Peterson AFB, Colorado and Maxwell
AFB, Alabama, where Family Readiness is an additional duty. The command
is currently working on how best to help meet these growing
requirements. One thing that hasn't changed is that families are proud
of the military member's role in fighting the war on terrorism.
New Mission Areas:
The Air Force Reserve will continue to transform into a full
spectrum force for the 21st century by integrating across all roles and
missions throughout the Air, Space, and Cyberspace domains. Our roles
and missions are mirror images of the Active component. Bringing Air
Force frontline weapon systems to the Reserve allows force unification
at both the strategic and tactical levels. Indeed, we are a unified,
total force.
Sharing the tip of the spear, our focus is on maximizing warfighter
effects by taking on new and emerging missions that are consistent with
Reserve participation. Reachback capabilities enable Reserve Forces to
train for and execute operational missions in support of the combatant
commander from home station. In many cases, this eliminates the need
for deployments. The Associate Unit construct will see growth in
emerging operational missions such as: Unmanned Aerial Systems, Space
and Information Operations, Air Operations Centers, Battlefield Airmen
and Contingency Response Groups. The Active/Air Reserve component mix
must keep pace with emerging missions to allow the Air Force to operate
seamlessly as a Total Force. This concurrent development will provide
greater efficiency in peacetime, and increased capability in wartime.
Transforming and Modernizing the Air Force Reserve:
Equipment modernization is our lifeline to readiness. The United
States military has become increasingly dependent on the Reserve to
conduct operational and support missions around the globe. Effective
modernization of Reserve assets is key to remaining a relevant and
capable combat ready force. While the Air Force recognizes this fact
and has made significant improvement in modernizing and equipping the
Reserve, the reality of fiscal constraints still results in shortfalls
in our modernization and equipage. While a few of our unfunded
priorities are included on the Air Force Unfunded Priorities List, most
are not, creating significant shortfalls. These items are critical to
push combat capability to the warfighter and meet the challenges of
combat survival and employment for the next 20 years. Funding our
modernization enhances availability, reliability, maintainability, and
sustainability of aircraft weapon systems; strengthening our ability to
ensure the success of our warfighting commanders and laying the
foundation for tomorrow's readiness.
fiscal year 2006 national guard and reserve equipment account (ngrea)
We appreciate the support provided in the 2006 NGREA. In fiscal
year 2006 the Air Force Reserve is spending $30 million on critical
aircraft modernization and miscellaneous equipment to help fulfill our
Nation's air, space, and cyberspace peacetime and wartime requirements.
The items we purchase this year are prioritized from the airmen in the
field up to the Air Force Reserve Command Headquarters and vetted
through the Air Staff. These items run the gamut from multi-function
aircraft displays, security forces night vision devices, defensive
systems, aircraft radar upgrades and enhanced strike capabilities.
The Air Force Reserve is spending $3.21 million on modernizing the
A-10 aircraft Litening AT POD interface. Use of a Multi-Function Color
Display (MFCD) provides additional capability, including data link
integration, machine-to-machine image transfer, moving map, cursor-on-
target and ARC-210 integration. We are also completing our buy of 23
additional Situational Awareness Data Link radios for the A-10 at a
cost of $920,000. We are continuing our support for the radar test
stand modification and the Joint Helmet Mounted Cueing System with $1.3
million. We continue to purchase Litening AT Pods; this year we have
added $9.688 million to the conference appropriation of $12.4 million
for a total of $22.088 million. This 15-pod procurement completes the
current total validated command pod requirement. Additionally this
procures spares, support equipment and required warranties.
Upgrading the C-130 fleet with all-weather color radar has been an
Air Force Reserve priority for the last several years. This year we
continue our dedication to the program by adding $4.75 million to the
conference appropriated $7.5 million for a total of $12.25 million to
purchase 14 radars. This means 60 percent of the Air Force Reserve C-
130 fleet will have the APN-241 radar. We are also spending $1.8
million to begin installing the capability for both C-130 pilots to
dispense chaff and flares to enhance survivability in a combat
environment. Previously, aircrews had to rely on crew positions other
than the pilots to react to threats. Adding this capability doubles the
number of crewmembers who can effectively counter threats in a timely
manner.
The Air Force Reserve also has a need for Defensive Systems
testers, specifically, an end-to-end ground-based tester for the AAR-47
missile detection system and an ALE-47 IR countermeasures dispensing
system. The desired capability will allow testing of the complete
system while it is in normal operation mode by transmitting
independent, external signals to the AAR-47, rather than using built in
testing routines that are not comprehensive.
On our B-52s we are installing Smart MFCD and Digital/Analog
Integrated Track Handle which will provide the most cost effective
solution to resolve a critical shortage with B-52 Targeting Pod
controllers. Along those same lines we are also installing a MFCD to
enhance our search and rescue capabilities on the HH-60 helicopter. The
combat rescue mission requires increased computer processing capability
and color displays to enhance target identification and moving map
capability.
Night vision operations continue to be at the forefront in the Air
Force Reserve. We rely on our Security Forces in all aspects of the
battle and depend on our Pararescue personnel, Pararescue Jumpers
(PJs), for personnel recovery. To that end we are spending $330,000 to
outfit our Security Forces Personnel with Night Vision Devices and
laser sights. Since our PJs have long operated with outdated Night
Vision Goggles, $2.1 million is being spent this year to upgrade the
PJs capabilities, both in the air and on the ground via acquisition of
advanced night vision devices.
reconstitution
Reconstitution is a planning process with the purpose of restoring
``units back to their full combat capability in a short period of
time.'' The Global War on Terror is having a significant and long-term
impact on the readiness of our Air Force Reserve units to train
personnel and conduct missions. The goal must be to bring our people
and equipment back up to full warfighting capability.
The rotational nature of our units preclude shipping equipment and
vehicles back and forth due to cost and time constraints, therefore,
equipment is kept in the AOR to allow quick transition of personnel and
mission effectiveness. After September 11, 2001, and during OIF and
OEF, units returning back to the continental United States returned
without the same level of equipment as when they deployed. Equipment
and vehicles have remained in the AOR to support rotations and mission
requirements, which has a negative impact on readiness for the Total
Force.
To preclude mission degradation, reconstitution plays a vitally
important role for the returning unit. Air Force Reserve Command,
working with the Air Staff, has put together a Memorandum of Agreement
to replace approximately $2.2 million in transferred, withdrawn, or
diverted assets that were used in support of OIF/OEF. Our Air Force
Reserve units need this equipment to train and perform their mission.
closing
I would like to close by offering my sincere thanks to each member
of this committee for their continued support and interest in the men
and women of your Air Force Reserve. Recruiting and retaining our
experienced members is the best investment the country can make because
it ensures a force that is ready and able to go to war at any time. The
Air Force Reserve continues its heritage of providing operational
support while maintaining a strategic reserve capability. Our vision is
to provide the world's best mutual support to the Air Force and our
joint partners and we appreciate your continued support in helping us
defend this Nation in our role as an unrivaled wingman.
Senator Graham. That's a good way to begin the questions.
We are all very proud of what you've done and the people you
represent.
To those who have been called here as an example of service
and sacrifice, the captains and the sergeants, thank you all
very much for what you've done. They are all amazing and very
encouraging stories.
Do the benefit packages that we've tried to design based on
higher levels of stress that we didn't anticipate--as you said,
General Helmly, we have changed those benefits, in terms of pay
and bonuses and health care--is there general consensus that
this is working, when it comes to recruiting and retention? If
you don't think it's working, speak up.
General Helmly. Mr. Chairman, in my judgment it is helpful.
I believe the other part that must be addressed is
communications. I know that when I took office, most of our ads
emphasized 1 weekend a month, and 2 weeks in the summer.
Senator Graham. You don't do that anymore, do you?
General Helmly. Frankly, they were broken expectations that
have created a large part of our challenge. Our ads now
emphasize, ``Honor is never off duty. This is not your everyday
job.'' We're very frank upfront. We have put forth initiatives
to remind folks, ``This is more than money and benefits. This
is all about service to the Nation.'' I'm always cautious that
money is not the be-all and end-all in a benefits package. We
must provide our soldiers, sailors, airmen, and marines, Active
and Reserve components, with a standard of living commensurate
with their sacrifice for our Nation. I don't believe we want
the kind of force that money will buy.
Senator Graham. Right. You will never get people to do what
you do for the money. I don't care how much money you put on
the table. We're not hiring Hessians here. We're trying to get
Americans to come forward and say, ``All right, count me in.''
Along the benefits line, has TRICARE eligibility for the
deployable Guard and Reserves been well received?
Admiral Cotton. Mr. Chairman, I'd like to comment on that.
Yes, sir, it has most assuredly, especially this TRICARE
Reserve Select Program. I'd like to add one further comment on
that. Right now, it is for people who have served in support of
a contingency for 90 consecutive days. We send some great folks
over to CENTCOM, and they serve. However, we have people
serving around the globe in many other actions, who might not
be part of a designated contingency, who are accumulating, over
many kinds of sets of orders, greater than 90 days. For
example, an Air Force or a Navy C-130 pilot that flies 120 days
a year, but not consecutive, might not eligible for this
benefit. As we all know, health care is very important. This is
just a small change to that, that we might look at, to reward
those people that are doing many things every single day, but
maybe not 90 consecutive days, in support of a contingency.
Senator Graham. This is a good exchange, because we have
recently, along with Senator Nelson and others, fixed that. In
October, it's for anybody in the Selected Reserves.
Now, here's what I've learned from this exchange. Nobody
knows that. We need to get the message out. Coming this
October--am I right about that?--that the 90-day requirement's
going to be replaced? If you're a member of the Selected
Reserves, there will be a three-tiered system, in addition to
the 90 days. Everybody will have access to health care at
different levels, but the entire deployable Selected Reserve
Force will be able to sign up for one of three levels. Let's do
all we can to get that out.
General Bradley. Yes, sir, that's exactly right. I think
it's a good system. It offers options for people that will help
them greatly. It's a great benefit. Thanks for the change.
Senator Graham. I appreciate this exchange. It's helped us
all understand that the three-tier system needs to be better
advertised.
General James. I concur. The feedback I get from my folks
is that they're really appreciative of what you're doing for
them, because of the new nature of our commitment.
I failed to introduce my senior NCO representative here
today, Command Chief Master Sergeant Laurie Casucci. She is
representing the over 90,000 enlisted men and women in the
great Air National Guard. Chief Casucci, my apologies. She is a
wonderful, professional command chief, and she's representing
Command Chief Dick Smith, who couldn't be with us today.
Senator Graham. Thank you, Chief, for your service.
Let's go on to the next benefit question. The brewing
desire of Congress, slowly but surely, is to allow people to
retire at 55, rather than 60, if they'll serve from 20 to 30
years. You need to lose sleep about that. I do. I know you all
do. The one thing I worry about is not only retention, but also
how do you keep this force together, given the demands on it?
We're losing a lot of people--or at least I believe we're
losing people at the 20-year point who may have stayed longer,
because it's getting tough. Senator Chambliss, Senator Nelson,
others, and I have been working to come up with a package that,
for every 2 years you serve past 20 years, you would be
eligible to retire a year earlier. That's another way of doing
it, where all the points you accumulate allow you to retire at
a faster pace. There are two or three different ways of doing
this. The bottom line is, what effect do you believe it would
have on retaining people from the 20- or 30-year point if we
had an incentive system so you could retire earlier than 60?
General Helmly. Mr. Chairman, I have no empirical data to
support my argument, so I will give you my professional
judgment. I believe we would see a spike, or an increase in
retention beyond 20 years. We have seen, as the stress of the
war continued, an increase in the number of those willing to
leave us at the 20-year mark. That's grown by about 15 to 20
percent per annum over the last couple or 3 years. In the kind
of force that we fight with today, which is skill-intensive in
all Services, vice numbers-intensive, retention only makes good
sense.
Senator Graham. Very quickly--the vote started at 3:05
p.m., so I'll move on here--the 365-day call-up, versus 270, do
you support that concept?
Admiral Cotton. Mr. Chairman, I have a comment on that.
Senator Graham. Yes.
Admiral Cotton. I think we should ask the customer and
that's the combatant commander. Once you train someone for duty
and get them into theater, you want to use them a little bit
longer. This would give them the flexibility to train en route,
deploy for 6, 7, or 8 months, and then have downtime
afterwards. I think we'd increase the flexibility of our
customers if we did 365 days.
Senator Graham. Does anyone disagree with the idea of going
from 270 to 365 days?
General Helmly. Mr. Chairman, I don't. I'm mindful of the
fact that we have to look at the entire mobilization call-to-
duty process. The 270-day was built for the Cold War. It was
built to prime the pump for, then, a partial mob. I'm mindful
that the current partial mob law was written in about 1953, for
an entirely different kind of force than we have today, and an
entirely different kind of threat, and certainly not for a long
war.
Senator Graham. The numbers of the Marine Corps are just
astounding. You described it very well. This is a Reserve
Force, in name only, really. You're all playing in the war.
When you have 97 percent of the people activated, or 70 percent
of the force activated, it's just clear that if you join up,
you're going to be called on to serve. Our benefits and
equipment need to reflect that.
I have one last thing, and then I'll turn it over to
Senator Nelson. The equipment accounts. We're very sensitive
here that we're leaving equipment behind, and the units are
being underfunded when it comes to equipment, and you don't
have what you need. Could you all briefly comment on how you
see the state of the equipment and what we need to do?
Admiral Cotton. Mr. Chairman, I'd like to say that it's not
just the equipment we have now, it's also the Navy growing into
some new missions. We've just recently established the Navy
Expeditionary Combat Command, and bringing back riverine for
missions. So, it'll be dollars for some new equipment, too, and
some new missions, in support of the long war.
Senator Graham. General?
General Bergman. Sir, the cyclic rate of the equipment, as
we all know, is astronomical. It is a 1-year-in-1-month type of
thing. Some smart decisions need to be made, and I know all the
Services are looking at: Where do we stop repairing, and where
do we just buy new? It has its challenges. In the end, as long
as the Reserve components have the equipment to train with, we
know that, when they get into theater, the equipment will be
there to fight with.
General Vaughn. Mr. Chairman, General Blum hit this. For
us, it's really about transparency. It's going to take a while
to get back over this. I think if we have full faith and
confidence that we're going to get it back, and we have
training sets out there, and then you all are in a position to
watch this thing all the way through, if you can see it flow
all the way from the appropriations down to the end user, and
it is transparent all the way through, just like our National
Guard and Reserve equipment accounts, then we'll be in good
shape. The Army is working in that direction. We just need to
all be vigilant.
General Helmly. Mr. Chairman, it would be, frankly,
unprofessional if I said that we didn't get here because the
Army didn't like us. The Army was $96 billion short, coming
into 2000, on equipment. Our equipment's procured, in the main,
by Army procurement dollars, Active, Guard, and Reserve. We
find ourselves in a very deep hole. Our chief calls it ``holes
in the yard.'' In our case, we're about $10 billion short. The
wear and tear, as the Marine Corps Commandant mentioned, and
the shortage, have only exacerbated that. Now we find ourselves
at about a 75-percent level of fill.
The last point I'll make is that the Army Reserves skill
set is such that the kinds of equipment we use, while not
capital-intensive, is normally in low density in the support
items--cranes, dozers. Because of that, it doesn't make the
high-visibility part of the equipment requirements. We have to
pay close attention to it. It's going to take a long time, as
General Vaughn said in the National Guard, to fix that.
General Bradley. Senator Graham and Senator Nelson, I
wouldn't compare our problem to that of the Marines or the
Army. But, for equipment, we're flying our airplanes a lot
harder and a lot more often than our projections would have
predicted for us. So, our aircraft are going to wear out. Our
C-17s are performing magnificently, but we are using them at a
much greater rate than we had planned. We will have some
definite aircraft equipment needs down the road.
Also, in our other types of airplanes, like fighters, we
need to continue to do some modernization, some small things on
the airplanes that we have, that will carry us out until we
have replacement airplanes through our recapitalization
program. We will have some needs there, as well.
Senator Graham. Senator Nelson?
Senator Ben Nelson. Thank you.
General Bradley, when BRAC realigns or closes a base, there
can be some disruption to your personnel in that particular
area. Some choose not to go with the change. Do you have the
force management tools necessary to deal with BRAC and end
strength reductions to ensure that your units and personnel
maintain their mission capacity?
General Bradley. No, sir, we don't. In the 1990s, when we
went through base closure actions, we had some tools, such as
Reserve Transition Assistance Programs, that helped us with
people who had served us well and faithfully, but just couldn't
move several thousand miles, or hundreds of miles, to a new
unit. As you point out, our reservists, when their bases are
closed or their units are closed--and we're going to close five
wings in the Air Force Reserve, due to base closure, many
times, those positions are going to go hundreds or thousands of
miles away. In the Active Air Force, they'll move those folks.
We don't move them. People have served us 15 years or more, and
can't continue. Now, we'll try to assist them to find another
way to serve. We'll try to accommodate them in the Air Force
Reserve or the Air National Guard or in the Army. Some people
just can't continue. The Transition Assistance Program, such as
the ones that we had in the 1990s, would be very helpful. I'd
be very glad to provide your staff, if you'd like, some
specific items that would be particularly helpful, that we had
in the past.
[The information referred to follows:]
Senator Ben Nelson. That would be particularly helpful,
because, obviously, we have to be prepared for it. So, thank
you.
General Bradley. Yes, sir. Thank you for your question.
Senator Ben Nelson. General Vaughn, part of the
reorganization of the Army Guard is to replace several of the
combat brigades with Combat Support Brigades. Can you assure us
that the personnel assigned to the Combat Support Brigades will
be properly trained for their new missions?
General Vaughn. Senator Nelson, as we work through this--
this gets back to how we're organized, how many brigades--the
Adjutants General now are involved in a collaborative process
with the Army to figure out just what that really is. From the
28 Brigade Combat Teams (BCTs) we talked to, I can tell you
that those BCTs were a good structure, because they had combat
support and combat service support sunk in them. They're going
to be trained. What we have to watch for, and what the
Adjutants General are going to watch for, is turbulence out
there, because as you well know, the best thing we can do is
keep people long-term in the same kinds of jobs. We're engaged,
and the Army's now engaged with us in figuring out this issue
that we ran into some 4 or 5 months ago, and we're doing it the
right way now, collaboratively.
Senator Ben Nelson. General James, I know the Air National
Guard has picked up some missions from the Active-Duty Air
Force. Will you or your successor have the personnel needed for
the missions if they're reduced by over 14,000 air men and
women?
General James. It'll be quite a challenge. Because of the
new missions we have picked up, we will be challenged. We're
going to have to look at the missions that we have been asked
to do, as General Blum asked me to take a look at anything past
2001 that we've taken on that as additive mission to do in the
Air National Guard without additive manpower. I think it'll be
quite a challenge.
I think the way to approach this, Senator, is instead of
looking at a bill that was handed to us, we need to look at
these missions that the Air Force wants us to do, missions that
they want us to continue in, determine what the manpower
requirement is going to be for the Air National Guard as a
whole, and that should be our end strength target.
I realize that the Air Force has to recapitalize. I realize
there's a big bill for that. However, what's going to have to
happen to us if we are forced to take these cuts is that we're
going to have to start doing less with less.
Senator Ben Nelson. I think that makes a great deal of
sense. Thank you.
Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Thank you, everyone, for
your presentations. I appreciate it.
Senator Graham. Thank you very much.
I'm going to follow up on Senator Nelson's question. I've
been told that if the Air Force Reserve is going to do all the
things in the Air Guard that's been asked of it, you're going
to need more people, not fewer. That's just the honest answer,
isn't it, General James?
General James. I've had my folks--my planners,
programmers--run three different scenarios, depending on
whether we did everything, whether we did X percentage or X
percentage. Every time, we've come out with a number higher
than 106,800.
Senator Graham. I appreciate your testimony. We have to run
and vote. We got the message. I hope we keep this partnership
going. It think it's paid dividends for our troops to have a
good relationship between Congress and the leadership of the
Guard and Reserves. You represent that leadership, and we're
proud of you.
To the people who have served overseas and abroad that were
identified today, we're very proud of you, and we know you
represent the best in our country. God bless. Until next time,
be careful. Be safe.
Thank you. We are adjourned.
[Questions for the record with answers supplied follow:]
Questions Submitted by Senator Lindsey O. Graham
end strength for the army reserve components
1. Senator Graham. Secretary Hall and General Blum, the President's
fiscal year 2007 budget is consistent with the Quadrennial Defense
Review's (QDR) recommendation to reduce the Army's Reserve component to
533,000 personnel by fiscal year 2011 from the currently authorized
levels of 350,000 in the Army National Guard (ARNG) and 205,000 in the
Army Reserve. This is a cut of 22,000 across the Future Years Defense
Plan (FYDP) from the levels currently authorized for the ARNG and Army
Reserve.
Please explain the rationale behind the QDR's recommendation to
reduce the Army Reserve component when we are relying on the ARNG and
Army Reserve more than anytime in recent memory and we are asking them
to take on more new missions?
Mr. Hall. Prior to the 2005 QDR the Army had developed a plan for
34 combat brigades and 72 support brigades in the ARNG, and 43 combat
brigades and 75 support brigades in the Active component. This provided
up to 20 combat brigades for steady state operations. The QDR showed a
lower requirement for combat brigades but a greater requirement for
brigades able to respond more immediately to meet homeland defense/
civil support. Therefore, the Army elected to increase the ARNG
domestic capability by rebalancing six brigade combat teams (BCTs) and
one combat aviation brigade to seven support brigades. These brigades
provide engineering, communications, transportation, logistical,
chemical, and medical capabilities critical to homeland defense and
civil support. Modernization, coupled with the civilianization of
nonmilitary essential functions, resulted in a reduction of military
manpower requirements, although the total number of brigades remained
at 106.
Much has been said about the ARNG being cut, both end strength and
units. While it is true that the fiscal year 2007 budget submission
reflects an actual number of troops on board, the Army leadership is on
record in testimony before the House and Senate that they are committed
to funding the Guard to the level to which they can recruit, up to
their congressionally authorized end strength of 350,000. For
modernization alone, the Army has budgeted approximately $21 billion
from 2005 to 2011, a four-fold increase over the level of funding for
equipment modernization from the 1999 period. This organization,
manning, and funding will permit the ARNG to support the Nation's
global operations, prevail in the global war on terror, and conduct
expanded State and homeland security missions.
General Blum. The reduction in ARNG forces was based on the
assumption that the United States Army had sufficient land forces to
sustain the ``Long War.''
2. Senator Graham. Secretary Hall and General Blum, how were the
recommendations of the QDR coordinated with The Adjutants General
(TAGs) and Governors of the States?
Mr. Hall. I will defer to the Chief of the National Guard Bureau.
Any QDR coordination would have been provided through the National
Guard Bureau.
General Blum. There was initially no coordination with TAGs or
Governors on the QDR recommendations. Prior to the release of the QDR
on 30 January 2006, the Secretary of the Army and the Chief of Staff of
the Army briefed the 54 Adjutants General of the States, Territories,
and the District of Columbia on the recommendation to reduce the ARNG
force structure from 34 to 28 BCTs. TAGs of the United States, as a
corporate body, nonconcurred with the proposal to reduce force
structure. Subsequently, the Army has incorporated TAGs into a Force
Structure Steering Committee to work the issue of the 28 BCTs.
Currently, the Army plans to keep the end strength of the ARNG at
350,000 and to leave the Force Structure Allowance at 348,000 in fiscal
year 2008 working toward 342,000 in fiscal year 2011. This General
Officer Steering Committee reports back to the Governors on the status
of their deliberations in keeping with the statutory responsibility of
the Governor to consent and approve of units being withdrawn or changed
from a State.
3. Senator Graham. Secretary Hall and General Blum, given the
tremendous effort of the Army Guard and Reserve and the strain on those
forces to support combat operations in Afghanistan and Iraq, what
assumptions did the QDR make that led to a recommendation to reduce the
size of the ARNG and Army Reserve by 22,000 people?
Mr. Hall. Prior to the 2005 QDR, the Army had developed a plan for
34 combat brigades and 72 support brigades in the ARNG and 43 combat
brigades and 75 support brigades in the Active component. This provided
up to 20 combat brigades for steady state operations. The QDR showed a
lower requirement for combat brigades but a greater requirement for
brigades able to respond more immediately to meet homeland defense/
civil support. Therefore, the Army elected to increase the ARNG
domestic capability by rebalancing six BCTs and one combat aviation
brigade to seven support brigades. These brigades provide engineering,
communications, transportation, logistical, chemical, and medical
capabilities critical to homeland defense and civil support.
Modernization, coupled with the civilianization of nonmilitary
essential functions, resulted in a reduction of military manpower
requirements, not people, while at the same time maintaining the total
number of brigades at 106.
The Army will resource the troop strength of all three components
to their actual strengths. Resourcing troop levels at their actual
strength, combined with force rebalancing efforts, will provide our
Nation and its Governors with the necessary resources to accomplish
their homeland defense requirements as well as our worldwide
operational needs.
General Blum. The reduction in Reserve component forces was based
on the assumption that the United States Army had sufficient land
forces to sustain the ``Long War.''
budget cuts impacting the army national guard
4. Senator Graham. General Blum, in addition to the QDR, the ARNG
was also impacted by budget decisions that were made late in 2005. How
did budget decisions impact the National Guard force structure,
including its personnel end strength levels?
General Blum. While the President's budget was sent to Congress
proposing an ARNG end strength of 332,900, that request was
subsequently revised to 350,000. The future structure of the force will
be determined through a collaborative process involving the Army, the
National Guard Bureau, and the State TAGs.
5. Senator Graham. General Blum, how does the Department of Defense
(DOD) intend to address the funding levels for the ARNG and Army
Reserve given recent statements by the Army's leadership that end
strength levels will be maintained, and that the Army will fund the
National Guard and Army Reserve based on its success in recruiting up
to their authorized end strengths, and that the Army will fund to fully
equip the Guard and Reserve Force structure?
General Blum. The Army is committed to funding the ARNG up to the
350,000 strength level in fiscal year 2007 and is in the process of
identifying sources to meet this commitment. Efforts are ongoing
regarding the equipment/investment (procurement) restoral and the total
dollar amount depends on the final outcome of force structure
adjustments.
end strength for the air national guard
6. Senator Graham. Secretary Hall and General Blum, following
recommendations made in the QDR, the President's budget for fiscal year
2007 begins the process of reducing Air Force manpower by 40,000 full-
time equivalents across the Total Force. In order to achieve a cut of
5,000 full-time equivalents from its Reserve components, the Air Force
will have to cut over 22,000 Air National Guard (ANG) and Air Force
Reserve positions over the FYDP. The cuts are expected to start in
fiscal year 2008. These cuts are about 12 percent of the Air Force
Reserve component force structure.
How can the Air Force cut so much of its Reserve component force
structure given the demands we have seen during operations in
Afghanistan and Iraq?
Mr. Hall. The reduction of Air Force manpower is based on the
restructuring/reorganizing centered around 86 combat wings. It
leverages reachback capabilities and minimizes the forward footprint.
The balanced reductions across the force--Active component, ANG, Air
Force Reserve, and civilians--are facilitated by modernization and a
reduction of aircraft. The Air Force proposal streamlines organizations
to a smaller, more agile force and transforms its organizational
structures with an increased emphasis on supporting the warfighter.
This includes, but is not limited to, completing and aligning the Air
Force's Warfighting Headquarters transformation in order to support the
combatant commanders (CCDRs) and Joint Task Forces (JTFs). These
organizational restructuring actions will result in a more streamlined
structure with an enhanced ability to employ air, space, and cyberspace
power in support of CCDRs and JTFs. Eliminating redundancies and
streamlining organizations will make it possible to field a more
capable force of military, civilians, and contractors while freeing up
resources for recapitalizion.
General Blum. The ANG understands the compelling issues behind the
Air Force's need to modernize and recapitalize the Total Air Force.
Accomplishing this task in today's budgetary environment, operating
efficiencies will have to be found through rebalancing among
components, reducing redundancies and inefficient business practices,
and maybe targeted end strength reductions.
We also agree the Reserve components are in demand more than ever.
In fact, our figures show the ANG commitment has more than tripled
since 1991. This level of commitment, combined with the increased
demand of the new and emerging mission areas, has forced us to review
all of our programs to ensure we continue to provide trained units and
qualified persons available to support the Air Force in its mission to
deliver sovereign options for the defense of the United States and its
global interests--to fly and fight in air, space, and cyberspace.
Additionally, we consider it our duty to make sure the Air Force
understands our dual responsibility to provide trained and equipped
units to protect life and property and to preserve peace, order, and
public safety within the State or territory.
General Moseley has asked the Air Reserve components to look
internally to locate efficiencies and assist the Air Force in meeting
its goal. As we do so, I've instructed the ANG to follow these guiding
principles:
Guiding Principles
Flying mission in every State
Proportionality--share skill sets
Retain surge capability with approximately 60 percent
part-time, ``Traditional''
Maintain regional capability in support of disaster
response
Priority to dual-use (Federal and State) capability,
weigh against ``how much capability is enough?''
7. Senator Graham. Secretary Hall and General Blum, will personnel
cuts of this size require disestablishment of squadrons and other
units?
Mr. Hall. Air Force transformation will allow for a more capable,
but smaller Air Force. There will be increases in joint enablers and
networked and integrated systems. At this time, there are only a few
units that have been identified to be disestablished as the Air Force
transforms. Most of the restructuring is taking place within existing
units. Many of the units will simply convert to a new structure, an
associate unit concept. Associate units merge Active and Reserve
component assets into one organization. This allows for superior
capabilities, with generally more experienced Reserve component airmen
working side-by-side with their Active component counterparts, flying
better aircraft armed with improved precision-guided munitions. This
allows for a reduction in end strength with a comparatively small
corresponding disestablishment of units.
General Blum. Our analysis of the proposed cuts is not complete. We
are still attempting to determine how best we can pay the bill. In
other words, will we use manpower, mission divestment, or a combination
of both? In every previous round of cuts to the Active component there
has been an increase of requirements and commitment required by the
Reserve component. Additionally, the capabilities required of the ANG,
as well as the Total Force, combined with new and emergent needs in
homeland defense/civil support lead us to believe a slightly larger ANG
may be required in the future.
8. Senator Graham. Secretary Hall and General Blum, have such
reductions been worked out with TAGs and Governors of the States
involved?
Mr. Hall. I will defer to the Chief of the National Guard Bureau.
since coordination of such reductions with the States would have been
accomplished through the National Guard Bureau as the channel of
communication between the Air Force and the States.
General Blum. No, the reductions have not been worked out with the
TAGs. As already stated, we are still investigating how best we can pay
the bill. The National Guard Bureau informed the TAGs of the contents
of PBD 720 during the January 30 TAG meeting and we will continue to
keep them involved as we analyze this issue.
9. Senator Graham. Secretary Hall and General Blum, given the
growth of missions assigned to the Reserve components, including
homeland defense and support of homeland security, as well as growth in
non-traditional missions for the Air Force in support of the Army and
Marine Corps in civil affairs, ground-based logistics, force
protection, and military police, do such large cuts in personnel mean
that some missions of the Air Force Reserve components will be reduced
or eliminated and if so, which missions and functions are being cut?
Mr. Hall. While working in partnership with the ANG and the Air
Force Reserve, the Air Force will become a numerically smaller, yet a
more capable force through modernization and recapitalization of
selected weapons systems. This effort will enable the Air Force to meet
the challenges of a shrinking budget, and an aging aircraft inventory
as well as to leverage emerging missions. The goal is to improve
operating efficiencies, reduce redundancies and inefficient business
practices, as well as target end strength reductions. In order to
ensure correct actions are implemented, a comprehensive process that
includes collaboration with all stakeholders is underway. The plan for
the Total Force integration will guide the decisions made so that
implementation can begin. These efforts will be carried out over the
next 12 months. At this time, there are only a few units that have been
identified to be disestablished. Many of the units will convert to a
new structure, an associate unit concept--Active and Reserve component
assets merging into one organization. One example is the initiative at
Langley Air Force Base where the Virginia Air National Guard's 192nd
Fighter Wing will fly the F/A-22 at the same time as the active duty in
an associate unit arrangement with the 1st Fighter Wing. In addition,
the Reserves will see a growth in emerging missions such as unmanned
aerial vehicles. As the Air Force transforms from a Cold War force
posture to a structure that supports expeditionary warfare, more
efficient use of the ANG and the Air Force Reserve assets will enhance
flexibility and the capacity to be a more agile and lethal combat
force, and a more vigilant homeland defender.
General Blum. Our analysis of the proposed cuts is not complete. We
are still attempting to determine how best we can pay the bill. In
other words, will we use manpower, mission divestment, or a combination
of both.
guard and reserve rotation policy and strain on the force
10. Senator Graham. Secretary Hall and General Blum, we are now
more than 4 years beyond September 11 and the Guard and Reserve have
been on a wartime footing for this entire period. Could you please give
me a snapshot of recruiting and retention?
Mr. Hall. Recruiting Results: In a very challenging recruiting
environment, the DOD Reserve components' cumulative achievement of
recruiting objectives has declined over the past 3 years from 105
percent in fiscal year 2002, to 98 percent in fiscal year 2003, to 96
percent in fiscal year 2004, to 85 percent in fiscal year 2005, with
only two of the six DOD Reserve components, the Marine Corps Reserve
and the Air Force Reserve, achieving or exceeding their recruiting
objectives each year. The most significant shortfalls have been in the
ARNG, and most recently in the Army Reserve. In fiscal year 2005, only
two components met their goals--the Marine Corps Reserve and the Air
Force Reserve. We expected that fiscal year 2006 would continue to be
challenging for Reserve recruiting, particularly in the Reserve
components of the Army, but many initiatives have been undertaken to
mitigate the challenges. As of the end of March 2006, three of the six
Reserve components met or exceeded their accession goals and a fourth
is within acceptable limits. Both Reserve components of the Army are in
this successful group. Some of the Reserve components have not met the
Department's goals for high school graduates and mental groups I-III;
however, recent efforts appear to have reversed that trend.
Retention: The requirements to support the global war on terror,
particularly our commitment in Iraq, have placed a strain on the
Reserve Force. Nonetheless, measuring those who reenlist at the
completion of their current contract, we find that reenlistments were
higher (by more than 2,000) in fiscal year 2005 than they were in
fiscal year 2004, up from 95.5 percent of goal in fiscal year 2004 to
100.1 percent of goal in fiscal year 2005. Reenlistments have exhibited
a positive trend since fiscal year 2002, and indications are that it
will continue through fiscal year 2006. Additionally, we believe the
best measure of Reserve component continuation is attrition, and
overall attrition rates remain near historically (last 15 years) low
levels. Enlisted attrition through February 2006 is generally lower
than the same period reported last year and in the base year of fiscal
year 2000. We expect that attrition rates will continue at these low
levels, including those members who have been mobilized and deployed to
support operations in Iraq and Afghanistan.
General Blum. As I stated in my verbal testimony, I recognize that
both the Army and the ANG face recruiting and retention challenges.
However, I also believe that with the current incentives in the form of
bonuses and additional duty pay that has been authorized by Congress
recently, both recruiting and retention have met, will continue to
meet, and possibly even exceed, expectations.
11. Senator Graham. Secretary Hall and General Blum, as a
percentage, how much of the ARNG and Army Selected Reserve has deployed
in support of combat operations in Afghanistan and Iraq?
Mr. Hall. Between September 11, 2001, and February 28, 2006, 29.8
percent of the members who served in the ARNG during that period were
deployed to areas that warrant receipt of Imminent Danger Pay and/or
the Combat Zone Tax Exclusion benefit. Similarly, during that same time
period, 29.6 percent of the members who served in the Selected Reserve
of the Army Reserve deployed to those zones that warrant receipt of
Imminent Danger Pay and/or the Combat Zone Tax Exclusion benefit.
Today, 8.5 percent of the members serving in the ARNG, and 7.4
percent of the members serving in the Selected Reserve of the Army
Reserve, are currently deployed to these regions.
General Blum. 32 percent of the ARNG and 29 percent of the Army
Selected Reserve have been deployed in support of combat operations in
Afghanistan and Iraq.
12. Senator Graham. Secretary Hall and General Blum, in terms of a
number by component, how many people have deployed?
Mr. Hall. Between September 11, 2001, and February 28, 2006, a
total of 361,274 Reserve component members have been deployed outside
the continental United States to areas that warrant receipt of Imminent
Danger Pay and/or the Combat Zone Tax Exclusion benefit. There are
53,430 Reserve component members who are currently deployed to these
regions. The chart below provides the breakout of the deployed Reserve
members by component.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total Number of
Total Number of Members
Members Ever Currently
Deployed (since Deployed (2-28-
9-11-01) 06)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Army National Guard................. 156,067 28,568
Army Reserve........................ 91,097 13,778
Navy Reserve........................ 18,102 3,265
Marine Corps Reserve................ 49,323 3,110
Air National Guard.................. 27,903 2,105
Air Force Reserve................... 18,782 2,604
-----------------------------------
Total DOD Reserve Components...... 361,274 53,430
------------------------------------------------------------------------
General Blum. Since September 2001 approximately 170,000 individual
ARNG soldiers and more than 50,000 ANG personnel have been deployed one
or more times.
13. Senator Graham. Secretary Hall and General Blum, how is the 24-
cumulative-month limit on involuntary recall impacting units and
individuals in the Guard and Reserve who have high-demand skills?
Mr. Hall. The Department's implementation of the partial
mobilization authority is more restrictive than the law by limiting the
period of involuntary mobilization for this contingency to 24
cumulative months rather that the 24 consecutive months authorized by
law. This protects individuals with high demand skills, and low
density/high demand units, from being overused involuntarily. The 24-
cumulative-month policy was carefully crafted to help ensure prudent
and judicious use of Reserve component members, thereby supporting the
Department's ability to sustain a robust Reserve component force. To
address the problem of high demand units and skills, the Services are
rebalancing and the Department is using other mitigation strategies
such as using joint solutions and in-lieu-of forces to meet operational
requirements. The Department's policy protects against repeated,
extended periods of involuntary activation which would more than likely
have a detrimental effect on the retention of Guard and Reserve members
and would probably undermine support from families and employers of
Reserve component members.
General Blum. Yes, the 24-cumulative-month limit does have an
impact on both units and individuals who have high-demand skills;
however, again, thanks to Congress, there are a number of bonuses and
incentives available that encourage volunteers to fill these units,
thus ensuring that we are able to continue to meet the mission
requirements.
14. Senator Graham. Secretary Hall and General Blum, how are we
going to be able to keep up our commitments without breaking the force?
Mr. Hall. Through careful management of the force, the Department
and the Services will continue to transform and meet the demands of our
combatant commanders. From fiscal year 2004 to fiscal year 2005, the
Services rebalanced about 70,000 spaces of structure in low demand into
structure that is in high demand. They have plans to rebalance about
55,000 additional spaces from fiscal year 2006 to fiscal year 2011. At
the same time, many of our members are volunteering to serve on Active-
Duty. Providing more members in these high demand skills and the use of
volunteers, helps us meet our commitments while reducing stress on the
force. There are a number of other initiatives that seek to enhance our
ability to meet our commitments while reducing stress on the force.
These initiatives include technology insertions, organizational
changes, use of civilians, reachback operations, and other initiatives
that will allow for a continuum of service for our Total Force. Taken
together, this suite of initiatives, coupled with careful force
management practices, should allow us to continue to meet the combatant
commanders' requirements in the long war on terrorism while
transforming to meet the threats of the future.
General Blum. We are thankful of the commitment and sacrifices that
our men and women in the National Guard and all Reserve components have
made to fight the global war on terrorism. We also know that we have to
continue to do all we can to compensate our National Guard members with
the entitlements and benefits which reflect their level of service. We
appreciate the congressional support for all the benefits which have
been provided to our National Guard and Reserve members during the last
several National Defense Authorization Acts (NDAAs). Now we need to
focus on the actual delivery system to provide all these benefits to
our members. Some of the benefits such as TRICARE Reserve Select (TRS)
and Income Replacement are complex and will require dedicated effort to
ensure all eligible members are aware of the new benefits and can
participate as they choose.
commission on the national guard and reserve
15. Senator Graham. Secretary Hall, General Blum, General Vaughn,
General James, General Helmly, Admiral Cotton, General Bergman, and
General Bradley, the congressionally chartered Commission on the
National Guard and Reserve began hearings this month focusing on a
broad range of issues, including the future roles and missions of the
Guard and Reserve, rotation policies, training, equipping,
compensation, and benefits. The Commission is required to provide
Congress with an interim report within 90 days of its first meeting,
which will be in June. What issues have you highlighted for the
Commission?
Mr. Hall. The overarching issue has been the transition from a
strategic reserve to an operational reserve. All aspects of this
transition from training, recruiting/retention, equipment, facilities,
readiness, and mobilization have been discussed. Limiting mobilization
periods to not more than 12 months every 6 years has been highlighted.
The more than 120 provisions in law over the past 2 years passed by
Congress have improved the Reserve component capability in the global
war on terror. Military OneSource and over 700 family support centers
have benefited Reserve component members and their families. All
aspects of TRICARE for reservists have been discussed.
General Blum. I have not testified to the Commission.
General Vaughn. As of today I have not formally highlighted any
issues for the Commission.
General James. The ANG fully supports the important work underway
by the Commission on the National Guard and Reserve. Our hope is the
Commission will focus on such issues as the role of the ANG in homeland
defense and civil support, the legislative challenges posed by U.S.C.
title 10/32 in today's environment, the future roles and missions of
the ANG.
General Helmly. Today's Army Reserve is no longer a strategic
reserve; it is a complementary, operational force undergoing the
largest change in its history. The Army Reserve is an integral part of
the United States Army, providing combat support and combat service
support to the joint force. Major issues for the Army Reserve are:
delineating roles and missions for a Federal Reserve Force; recruiting
quality soldiers; developing a cyclic rotation plan to provide a
sustainable pool of ready units; focusing training on preparing Army
Reserve soldiers for Active Service; personnel compensation and
benefits; equipment availability and readiness; and reducing support
structure to increase readiness of deployable units. These changes are
necessary to sustain the Army Reserve's relevancy to the National
Defense Strategy.
Admiral Cotton. In a request for a written response to the
Commission, Navy Reserve highlighted the following issues:
Recruiting and Retention:
a. Expand the Army Guard pilot program that offers a recruiting
referral bonus of $1,000 to all Services.
b. Provide TRS for all reservists performing operational support.
c. Enhance Navy Reserve medical readiness.
d. Improve recruiting and retention incentives by indexing the
Montgomery G.I. Bill--Selected Reserve (MGIBSR) to the Active
component MGIB rate.
Structural Enhancements:
a. Simplify Selected Reserve orders to two types: Inactive-Duty (for
training) and Active-Duty (for work).
b. Allow Reserve component personnel to attain and retain Joint Service
Officer qualifications.
c. Apply NDAA for Fiscal Year 2005 rules to enable Reserve component
flag officers to serve greater than 179 days on active duty to
accommodate global war on terror operational support, Joint
Service, and Joint Professional Military Education
requirements.
d. Authorize full time support reservists, Active Guard and Reserve,
and technicians to perform any mission deemed appropriate by
the Service Secretary.
e. Change current Reserve flag officer designator limits to enable more
flexibility in meeting operational support requirements.
f. Remove limits on moving funds between budget activity accounts.
General Bergman. The Marine Corps has identified several issues for
the Commission on the National Guard and Reserve. Our main concern is
the policy regarding one mobilization and volunteerism for subsequent
mobilizations. The policy has adversely impacted the Marine Corps
because it puts the onus for deploying service capabilities on the back
of the individual marine and sailor. Family and employers know the
marine's second activation is voluntary. Additionally, the policy
creates a morale problem in deploying units. An emotional wedge is
driven between the marines that volunteer for reactivation and those
that do not. Finally, the policy disrupts unit cohesion and limits unit
training prior to activation, while earlier activation for training
uses cumulative activation time. The Marine Corps recommends changing
the policy to authorize involuntary activations for up to the full 24
months, even with prior activation; including recall of the Individual
Ready Reserve.
The Assistant Commandant for the Marine Corps testified before the
Commission on March 15, 2006. A number of issues were also highlighted
that centered on the need to maintain readiness, take care of our
marines and their families, and posture the Corps to meet future
national security requirements. These include the continuing need for
the Selected Reserve Officer Affiliation Bonus to aid recruiting and
retention efforts; possible changes in legislation to address the
increasingly unsustainable cost of health care; optimizing Active and
Reserve capabilities to mitigate unit and personnel operational tempo
and support irregular warfare; providing adequate resources to conduct
predeployment training and enhanced training in support of irregular
warfare; higher than planned equipment utilization rates affecting
equipment readiness and availability for predeployment training and
employment in theater; and the challenge of resetting our ground and
aviation forces which is additive to the ongoing cost of war
requirement and requires continued supplemental funding.
General Bradley. Formally to this point in time, we have provided
inputs only to the Vice Chief of Staff for the Air Force for his
testimony before the Commission on March 9 and to the Assistant
Secretary of the Air Force for Manpower and Reserve Affairs in
developing a paper on the Operational Reserve. I will testify before
the Commission in July.
Informally, when the Commission was being formed, my staff provided
the Commission's staff with issues for consideration during their
review. These included the following:
Define strategic and operational missions as they
apply to the Reserve components.
Define what percentage of the contributions the
Reserve components should provide but consider the needs of
each Service as being different.