[Senate Hearing 109-]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2007
----------
WEDNESDAY, APRIL 26, 2006
U.S. Senate,
Subcommittee of the Committee on Appropriations,
Washington, DC.
The subcommittee met at 10:06 a.m., in room SD-192, Dirksen
Senate Office Building, Hon. Ted Stevens (chairman) presiding.
Present: Senators Stevens, Domenici, Bond, Burns, Inouye,
Leahy, Mikulski, and Dorgan.
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
National Guard
STATEMENT OF LIEUTENANT GENERAL H STEVEN BLUM, CHIEF,
NATIONAL GUARD BUREAU
OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR TED STEVENS
Senator Stevens. Good morning and welcome to all of you.
Sorry to be a little late. We want to welcome you to today's
hearing on National Guard and Reserve programs. There are two
panels scheduled today. First we want to hear from the National
Guard leadership and then from the leaders of the four Reserve
forces.
This first panel consists of: Lieutenant General Steven
Blum, Chief of the National Guard Bureau; Lieutenant General
Clyde Vaughn, Director of the Army National Guard; and Major
General Charles Ickes, Acting Director of the Air National
Guard. We thank you very much for coming, for your service, and
we do welcome General Vaughn and General Ickes to their first
hearing before this subcommittee. We are pleased to have you
here.
We know that in the past year Guard and Reserves have
continued to provide support for their active duty forces
overseas. The total force is a reality now, there is no
question about it. In addition to augmenting the military
effort in Iraq and Afghanistan, the Reserves have also stepped
up to meet challenges such as securing our homeland, responding
to national disasters such as Hurricane Katrina. You had
several sizable missions to fulfill and have accomplished all
of them with a great deal of success, and we thank all of your
citizen-soldiers for their dedication and sacrifices at home
and abroad.
We want to hear about several challenges we are told that
face our Guard and Reserves, including the continued
deployments, modernization of equipment, and recruiting and
retention of personnel. We would like to have you discuss the
future plans to remain relevant and ready to support our total
domestic security. We look forward to hearing from each of you
how the fiscal year 2007 budget request will help you address
these issues.
Let me yield to my good friend, the co-chairman from
Hawaii, Senator Inouye.
STATEMENT OF SENATOR DANIEL K. INOUYE
Senator Inouye. I thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I
would like to join you in welcoming our witnesses.
The utilization and dependency on our Reserve and Guard
forces have changed dramatically. Now you are all over the
world. There is an unprecedented demand for the Reserves. Today
your forces are spread around the globe and serving here at
home by the thousands. As this subcommittee has noted in past
hearings, your troops have responded magnificently. The
integration of Reserve forces by combatant commanders in
Afghanistan and Iraq have been seamless. The bravery is
impressive.
Again, we congratulate you for having your forces prepared
for the challenges they are now facing. But as I say this, I
know that the challenges facing us are many and growing. For
example, many States are concerned about the plans the Army has
to reorganize several Guard units. We are aware of the concerns
that our returning reservists may have difficulty being
retained. We know about your shortfalls of equipment for those
returning from service overseas. We understand that some
Reserve units have been called to deploy overseas more than
once since 9/11, straining relationships with employers and
their families.
So today we are here to hear your recommendations, to
ensure that our Guard and Reserve forces remain strong and
ready to meet the future.
So I thank you, Mr. Chairman, for calling this hearing.
Senator Stevens. Senator Burns.
STATEMENT OF SENATOR CONRAD BURNS
Senator Burns. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
I want to thank the distinguished folks who are at the
table this morning. I want to say on these past couple of weeks
I had an opportunity to meet a group of young men from Nellis
Air Force Base in Montana. They are rescue and recovery people,
training in a rough topography and weather conditions, and they
had them both up there, I think. And now, after a couple of
weeks in Montana, why, they said, well, as tough as it was, we
are reluctant to go back to Nellis. They just want to stay in
Montana.
But I thank you for coming this morning on something that
is very dear to all of our hearts, because not only of the
obligations that some of you have in our respective States, but
also had it not been for your troops in recent operations I
think we would have been hard-pressed to really complete a
mission. So I appreciate that. You have proven yourselves to be
flexible. We have tried as Congress to put the infrastructure
in place that would facilitate not only your recruiting but
also your training and the morale of the troops, because, as
you know, most are citizen-soldiers and have obligations to
their communities and to their families and do this out of
their real deep commitment to the security of this country. I
commend you on that and your leadership.
We are here now--I think a couple of primary concerns is
ensuring that you have the funding to reset the force now,
because we have been deployed around the world, as Senator
Inouye indicated, now to revitalize not only from a human
resource but also our equipment and our ability to train and to
bring new people into our force. We are making sure that the
funding is not shortchanged with the area of your concerns,
that we maintain that ability to be ready when called, and also
taking care of these great Americans, their families and their
support system that really makes us a different kind of a
society, so to speak.
So I commend you on your leadership. Also, how do we deal
with employers who all at once look down the line one day and
they have some holes in their own operation at home, and when
the troops come home do they have jobs and do they have the
support system that puts them back into society before it was
disrupted? Not that their level of patriotism has lowered any,
but they have other obligations also, and we want to make sure
that those support services are there.
So thank you, Mr. Chairman. I look forward to their
testimony.
Senator Stevens. Thank you, Senator.
Senator Mikulski.
STATEMENT OF SENATOR BARBARA A. MIKULSKI
Senator Mikulski. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
To the people at the head table, a very enthusiastic
welcome. General Blum, it is great to see you again. They
really enjoyed your speech at the University of Baltimore
graduation, where you were inspirational, motivational, and
really admired, and my family certainly enjoyed meeting you
that day.
I think that is characteristic here. You know, your job is
to inspire and to motivate the Guards and our job is to make
sure you have the right resources to do that.
I just wanted to say very briefly, number one, thank you
and please thank every single soldier, Air Force member of the
National Guard that you represent. They really are appreciated,
and we are going to show that appreciation today, not with
words but with deeds.
We want to hear what are the resources that are needed to
support the Guard in their current mission and operations.
Number two, what can we do to retain the best of the best in
terms of whether it is family support, employer support, et
cetera? Number three, how do we recruit new members of the
National Guard, because they see that what it takes to be a
citizen-soldier is a significant commitment of time, duty, and
even personal expense.
So thank you and God bless you for what you do and many
thanks to all those who serve.
General Blum. Thank you, Senator.
Senator Stevens. Are you finished, Senator?
Senator Mikulski. Yes.
Senator Stevens. Thank you very much.
Senator Bond.
STATEMENT OF SENATOR CHRISTOPHER S. BOND
Senator Bond. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
Lieutenant General Blum, Lieutenant General Vaughn, Major
General Ickes, welcome back to the subcommittee. Thank you very
much for the service. The Guard as participants in the first
gulf war, responders to 9/11, Hurricane Katrina, service in
Operations Iraqi and Enduring Freedom, just to name a few,
provided tremendous service to this country.
I have been around a while working with Guard issues. In
1991 I led a charge to preserve Guard units, including 3,100
guardsmen in Missouri and more than 100,000 across the Nation,
who were proposed for cuts by the Pentagon. In 2001 the Air
Force eliminated the B-1 mission from the Air National Guard.
During the 2005 base realignment and closure (BRAC) process we
learned from testimony of adjutants general that the Air
National Guard was not substantively involved and as a result
they made one of the worst decisions I have seen, to shut down
the 131st Fighter Wing with the F-15s at St. Louis, providing
homeland security protection in the most efficient force, F-15
force, in the air assets.
Earlier this year, we heard proposals coming out of the
Pentagon to reduce end strength of the Army Guard by 17,000 and
14,000 from the Air Guard. We sent a little letter with 75 or
80 signatures that got some rethinking of it.
But on issue after issue, the Guard has had to rely on
Congress, not its total force partners in the active duty, to
equip and provide fully the resources and benefits it needs,
not only to support our active duty warfighters in the away
game as they serve right alongside with those men and women on
active duty, but also to fulfil the Guard's paramount home game
mission of defending the homeland and providing support to
civil authorities.
Why? It is obvious that the Guard is not provided with the
bureaucratic muscle commensurate with its contributions to the
total force. That is why Senator Leahy and I, who are co-chairs
of the Senate National Guard Caucus, are introducing
legislation today aimed at redressing the uphill battles the
Guard must fight every year to ensure full training, equipping,
and readiness to meet the missions.
Mr. Chairman, I have a very long-winded statement that I
will submit for the record, but I will spare you that and just
wait for the questions. I thank the chair.
Senator Stevens. We thank you for your generosity, Senator.
[The statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of Senator Christopher S. Bond
Thank you Mr. Chairman.
Lieutenant General Blum, Lt. General Vaughn and Major
General Ickes (pronounced like ick-iss) welcome back to this
committee and thank you first and foremost for your service to
our nation.
As participants in the first Gulf War, responders to 9/11
and Hurricane Katrina, service in Operation Iraqi and Enduring
Freedom, just to name a few operations, all of us are familiar
with the tremendous service the National Guard has rendered to
our Nation and the 50 states and four protectorates.
In 1991, I lead a charge to preserve National Guard Units,
including 3,100 guardsmen in Missouri and more than 100,000
across the nation, from proposed cuts by the Pentagon. In 2001,
the Air Force eliminated the B-1 mission from the Air National
Guard, consolidating units into the active duty. During the
2005 BRAC process, we learned and heard testimony from Adjutant
Generals from numerous states that the Air National Guard was
not substantively involved in that process or in the
formulation of the Future Total Force initiative.
Earlier this year, DOD, the Army and the Air Force proposed
to reduce end-strength by 17,000 and 14,000 respectively and
again, Congress had to step in and prevent such cuts. This
decision, in addition to the aforementioned ones and the litany
of others that I have not mentioned, was made without the
substantive input from National Guard leaders.
Year after year, issue after issue, the National Guard has
had to rely on the Congress--not its total force partners in
the Active duty--to equip and provide fully the resources and
benefits it needs--not only to support our active duty
warfighters in the away game as they serve right alongside with
our brave men and women in the active duty, but to also fulfill
the Guard's paramount home-game mission of defending the
homeland and providing support to civil authorities.
Why? Well, it is obvious to me that the National Guard is
not provided with the bureaucratic muscle commensurate with its
contributions to the total force. Senator Pat Leahy and I as
co-Chairs of the Senate National Guard Caucus are introducing
legislation today aimed at redressing these uphill battles that
the Guard must fight every year to ensure they are trained,
equipped and ready to meet their missions.
Hurricane Katrina was one of the worst natural disasters in
our nation's history.
Our nation was reminded during the response to Hurricane
Katrina of the Guard's other paramount mission: homeland
defense and civil support. The National Guard's contributions
to Hurricane Katrina were stellar.
The magnitude, quality, and timeliness of the Guard's
response remains one of the less publicized successes of the
Katrina disaster.
The Guard's successful response was attributable to the
fact that the Guard is best organized and trained to initiate
and coordinate a civil responses on the scale of Katrina.
With equipment availability levels currently at a perilous
35 percent, just think of the capability a fully equipped
National Guard could provide a Governor and localities in the
event of another terrorist attack or natural disaster.
This is why I lead the charge along with my co-chair of the
Senate National Guard Caucus Sen. Patrick Leahy, to provide
over $900 million in last year's Defense Appropriations Bill
for the shortages in equipment the Guard is experiencing.
Time and time again the National Guard has been a
tremendous value for the capabilities it provides our nation,
providing 40 percent of the Total Force for around 7-8 percent
of the budget.
Now more than ever, as budgets are constrained and
entitlements continue to grow at alarming rates, we should not
be looking to reduce the Guard, but rather fully man and fully
equip it.
The growing significance of the operational role of the
National Guard in matters of national security and homeland
defense and homeland security, beyond that strictly deriving
from its role as a reserve component of the Army and the Air
Force, demands that the position of the Chief of the National
Guard Bureau be raised to an authorized grade of General.
It is a fundamental practice within the Pentagon that the
most strategic decisions are made at the Secretarial level with
the advice of the four-star Service Chiefs, the four-star
Combatant Commanders and the other four-stars within the active
duty force. The legislation introduced by Sen. Leahy and I will
ensure that the vital interests of the National Guard which
impacts military readiness, support to civilian authorities
within the fifty states and four protectorates, and the 450,000
civilian-soldiers and airmen, will be adequately represented.
Senator Stevens. General Blum, we would be happy to have
your statement. All your statements will appear in the record
in full as though read, but we want to hear what you want us to
hear.
OPENING STATEMENT OF GENERAL BLUM
General Blum. Well, thank you, Chairman Stevens, Senator
Inouye, and distinguished members of the subcommittee. Thank
you for the opportunity to appear today and discuss the
National Guard's budget submission for fiscal year 2007. I am
proud to be here today with General Vaughn, the Director of the
Army National Guard, and Major General Chuck Ickes, who is the
Acting Director of the Air National Guard. Each of you--we will
all discuss the funding issues that you asked us about, so you
can better understand what we need to deliver the capabilities
that you have so well articulated, so well that I am going to
dispense with most of my opening statement because, frankly,
you have delivered it for me, which is even better because it
means you completely understand the issues and you understand
the challenges that the National Guard is facing as we move
from a strategic reserve to an operational force.
I would be remiss, however, if I did not speak for the
460,000 citizen-soldiers and citizen-airmen and express their
appreciation to this subcommittee for the magnificent support
that you have displayed for us, particularly in this last year.
You helped us take care of personnel, training, and equipment
needs in a very, very measured and effective manner. In fact,
the robust appropriations of this particular subcommittee to
the National Guard and Reserve account helped us purchase
needed capabilities that we will probably use, unfortunately,
very soon here in our country in the upcoming hurricane season,
so that we are even more prepared than we were last year, when
we responded with 80,000 soldiers deployed overseas and at the
same time generated 50,000 citizen-soldiers from every State
and every territory in this great Nation to Louisiana and
Mississippi to help out in the aftermath of Hurricanes Katrina,
Rita, and Wilma.
The National Guard, as you have mentioned, is entering a
new era in our Nation's history and it must adapt to these new
challenges. To keep this type of force as effective as you have
described and as important and as essential to the Department
of Defense as the National Guard has become, we must ensure
that the National Guard receives adequate funds and equipment
to do the job.
The National Guard is absolutely proud to serve and deliver
the strong military capabilities both here at home and abroad
in a most cost-effective manner. The funds that you appropriate
I assure you will be well spent and highly leveraged both here
at home in domestic operations as well as overseas in the
global war on terrorism.
When a guardsman is not mobilized, the Government does not
incur any of the expenses that we routinely pay for our active
duty force. We have an on-call capability for a fraction of the
cost. For those of you that do not know it, the National Guard
is and remains unique in the Department of Defense. It is the
only uniformed force that can be called upon by the Governors
of our Nation on a day-to-day basis. It is clearly the American
taxpayers' best defense bargain.
The Army National Guard is only on a normal day 12 percent
of the Army's budget and it provides 32 percent of the Army's
overall capabilities. It presently is providing about 40
percent of the Army deployed on the ground fighting today in
Iraq and Afghanistan. The Air National Guard only on a normal
day gets 8 percent of the Air Force's budget and provides 34
percent of the total Air Force's capability.
There is an added benefit of the National Guard where the
Federal and the State dual use dividend pays huge, huge
dividends every day in every zip code of our Nation. There has
never been a day in my tenure as the Chief of the National
Guard Bureau for the last 3 years where national guardsmen were
not called out by their Governors to either help save lives, or
help prevent suffering, or help restore order, or help bring
aid and assistance that the local and state governments were
unable to do, and had to leverage the military capabilities of
the Department of Defense.
Before I thank you and finish my comment, I would like to
introduce three American heroes. One is Command Sergeant Major
John Leonard. Sergeant Leonard, please stand. This soldier will
be completing 41 years in uniform next month and he will
finally retire because he reaches the mandatory retirement age.
That is the only reason that he is leaving. Otherwise he would
stay probably for another 20.
He served in three wars. He has been a national guardsmen,
he has been a marine. He has been mobilized three times. He
represents every citizen-soldier and citizen-airman in this
great Nation, he has been my enlisted advisor for the last 3
years, and he will be a huge loss. This Nation owes a great
debt of gratitude to citizen-soldiers like John Leonard.
Senator Stevens. Thank you very much.
Sergeant, if you would like to have a waiver on that, look
us up.
General Blum. You can think about that, John.
Command Sergeant Major Leonard leaves feeling pretty good,
because there are two other soldiers, a soldier and airman, a
citizen-soldier and an airman, here that I would like to
introduce at this time. I have Specialist Mike Acquaviva from
the United States Army National Guard. He comes out of the
State of Alabama. He has been--he was prior service Air Force
and he joined the National Guard 3 years ago. He is a heavy
equipment operator in Alabama for Cullman County.
He was mobilized for Iraq. He spent 18 months on active
duty through the mobilization process, 1 year boots on the
ground. He's a signal soldier, so he went over there to provide
communications to the coalition forces, the State Department,
Special Operations Forces, and some of our multinational
partners in Iraq up in the area of Kirkuk.
He was wearing a lot of battle armor and equipment and
ammunition for several months that he thought he did not need
because he thought he was there to be a radio operator, until
he woke up one morning in Kirkuk and found 1,800 insurgents
from one of the militias attacking and trying to overrun his
position.
Specialist Fourth Class Mike Acquaviva, although he is
married, although he has a 14-year-old daughter, and although
he is a signal soldier, climbed to the roof of a building,
employed a squad automatic weapon, and was instrumental in the
defeat of this attack. A captain fighting right beside him was
hit with a sniper round through the arm, through his chest, and
out his back. Specialist Acquaviva stopped what he was doing,
rendered first aid, and saved the life of that captain, and
then went back to firing his weapon for the next 9 hours
continuous combat, until he ran out of ammunition, and then
picked up the weapon of the wounded captain until all of his
ammunition was expended.
For his heroic deeds, he was awarded the Bronze Star with a
V Device. We are extremely proud of this individual and he will
be awarded the Combat Action Badge before he leaves Washington,
because his actions have earned that. You will get that award
before you leave town. Mike Acquaviva, American hero from
Alabama Guard.
Also, Staff Sergeant Carl Gurmsheid is from the Arizona
National Guard. The reason that I have selected to bring him is
that he has done every mission in the National Guard and has
participated in the last 4 years. He was working in the Arizona
National Guard as an engineer, a firefighter. He has shown his
flexibility to retrain three times in the last 4 years to do
what this Nation needed him to do. He worked in the
counternarcotics, counterterrorism piece. He responded in
Operation Noble Eagle right after 9/11, and ultimately he has
just come back from his tour of combat in Iraq.
So at home, overseas, civilian support to law enforcement,
whatever the Guard does day to day, this is the kind of
involvement that Carl Gurmsheid has been willing to stand up
and do whatever his State or Nation needed him to do when they
needed him to do it.
He is also married. His wife Melissa and he have two
children, Grace, 5, and Jacob, 3. The necessity to address not
only the soldiers but their families is a priority at keeping
the readiness of the force at combat level the next time we
need them.
So I am pleased to be the chief of 460,000 young men and
women like I introduced to you here today.
PREPARED STATEMENT
Thank you. I would be interested to answer any questions
you may have. Thank you.
Senator Stevens. Does that complete your statement,
General?
General Blum. Yes, sir. Yes, Mr. Chairman.
[The statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of Lieutenant General H Steven Blum
in memoriam
A special dedication to the men and women of the Army and the Air
National Guard who made the ultimate sacrifice while serving the United
States of America.
america's 21st century minutemen--always ready, always there!
National Guard Soldiers and Airmen lost during the attacks on 9/11,
Operation Noble Eagle, Operation Enduring Freedom and Operation Iraqi
Freedom as of January 1, 2006
PVT Algernon Adams, SC
SGT Leonard Wade Adams, NC
SPC Segun F. Akintade, NY
SPC Azhar Ali, NY
SGT Howard Paul Allen, AZ
1LT Louis E. Allen, NY
SSG William Alvin Allers III, KY
SFC Victor Antonio Anderson, GA
SPC Michael Andrade, RI
SGT Travis Mark Arndt, MT
SSG Daniel Laverne Arnold, PA
SSG Larry Richard Arnold, MS
SGT Christopher James Babin, LA
SSG Nathan J. Bailey, TN
SPC Ronald W. Baker, AR
SGT Sherwood R. Baker, PA
1LT Gerald Baptiste, NY
SGT Michael C. Barkey, OH
1LT Christopher W. Barnett, LA
SPC Bryan Edward Barron, MS
SGT Michael Barry, MO
SPC Todd M. Bates, OH
SGT Tane Travis Baum, OR
SPC Alan Bean Jr., VT
SGT Bobby E. Beasley, VA
CPL Joseph Otto Behnke, NY
SGT Aubrey D. Bell, AL
SPC Bradley John Bergeron, LA
SSG Sean B. Berry, TX
SSG Harold D. Best, NC
SGT Dennis J. Boles, FL
SFC Craig A. Boling, IN
SSG Jerry L. Bonifacio Jr, CA
COL Canfield ``Bud'' Boone, IN
PFC Samuel R. Bowen, OH
SGT Larry Bowman, NY
SSG Hesley Box, Jr., AR
SSG Stacey C. Brandon, AR
SPC Kyle A. Brinlee, OK
SSG Cory W. Brooks, SD
PFC Nathan P. Brown, NY
PFC Oliver J. Brown, PA
SPC Philip D. Brown, ND
SPC Jacques Earl Brunson, GA
PFC Paul J. Bueche, AL
CPL Jimmy Dale Buie, AR
SPC Alan J. Burgess, NH
SPC Casey Byers, IA
SGT Charles T. Caldwell, RI
SSG Joseph Camara, RI
SGT Deyson Ken Cariaga, HI
SPC Jocelyn L. Carrasquillo, NC
SGT James Dustin Carroll, TN
SGT Frank T. Carvill, NJ
SFC Virgil Ray Case, ID
CAPT Christopher S. Cash, NC
SPC Jessica L. Cawvey, Il
SPC James A. Chance III, MS
SSG William D. Chaney, IL
MSG Chris Shayne Chapin, VT
SSG Craig W. Cherry, VA
SPC Don A. Clary, KS
MSG Herbert R. Claunch, AL
SPC Brian Clemens, IN
SGT Russell L. Collier, AR
SFC Kurt Joseph Comeaux, LA
SPC Anthony Steven Cometa, NV
SFC Sean M. Cooley, MS
SSG Travis Sentell Cooper, MS
SGT Alex J. Cox, TX
SPC Carl F Curran, PA
SPC Daryl Anthony Davis, FL
SSG Kevin Dewayne Davis, OR
SPC Raphael S. Davis, MS
SSG David Fredrick Day, MN
SGT Felix M. Del Greco, CT
SPC Daryl T. Dent, DC
SPC Daniel A. Desens, NC
PFC Nathaniel Edward Detample, PA
SPC Joshua Paul Dingler, GA
SPC Ryan E. Doltz, NJ
1LT Mark Harold Dooley, VT
SPC Thomas John Dostie, ME
SSG George Ray Draughn Jr., GA
SPC Christopher M. Duffy, NJ
SGT Arnold Duplantier,II, CA
SSG Mark Oscar Edwards, TN
SGT Michael Egan, PA
SGT Christian Philip Engeldrum, NY
CPT Phillip T. Esposito, NY
SPC William Lee Evans , PA
SPC Michael Scott Evans II, LA
SSG Christopher Lee Everett, TX
SGT Justin L. Eyerly, OR
SPC Huey P. Long Fassbender, LA
CPT Arthur L. Felder, AR
SGT Robin Vincent Fell, LA
SPC William Valentin Fernandez, PA
SPC Jon P. Fettig, ND
SGT Damien Thai Ficek, WA
SGT Jeremy J. Fischer, NE
CPT Michael Todd Fiscus, IN
SPC David Michael Fisher, NY
SGT Paul F. Fisher, IA
CW2 John Michael Flynn, NV
SSG Tommy I. Folks, Jr., TX
SPC Craig S. Frank, MI
SSG Bobby C. Franklin, NC
SSG Jacob Frazier, IL
SPC Carrie Lee French, ID
SPC Armand L. Frickey, LA
SSG Carl Ray Fuller, GA
SGT Jerry Lewis Ganey Jr., GA
SGT Seth Kristian Garceau, IA
SPC Tomas Garces, TX
SGT Landis W. Garrison, IL
SGT Christopher Geiger, PA
SPC Christopher D. Gelineau, ME
SPC Mathew Vincent Gibbs, GA
2LT Richard Brian Gienau, IA
SSG Charles Crum Gillican III, GA
SPC Lee Myles Godbolt, LA
SPC Richard A. Goward, MI
SSG Shawn Alexander Graham, TX
SGT Jamie A. Gray, VT
SPC James T Grijalva, IL
SGT Jonathon C Haggin, GA
SFC Peter James Hahn, LA
SSG Asbury Fred Hawn II, TN
SPC Michael Ray Hayes, KY
SPC Paul Martin Heltzel, LA
SPC Kyle Matthew Hemauer, VA
1LT Robert L. Henderson II, KY
SSG Kenneth Hendrickson, ND
SPC Brett Michael Hershey, IN
MSG Michael Thomas Hiester, IN
SGT Stephen Correll High, SC
SGT Jeremy M. Hodge, OH
SFC Robert Lee Hollar Jr., GA
SPC James J. Holmes, ND
SPC Jeremiah J. Holmes, NH
SGT Manny Hornedo, NY
SGT Jessica Marie Housby, IL
SPC Robert William Hoyt, CT
SPC Jonathan Adam Hughes, KY
SGT Joseph Daniel Hunt, TN
SSG Henry E. Irizarry, NY
SPC Benjamin W. Isenberg, OR
SFC Tricia Lynn Jameson, NE
SGT Brahim Jamal Jeffcoat, PA
SPC William Jeffries, IN
SPC David W. Johnson, OR
SSG David Randall Jones, GA
SFC Michael Dean Jones, ME
SGT Anthony Nelson Kalladeen, NY
SPC Alain Louis Kamolvathin, NY
SPC Mark J. Kasecky, PA
SPC Charles Anthony Kaufman, WI
SPC James C. Kearney, IA
SGT Michael Jason Kelley, MA
SSG Stephen Curtis Kennedy, TN
SSG Ricky Allan Kieffer, MI
SGT James Ondra Kinlow, GA
PFC David M. Kirchoff, IA
SGT Timothy C. Kiser, CA
SGT Floyd G. Knighten Jr., LA
SPC Joshua L. Knowles, IA
SSG Lance J. Koenig, ND
CW3 Patrick W. Kordsmeier, AR
SPC Kurt Eric Krout, PA
SPC John Kulick, PA
SFC William W. Labadie Jr., AR
SGT Joshua S. Ladd, MS
SPC Charles R. Lamb, II
CW4 Patrick Daniel Leach, SC
SGT Terrance Delan Lee, Sr., MS
PFC Ken W. Leisten, OR
SSG Jerome Lemon, SC
SPC Tiothy J. Lewis, DC
SGT Jesse Marvin Lhotka, MN
SSG Victoir Patric Lieurance, TN
SPC Justin W. Linden, OR
SSG Tommy Seary Little, MS
SPC Jeremy Loveless, AL
SSG David L Loyd, TN
CPT Robert Lucero, WY
SPC Audrey Daron Lunsford, MS
SPC Derrick Joseph Lutters, KS
SPC Wai Phyo Lwin, NY
SSG William Francis Manuel, LA
SPC Joshua Samuel Marcum, AR
PFC Ryan A. Martin, OH
SGT Nicholas Conan Mason, VA
SPC Patrick R. McCaffrey, Sr., CA
1LT Erik S. McCrae, OR
SPC Donald R. McCune, WA
SGT John Edward McGee, AL
SPC Jeremy Wayne McHalffey, AR
SPC Eric S. McKinley, OR
SPC Scott Paul McLaughlin, VT
SSG Heath A. McMillan, NY
SPC Robert Allen McNail, MS
MSG Robbie Dean McNary, MT
SPC Kenneth A. Melton, AR
SGT Chad Michael Mercer, GA
SSG Dennis P Merck, GA
SPC Michael G. Mihalakis, CA
SGT John Wayne Miller, IA
CPT Lowell Thomas Miller II, MS
SFC Troy L. Miranda, AR
SGT Ryan Jay Montgomery, KY
SGT Carl James Morgain, PA
SPC Dennis B. Morgan, SD
SGT Steve Morin Jr., TX
SGT Shawna M. Morrison, II
SPC Clifford L. Moxley, PA
SPC Warren Anthony Murphy, LA
SGT David Joseph Murray, LA
SPC Nathan W. Nakis, OR
SPC Creig Lewis Nelson, LA
SSG Paul Christian Neubauer, CA
SPC Joshua M. Neusche, MO
SPC Paul Anthony Nicholas, CA
SGT William J. Normandy, VT
PFC Francis Chinomso Obaji, NY
SGT John Banks Ogburn, OR
SGT Nicholas Joseph Olivier, LA
SSG Todd Donald Olson, WI
SPC Richard P. Orengo, PR
SSG Billy Joe Orton, AR
SGT Timothy Ryndale Osbey, MS
SSG Ryan Scott Ostrom, PA
SSG Michael C. Ottolini, CA
PFC Kristian E. Parker, LA
SSG Saburant Parker, MS
SPC Gennaro Pellegrini Jr., PA
SGT Theodore L. Perreault, MA
SSG David S. Perry, CA
SGT Jacob Loren Pfingsten, MN
SGT Ivory L. Phipps, IL
CW2 Paul J. Pillen, SD
SGT Foster Pinkston, GA
SGT Darrin K. Potter, KY
SGT Christopher S. Potts, RI
SGT Lynn Robert Poulin, SR, ME
SPC Robert Shane Pugh, MS
SSG George Anthony Pugliese, PA
SPC Joseph Andrew Rahaim, MS
SPC Eric U. Ramirez, CA
PFC Brandon Ramsey, IL
SPC Christopher J. Ramsey, LA
SSG Jose Carlos Rangel, CA
SSG Johnathan Ray Reed, LA
SSG Aaron T. Reese, OH
SGT Gary Lee Reese Jr., TN
SPC Jeremy L. Ridlen, IL
CPL John T. Rivero, FL
SSG William Terry Robbins, AR
CPL Jeremiah W. Robinson, AZ
SSG Alan Lee Rogers, UT
PFC Hernando Rois, NY
SFC Daniel Romero, CO
SGT Brian Matthew Romines, IL
SFC Robert E. Rooney, MA
SPC David L. Roustrum, NY
SGT Roger D. Rowe, TN
SGT David Alan Ruhren, VA
CW4 William Ruth, MD
SPC Lyle Wyman Rymer II, AR
SGT Paul Anthony Saylor, GA
SFC Daniel Ronald Scheile, CA
SPC Jeremiah W. Schmunk, WA
SPC Bernard Leon Sembly, LA
SPC Jeffrey R. Shaver, WA
SGT Kevin Sheehan, VT
SGT Ronnie Lee Shelley, GA
SGT James Alexander Sherrill, KY
1LT Andrew Carl Shields, SC
SGT Alfredo Barajas Silva, CA
SGT Alfred Barton Silver, TN
SGT Isiah Joseph Sinclair, LA
SPC Roshan ``Sean'' R. Singh, NY
SPC Aaron J. Sissel, IA
1LT Brian D. Slavenas, IL
SGT Eric Wentworth Slebodnik, PA
SGT Keith Smette, ND
CW4 Bruce A. Smith, IA
CPL Darrell L. Smith, IN
SGT Michael Antonio Smith, AR
SPC Norman Kyle Snyder, IN
SGT Mike Takeshi Sonoda Jr., CA
SGT Patrick Dana Stewart, NV
SGT Michael James Stokely, GA
Maj Gregory Stone, ID
SPC Chrystal Gale Stout, SC
2LT Matthew R. Stoval, MS
SGT Francis Joseph Straub Jr., PA
SGT Thomas James Strickland, GA
WO1 Adrian Bovee Stump, OR
SSG Michael Sutter, MI
SGT Robert Wesley Sweeney III, LA
SGT Deforest L. Talbert, WV
SFC Linda A. Tarango-Griess, NE
SPC Christopher M. Taylor, AL
SGT Shannon D. Taylor, TN
MSG Thomas R. Thigpen, Sr., SC
SGT John Frank Thomas, GA
SGT Paul William Thomason, TN
1LT Jason Gray Timmerman, MN
SGT Humberto F. Timoteo, NJ
SPC Eric Lee Toth, KY
SPC Seth Randell Trahan, LA
SPC Quoc Binh Tran, CA
SGT Robert W. Tucker, TN
2LT Andre D. Tyson, CA
SPC Daniel P. Unger, CA
PFC Wilfredo Fernando Urbina, NY
SGT Michael A. Uvanni, NY
SGT Gene Vance Jr., WV
SGT Daniel Ryan Varnado, MS
1LT Michael W. Vega, CA
PFC Kenneth Gri Vonronn, NY
SSG Michael Scott Voss, NC
PFC Brandon J. Wadman, FL
SGT Andrew Peter Wallace, WI
SFC Charles Houghton Warren, GA
SFC Mark C. Warren, OR
SPC Glenn James Watkins, WA
SPC Michael J. Wedling, WI
SSG David J. Weisenburg, OR
SPC Cody Lee Wentz, ND
SPC Jeffrey M. Wershow, FL
SGT Marshall Westbrook, NM
SPC Lee Alan Wiegand, PA
1LT Charles L. Wilkins III, OH
SPC Michael L. Williams, NY
SFC Christopher R. Willoughby, GA
SSG Clinton L. Wisdom, KS
SPC Robert A. Wise, FL
SPC Michelle M. Witmer, WI
SGT Elijah Tai Wah Wong, AZ
SFC Ronald Tanner Wood, UT
SGT Roy A. Wood, FL
LIEUTENANT GENERAL H STEVEN BLUM, CHIEF, NATIONAL GUARD BUREAU
CHIEF, NATIONAL GUARD BUREAU EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This past year the National Guard demonstrated how superbly it
simultaneously performs our dual missions, state and federal.
In August 2005, with more than 80,000 troops already mobilized for
the global war on terror and faced with Katrina, a catastrophic
hurricane, the Gulf Coast governors called upon the Guard. The Guard,
the nation's preeminent military domestic response force, fulfilled our
commitment to the governors and our neighbors. In spite of a massive
wartime mobilization, the Guard mobilized and deployed the largest
domestic response force in history. Soldiers and Airmen from all 50
states, the territories of Guam and the U.S. Virgin Islands, the
Commonwealth of Puerto Rico and the District of Columbia deployed in
record time in support of their Gulf Coast neighbors. Never before had
every corner of America answered the desperate cry of our neighbors in
such unison. Truly, when you call out the Guard, you call out America!
Guard forces were in hurricane affected neighborhoods rescuing
people within four hours of Katrina's landfall. More than 11,000
Soldiers and Airmen were involved in rescue operations on August 31.
The Guard mobilized and deployed, in support of rescue and recovery, an
additional 19,000 troops in the following 96 hours. Guard participation
peaked at over 50,000 personnel on September 7. More than 6,500 Guard
men and women were in New Orleans alone by September 2, 2005. The
National Guard responded in spite of massive overseas deployment of
personnel and equipment in support of our federal mission.
No state, regardless of its size, can handle a natural or man-made
catastrophe of the magnitude of a Katrina. Emergency Management
Assistance Compacts allowed governors of affected states to immediately
call upon another state's National Guard as reinforcements for recovery
efforts. In 23 states, the Adjutant General also serves as the State
Director of Emergency Management, State Director of Homeland Security,
or both. This is an important aid in the coordination of the civil and
military response.
The National Guard has undergone a total transformation in the past
few years. The once ponderous Cold War strategic reserve transformed
itself into an agile, lethal operational force capable of joint and
expeditionary warfare--a uniquely flexible force simultaneously capable
of responding to a broad range of civil and humanitarian crises.
The Guard serves our nation and communities across the full
spectrum of domestic and warfighting missions. We fight narco-terrorism
through our counterdrug programs. We work with our nation's youth
through programs like StarBase and ChalleNGe to ensure they have a
brighter future. We stand guard over America's critical physical and
cyber infrastructure. Our Airmen fly the vast majority of air
sovereignty missions over America's cities, while our Soldiers man air
defense batteries in the nation's capital and the nation's sole
ballistic missile interceptor site in Alaska. We conduct peacekeeping
operations in Kosovo and the Sinai, stand watch aboard military cargo
ships as they transit the Persian Gulf, guard prisoners in Guantanamo
Bay, and train the Iraqi and Afghan national armies. Joint and
multinational training, exercises, humanitarian support and a variety
of other missions have taken the Guard overseas to more than 40 nations
on five continents last year alone.
The Guard stands more ready, reliable, essential and accessible
today than at anytime in its near-four hundred years of existence.
Since 9/11, we have been employed around the world and here at home as
an operational force in a variety of contingencies. It is a role that
the Guard was not structured to perform before 9/11. The Guard--with
the exception of those units mobilized for war--is still under-
resourced for many of the missions it now performs. Army Guard units in
particular remain manned at Cold War levels, lack a robust cadre of
full-time support personnel, and are equipped well below wartime
requirements. Other vestiges of this Cold War construct, such as a
needlessly-long mobilization process, continue to hamper the most
efficient use of the Guard.
Our nation's reliance on the Guard is unprecedented at this stage
in a major war. At one point in 2005, the Army National Guard
contributed half of the combat brigades on the ground in Iraq. The
Army's leadership has acknowledged that the Army could not sustain its
presence in Iraq without the Guard. As of January 1, 2006, over 350
Guard men and women have given their lives while engaged in this global
struggle.
Guard units bring more to the warfight than just Soldiers and
Airmen. There is ample anecdotal evidence that the civilian skills
Guard members possess make them exceptionally well suited for
peacekeeping and nation building. An Iraqi policeman may have limited
respect for an American Soldier who attempts to train him in the
methods of civilian law enforcement. But, when that Soldier is a
National Guardsman with 20 years of civilian experience as a police
officer, that Soldier's credibility and impact as a trainer is vastly
enhanced.
Guard support to the warfight is not limited to our role on the
battlefield. The Guard's unique State Partnership Program continues to
support Combatant Commander's Security Cooperation Plans and strengthen
alliances with 50 allied nations around the world. This immensely
successful program has grown from direct military-to-military exchanges
to encompass military-to-civilian and ultimately civilian-to-civilian
exchanges. Once again, the citizen Soldiers and Airmen of the National
Guard are the bridge that allows this to happen, with their combination
of military and civilian backgrounds providing a sterling example of
how America has peacefully balanced military and civilian interests for
well over 300 years.
National Guard units deployed to combat since September 11th have
been the best-trained and equipped force in American history. The U.S.
Army invested $4.3 billion to provide those units with the very best,
state-of-the-art equipment.
This is an unprecedented demonstration of the Army's commitment to
ensure that no Soldier, regardless of component (Active, Guard, or
Reserve), goes to war ill equipped or untrained. With the help of the
U.S. Congress, this was accomplished over a two-year period. It is now
a reality for National Guard overseas combat deployments.
The Guard, since September 11th, has been well equipped for its
overseas missions, and has demonstrated its Citizen-Soldier expertise
across the full-spectrum of warfighting, peacekeeping, and security
engagement with our allies. The response to Katrina, however, revealed
serious shortcomings in the equipping of Guard units for Homeland
Security and Defense. Guard units returned from the overseas warfight
with a fraction of the equipment with which they deployed, leaving them
far less capable of meeting training requirements, or more importantly,
fulfilling their missions here at home.
The senior leadership of the U.S. Army has committed to re-
equipping the Guard, the nation's first domestic military responders.
The Army has a comprehensive reset plan that recognizes the Army
National Guard's critical role in Homeland Defense (HLD) and support to
Homeland Security (HLS) operations. This will take time and resources.
I am confident that a real sense of urgency exists to make this a
reality for America. The Guard currently has less than 35 percent of
the equipment it requires to perform its wartime mission. We gratefully
acknowledge the $900 million down-payment Congress made on resourcing
our needs as an operational force for HLD/HLS and the overseas
warfight, and recognize the full cost of restoring readiness will
require continuing long-term Congressional attention.
Satellite and tactical communications equipment, medical equipment,
utility helicopters, military trucks and engineer equipment are the
Army Guard's highest equipment priorities. We must ensure that this
equipment is identical to that required for wartime use, so that Guard
units remain interoperable with their active component counterparts for
both HLD/HLS and warfight operations. We also need to invest in an
extensive non-lethal weapons capability for use in both domestic and
overseas contingencies.
Two years ago, I committed to the governors, our state Commanders-
in-Chief that the National Guard Bureau would provide each of them with
sufficient capabilities under state control, and an appropriate mix of
forces, to allow them to respond to domestic emergencies. I also
promised to provide a more predictable rotation model for the
deployment of their Army Guard Soldiers, along the lines already in
place for Air Guard units participating in the Air and Space
Expeditionary Force deployments.
The National Guard Bureau is committed to the fundamental principle
that each and every state and territory must possess ten core
capabilities for homeland readiness. Amidst the most extensive
transformation of our Army and Air Forces in decades, we want to ensure
that every governor has each of these ``essential 10'' capabilities: a
Joint Force Headquarters for command and control; a Civil Support Team
for chemical, biological, and radiological detection; engineering
assets; communications; ground transportation; aviation; medical
capability; security forces; logistics and maintenance capability.
The final 11 Civil Support Teams were organized this past year,
giving every state and territory the capability of rapidly assisting
civil authorities in detecting and responding to a Weapons of Mass
Destruction attack. These are joint units, consisting of both Army and
Air National Guard personnel.
Air Guard personnel in the Civil Support Teams are part of a larger
trend. The National Guard has leveraged homeland defense capabilities
from the Air Guard far beyond the now-routine mission of combat air
patrols over our cities. Every state fields rapid reaction forces
capable of quickly responding to a governor's summons, and in many
cases these forces consist of Air Guard security police. The Air Guard
also provides extensive HLS capabilities with its communications,
ground transportation, and chemical-biological-radiological detection
units.
The civil engineering capabilities of Air Guard RED HORSE (Rapid
Engineer Deployable Heavy Operational Repair Squadron Engineer) teams
and the medical capabilities of Air Guard Expeditionary Medical Support
(EMEDS) systems proved extremely valuable in responding to Katrina. We
are examining fielding these capabilities on a regional basis for more
rapid response to future disasters.
Our 12 regional Chemical, Biological, Radiological, Nuclear and
high-yield Explosive (CBRNE) Enhanced Response Force Packages (CERFP)
provide mass casualty decontamination, medical treatment, security and
urban search and extraction in contaminated environment capabilities in
addition to the special skills of the Civil Support Teams. These units
are not dedicated solely to Homeland Defense, but are existing
warfighting units that have been given a powerful new HLD capability by
virtue of modest amounts of additional equipment and training. This
program, a concept only two years ago, has already placed 12 certified
force packages on the ground, with Congress authorizing an additional
five in the fiscal year 2006 Defense Appropriation. It is now an
important part of the Guard's increasingly sophisticated Homeland
Defense capability.
The Guard has fielded six regional Critical Infrastructure
Program--Mission Assurance Assessment (MAA) teams to conduct
vulnerability assessments of Department of Defense critical
infrastructure. These teams conduct force protection training and plan
for emergency response to a terrorist attack or natural disaster
striking our critical infrastructure. Four more teams will be fielded
in fiscal year 2006. These specialized capabilities are available to
any state or region, along with traditional Guard forces should they be
needed.
The most critical transformation the National Guard has undergone
since 2001 has been in the Joint Forces Headquarters in each state,
territory, and the District of Columbia (JFHQ-State). What used to be
the State Area Command (STARC) and Air Guard State Headquarters,
administrative organizations for peacetime control of units, has
developed into a sophisticated headquarters and communications node
capable of assuming command and control of units from all services and
components when responding to a domestic emergency. Tested and proven
during multiple National Special Security Events in 2004, these
headquarters were further validated this past year by hurricanes
Katrina and Rita.
These headquarters, now operated on a continual 24/7/365 basis,
must be linked together to provide robust capabilities to share secure
and non-secure information within the State or Territory, to deployed
incident site(s), and to other DOD and inter-governmental partners
engaged in support of Homeland Defense and Defense Support to Civil
Authorities missions. To support these needs in the near-term, NGB has
fielded 13 rapid response communications packages--the Interim
Satellite Incident Site Communications Set (ISISCS)--that are
regionally-based, and which proved absolutely vital when the entire
domestic communications infrastructure in the Gulf Coast region of the
United States went down during Hurricane Katrina. To satisfy the full
range of required Command and Control, Communications, and Computer
(C4) capabilities, NGB and U.S. Northern Command have collaborated on
the Joint Continental U.S. Communications Support Environment (JCCSE)
construct. When fully implemented, the JCCSE will provide U.S. Northern
Command, U.S. Pacific Command, the National Guard Bureau, each Joint
Force Headquarters-State, and our inter-governmental partners with the
vital C4 capabilities and services to support continuous and accurate
situational awareness of operational capabilities at the State or
Territory and incident levels; enhanced information sharing and
collaboration capabilities to facilitate mission planning, resourcing,
and execution; and a fully integrated trusted information sharing and
collaboration environment to facilitate coordination and unity of
effort.
Today we are taking on the challenge of responding to a potential
flu pandemic that could challenge domestic tranquility like no other
event since the Civil War. The forward deployed JFHQ-State are the only
existing organization with the intrinsic capabilities, knowledge of
local conditions and realities, geographic dispersion, resources and
experience to coordinate the massive state-federal response that would
be required in a pandemic of the predicted magnitude. Aided by the
JCCSE communications backbone, the headquarters can assist civil
authorities as they share a common operating picture, request and
coordinate specialized regionally-based response forces, and receive
follow-on forces from other states, federal reserve forces, or active
duty forces.
The Guard must continue to transform in order to maintain our
status as a fully operational reserve of the Army and the Air Force,
while at the same time increasing our ability to respond to terrorist
attack or natural disaster at home. We must also continue to commit
ourselves to recruiting and retaining a quality force capable of
meeting these challenges for decades to come.
Seventy-four percent of the Army National Guard's units are
impacted by the U.S. Army's conversion to a modular force structure.
The Army National Guard contribution to the modular total force
includes 34 Brigade Combat Teams, six Fires Brigades, 10 Combat Support
Brigades (Maneuver Enhancement), 11 Sustainment Brigades, 12 Aviation
Brigades, an Aviation Command and three Sustainment Commands. These
units are identical in structure to those in the active component, and,
when resourced like their active counterparts, will allow a seamless
transition between active and reserve forces in combat with minimal
time required for train up.
However, to make the Guard's units truly interchangeable, we must
man them like the active Army, with an overhead allotment for trainees,
transients, holdees, and students. Otherwise, we are forced to continue
the debilitating practice of stripping other units of personnel
whenever we mobilize a unit for war. In the same way, our full-time
manning levels are also based on a Cold War construct, and assume that
our units will have ample time to make up for a lack of readiness after
mobilization. Cold War era manning levels limit the Guard's ability to
perform as a modern, operational force.
The National Guard continues to engage with Joint Forces Command
and the Army to transform the lengthy and redundant mobilization
process for Army Guard units, one of the last vestiges of our Cold War
military construct. The no-notice deployment of 50,000 Guard members to
the Gulf Coast for Hurricane Katrina, as well as the fact that over
half of all current Army Guard members had been previously mobilized,
makes the argument for streamlining mobilization more powerful than
ever before in our 369 year history.
The Air National Guard will continue to leverage its existing
capabilities as it evolves to remain a full partner in the Future Total
Air Force plan. The response to Hurricane Katrina reaffirmed the
critical need for intra-theater airlift. The unprecedented, timely
response would have been impossible without the Air Guard's airlift.
The Base Realignment and Closure process removed the last flying
unit from some states. Though the Air National Guard is expanding in
such non-flying missions as intelligence, security police, and unmanned
aerial vehicles, it is impossible to maintain a healthy, balanced Air
National Guard structure in any state without some manned aircraft. The
National Guard Bureau is entrusted to allocate Guard units among the
states, and working together with the Air Force and Air Force Reserve,
I will attempt to maintain manned aircraft in every state, territory,
and the District of Columbia.
The Air National Guard is at full strength, with retention and
recruiting programs to fill the ranks. The Army National Guard has
turned the corner and has begun to increase in strength due to the
increases in bonuses and the funding of new recruiters authorized by
Congress in 2004. However, we can do more to strengthen recruiting.
Historically, Guard units enjoy close camaraderie because they are
built around a network of Soldiers and Airmen who actively recruit
their friends and family into their units. We acknowledge and encourage
this powerful source of strength by promoting both the Guard Recruiting
Assistance Program (G-RAP) and the ``Every Soldier a Recruiter'' (ESAR)
initiatives, rewarding Guard members who make the extra effort to bring
new enlistees into their units and sponsor them through the initial
entry process.
Retention of current Guard members, particularly those in units
returning from overseas, is well above pre-September 11th levels.
Nevertheless, we must remain aware of the negative impact that our most
critical need--lack of equipment--has on our ability to recruit and
retain Soldiers. Morale suffers when Soldiers cannot train for their
wartime or domestic missions for lack of equipment.
Our priorities this year to maintain a vibrant, capable and agile
National Guard are recruiting and retention bonuses and initiatives,
equipment reset and modernization and obtaining critical domestic
mission resources. Our nation's future security mandates that the Guard
continues to transform to meet challenges both at home and abroad.
Critics maintain that more than four years of continuous service at
home and abroad have stressed the National Guard to the breaking point.
I emphatically disagree. Morale in the National Guard is superb. We
fight a fanatical enemy overseas that has already demonstrated his
desire to destroy our families and our nation. At home, the gratitude
our nation displayed to its Army and Air National Guard in the wake of
hurricanes Katrina and Rita has been invigorating. We understand the
mission and purpose for which we have been called.
We have been, and we remain, America's minutemen--Always Ready,
Always There!
LIEUTENANT GENERAL CLYDE A. VAUGHN, VICE CHIEF, NATIONAL GUARD BUREAU
AND DIRECTOR, ARMY NATIONAL GUARD
``SERVING A NATION AT WAR: AT HOME AND ABROAD''
MESSAGE FROM THE DIRECTOR
During fiscal year 2005, the nation saw Army National Guard
Soldiers at their best and busiest: fulfilling dual roles as citizens
and Soldiers and responding frequently to the ``call to duty.'' Our
Soldiers have been noticeably involved in operations both at home and
around the world. In Iraq and Afghanistan, they continue to aid in the
transition and struggle for a healthy democracy. Along the Gulf Coast
after Hurricanes Katrina and Rita, Soldiers performed thousands of
rescue and recovery operations. Across the nation, they continue to
support communities and citizens in need. In fiscal year 2005, the
National Interagency Fire Center responded to over 54,000 wild land
fires that threatened over 8 million acres; the National Guard
participated in a large proportion of these alerts. Citizen-Soldiers
continued to guard key assets and responded to Governors' requests in
support of state emergencies.
Use of Army National Guard units in domestic and foreign
contingencies continued in record-setting numbers throughout fiscal
year 2005 with increased participation in areas of military support to
civilian authorities, state active duty, counterdrug operations, and
force protection. During Operation Winter Freeze (November 2004 through
January 2005), the National Guard and active component Title 10 forces,
in support of the U.S. Border Patrol, prevented illegal alien access
along a 295-mile stretch of the U.S.-Canadian border. During the
mission, the National Guard exposed three terrorist smuggling
organizations.
Following the best traditions of the Army National Guard, all 54
states and territories engaged in one or more of the following
operations: Operation Iraqi Freedom, Operation Enduring Freedom,
Operation Noble Eagle, Operation Winter Freeze, Operation Unified
Assistance (Tsunami Relief), Hurricane Recovery Operations for Katrina,
Rita and Wilma, Stabilization Force Bosnia, Kosovo Force, Horn of
Africa, Multi-National Force Observers, Guantanamo Bay Operations,
Force Protection Europe, and numerous other missions. As we enter the
fifth year of the Global War on Terrorism, we anticipate a slight
downward trend in Overseas Continental United States (OCONUS)
operations. We face some critical shortages that must be addressed over
the coming year to ensure we continue to accomplish our missions.
This Posture Statement presents an opportunity to detail Army
National Guard plans to ensure our nation's defense, meet our strategic
and legislative goals and transform to meet tomorrow's challenges. The
Chief of the National Guard Bureau established our fiscal year 2006
priorities to Defend the Homeland, Support the Warfight and
Transformation for the Future.
The Army National Guard balances its status as an integral element
of the United States Army with its duty to serve the Governors and the
people of our communities. Citizen-Soldiers represent thousands of
communities across America. These Soldiers bring with them real world
experience and provide capabilities to address both Homeland Security/
Defense and overseas conflicts.
The Army National Guard remains committed to completing the
transformation from strategic reserve to operational force capable of
both supporting the warfight and serving the Governors. We are able to
maintain this commitment because of the continued dedication of our
Soldiers, support from our families and the resources provided by
Congress.
HOMELAND DEFENSE: HERE AND ABROAD FOR OVER 369 YEARS
Prepared and Ready
The Army National Guard continued to provide forces for domestic
missions throughout fiscal year 2005, particularly in the areas of
disaster relief, state active duty, counterdrug operations, and force
protection. In a major contribution to the Global War on Terrorism, the
Army National Guard provided key asset protection for much of the
nation. Readiness concerns such as full-time manning, recruiting,
retention, and modernizing our ground and air fleets are the top
priorities for the Army Guard in today's geostrategic environment.
As the Global War on Terrorism continues, the Army National Guard
will continue to meet the Army's requirements to protect our national
interests, prevent future acts of terrorism, and meet Governors'
requests to respond to state emergencies. However, some critical
shortages still exist in the Guard structure and impose challenges to
meet these requirements such as the accurate reporting of readiness.
The Department of Defense has mandated the use of the Defense
Readiness Reporting System. This action will impose readiness reporting
challenges on the Army National Guard as it transitions to meet this
requirement. This reporting system is a web-based readiness program
that can provide a real time assessment of a unit's capability to
execute its wartime or assigned missions. This allows the Office of the
Secretary of Defense, Combatant Commands, and the Services direct
access to unit readiness assessments.
Full-Time Support
Fighting the Global War on Terrorism underscores the vital role
Full-Time Support personnel hold in preparing Army National Guard units
for a multitude of missions both at home and abroad. Full-Time Support
is a critical component for achieving soldier and unit-level readiness.
Full-time Army National Guard Soldiers maintain responsibility for
organizing, administering, instructing, training, and recruiting new
personnel, and maintenance of supplies, equipment, and aircraft. Full-
Time Support personnel are key to a successful transition from
peacetime to wartime, as well as a critical link to the integration of
the Army's components: Active, Guard, and Reserve. To meet the
heightened readiness requirements of an operational force, the Chief,
National Guard Bureau, in concert with the State Adjutants General,
placed increasing Full-Time Support authorizations as the number one
priority for the Army National Guard.
The current Full-Time Support ramp received approval before 9/11.
Although this ramp up was a step in the right direction it proved only
marginally acceptable while the Army National Guard served as a
strategic reserve. Following 9/11, the Army National Guard converted to
an operational force mobilizing more than 240,000 Soldiers in support
of the Global War on Terrorism. At the height of our mobilizations, the
Army Guard deployed over 9,000 full-time support personnel. With fiscal
resources only capable of backfilling the Active Guard Reserve at a 1:3
ratio and the Military Technicians at a 1:5 ratio, the burden on our
Full-Time Soldiers reached an all time high. As a result, the Army
National Guard witnessed an increase in the attrition of our full-time
force by over 40 percent.
While we made progress in recent years to increase Full-Time
Support, obstacles remain in obtaining acceptable full-time levels.
Emerging and expanding Army National Guard missions must receive
resources above those identified in the Full-Time Support ramp.
Increased full-time resources are necessary to achieve acceptable unit
readiness. It is critical we increase Full-Time Support in the near
term to a minimum of 90 percent of the total validated requirement.
This increase will ensure the highest levels of Combat Readiness (C1)
and Personnel Readiness (P1) for Army National Guard units in the
future.
Protecting the Homeland
National Guard Soldiers assisted civil authorities, established law
and order, conducted disaster relief operations, and provided
humanitarian assistance and force protection after two major hurricanes
struck the Gulf Coast and flooded the city of New Orleans. The National
Guard responded by surging more than 50,000 Soldiers and Airmen into
the areas devastated by the successive impacts of Hurricanes Katrina
and Rita. These Citizen-Soldiers provided much needed relief to the
citizens and support to the local authorities. The operation was the
largest domestic support mission in the nation's history.
Training for the Future
The Army Guard continued to provide battle focused and mission
essential training to units preparing to defend the nation. Units
preparing to deploy to Operations Iraqi Freedom and Enduring Freedom
and other theaters rotated through the National Training Center, the
Joint Readiness Training Center, and the Battle Command Training
Center. Army Guard units also participated in major United States and
overseas Joint Chiefs of Staff sponsored exercises, domestic support
operations, conducted overseas deployments for training and operational
support, as well as performing numerous small unit training exercises.
The Army National Guard worked with U.S. Army Forces Command and
Headquarters, Department of the Army in the development of an Army
Force Generation Model. This model provides predictability of forces
available and ready for operational deployments. It is also a paradigm
shift, as it changes unit resourcing from a tiered approach to a time
sequenced approach based on when a unit is expected to deploy. The Army
National Guard developed improved training models that increase
resources and training events to produce readiness leading up to a
unit's expected deployment availability. This new paradigm also makes
deployments more predictable for Guard Soldiers, their families and
employers.
The training priority for the Army National Guard is preparation of
combat-ready Soldiers so that lengthy post-mobilization training can be
avoided. As a result of the increased emphasis on ensuring our Soldiers
are combat ready, the Army National Guard Duty Military Occupational
Specialty Qualification rate for fiscal year 2005 was 92.29 percent
(excluding those Soldiers on their Initial Entry Training). This high
qualification rate was achieved through the implementation of the
phased mobilization process. This allowed Army National Guard Soldiers
who lacked the requisite training to complete their individual training
while in the early stages of mobilization before they were deployed.
Keeping the Force Strong: Recruiting and Retention
Recruiting and retention goals have proven to be challenging during
wartime. The Army Guard increased the numbers of recruiting and
retention NCOs from 2,700 in fiscal year 2004 to 4,600 by the end of
fiscal year 2005, an increase of 1,900. The Army Guard plans to add an
additional 500 in the first quarter of fiscal year 2006 for a total of
5,100 recruiters. Many steps were taken in 2005 to assist in meeting
our end strength missions. The Army Guard increased enlistment bonuses
to $10,000, increased the reenlistment bonus to $15,000, and increased
the prior service enlistment bonus to $15,000. We also increased
retention bonuses from $5,000 to $15,000. These steps, as well as an
increased recruiting and retention force, had positive effects and will
posture the Army Guard for continued success in the future.
The Guard Recruiting Assistance Program has produced remarkable
gains in recruiting for the Army National Guard since its inception as
a pilot program in late 2005. In its first 60 days, operating in 22
states, the program has trained more than 19,000 Active Recruiting
Assistants and is processing more than 6,000 potential soldiers. Over
1,000 new accessions have already been produced, and the program will
be expanded to every state by March, 2006. The program is an adaptation
of our civilian contract recruiting programs that allows the contractor
to train local recruiting assistants--currently primarily traditional
Guardsmen--who often serve in the same units and act as sponsors for
the new recruits.
The Every Soldier a Recruiter program is a separate brand-new
congressionally authorized referral program that will reward soldiers,
including soldiers on active duty and military Technicians, who provide
quality leads of non-prior service recruits who join the active Army,
Guard or Army Reserve.
Congressionally directed end strength for fiscal year 2005 was
350,000 Soldiers for the Army National Guard. The actual end of year
strength was 333,177 Soldiers (296,623 enlisted and 36,554 officers).
Although below the target, we experienced three consecutive months of
net gains in end strength to finish the year, the first time in 24
months, and we have thus-far exceeded our goals for fiscal year 2006 in
each month since the year started. The accession program's goal was
67,000 Soldiers (63,000 enlisted and 4,000 officers) for fiscal year
2005. The programmed attrition rate was 18.0 percent, and the non-prior
service/prior service accession ratio was 60:40. At the end of fiscal
year 2005, we exceeded our goal for prior service accessions by 104
percent, but fell short in the non-prior service category by 67
percent, thus making the actual fiscal year 2005 accession ratio 55:45
non-prior service/prior service. Command emphasis in the areas of
attrition and retention kept the loss rate for fiscal year 2005 at 19.1
percent, slightly above the program goal of 18 percent. Considering the
unprecedented Army Guard mobilizations and deployments, this was an
admirable achievement.
Retention of those already in the Army National Guard was superb.
The first term Soldier reenlistment goal was 8,945 Soldiers, but
reenlistments were 9,107 for 101.8 percent of the goal. The Careerist
Reenlistment goal was 23,626 Soldiers and the actual reenlistments were
24,697 Soldiers for 104.5 percent of the goal. The overall retention
achievement for the Army National Guard in fiscal year 2005 was 103.8
percent.
The No Validated (No-Val) Pay rate for 2005 was only 1.8 percent. A
Soldier's name will appear on the non-validated pay report when that
Soldier fails to attend training and has not been paid within the last
90 days. The fact that the No-Val rate is at an all-time low
demonstrates that Soldiers who stay in the Army National Guard value
their membership and want to remain active participants.
Environmental Programs
The Army National Guard Environmental Program manages resources to
foster environmental quality and maintain compliance with all
applicable federal, state, and local environmental requirements. The
fiscal year 2005 Environmental, Operations, and Maintenance
Appropriation was adequate to fully fund all critical environmental
compliance, conservation, and pollution prevention projects. Fiscal
year 2005 environmental restoration funding provided to the Army Guard
was adequate to accomplish minimum essential cleanup requirements.
Army National Guard training lands are the cornerstone of trained
and ready Soldiers. Evolving transformation actions require that we
maximize our maneuver and firing range capabilities over the existing 2
million acres of Army National Guard training lands and mitigate the
effects of encroachment from suburban sprawl. Through coordination with
surrounding communities and the use of legislative authority, the Army
National Guard was able to partner with private, local and state
organizations for acquisition of easements to limit incompatible
development in the vicinity of its installations.
SUPPORT THE WARFIGHTER ANYTIME, ANYWHERE
The Citizen-Soldier: Defending the Nation
From July 2002 through September 2005, overall unit readiness
decreased by 41 percent in order to provide personnel and equipment to
deploying units. Personnel, training, and on hand equipment decreased
between 18 and 36 percent while equipment readiness declined by 10.1
percent during the same period. Despite declines in the areas of
personnel and equipment due to increased mobilizations, deployments,
and funding, the Army National Guard met all mission requirements and
continued to support the Global War on Terrorism. From September 11,
2001 through September 2005, the Army National Guard deployed over 69
percent (325,000) of its personnel in support of the Global War on
Terrorism, homeland defense, and state missions.
Equipping the Force
The Army National Guard established funding priorities based on the
Army Chief of Staff's vision for modernizing the total force core
competencies. The Army National Guard's focus is to organize and equip
current and new modularized units with the most modern equipment
available. This modernization ensures our ability to continue support
of deployments, homeland security and defense efforts while maintaining
our highest war fighting readiness. Although all shortages are
important, the Army National Guard is placing special emphasis on
``dual use'' equipment such as the Family of Medium Tactical Vehicles,
channel hopping Single Channel Ground and Airborne Radio System
(SINCGARS), Joint Network Node, and Movement Tracking System. Filling
these shortages ensures interoperability with the active force and
increases the Army National Guard's ability to respond to natural
disasters or in a homeland defense role.
This requires the Rapid Fielding Initiative to equip our Soldiers
with the latest gear, such as body armor, night vision devices and
small arms. Additionally, it requires a steady flow of resources to the
Army National Guard to mitigate shortages caused by lack of past
resourcing, force structure changes, and the heightened importance of
homeland security.
Intelligence Operations
Army National Guard Military Intelligence units and personnel
continue to play a vital role in the Global War on Terrorism, and are
deployed worldwide to support critical tactical, operational, and
strategic intelligence operations. Army Guard personnel are supporting
mission critical areas in Human Intelligence, Signal Intelligence,
Measurement and Signatures Intelligence, Imagery Intelligence and Open
Source Intelligence. Army National Guard linguists are engaged in
document exploitation, translation and interpretation within the
Department of Defense, such as the National Security Agency, as well as
other federal agencies. More importantly, Army National Guard Military
Intelligence units are deployed at the tactical level with each Army
National Guard combat division and brigade providing critical and
timely intelligence on the battlefield.
Information Operations
The Army National Guard continues to provide a number of Full
Spectrum Information Operation Teams in support of a broad range of
Army missions and contingency operations. Army National Guard
Information Operations Field Support Teams provide tactical,
operational and strategic planning capabilities at all echelons of the
Army. Army Guard Brigade Combat Teams deploy to all theaters with
organic information operations cells that provide support and
coordination at all levels of military planning and execution. Army
Guard Computer Emergency Response Teams and Vulnerability Assessment
Teams provide technical expertise, information assurance assessments
and certification compliance inspections of critical Wide Area and
Local Area networks for Army installations worldwide.
Innovative Readiness Training
The Innovative Readiness Training program highlights the Citizen-
Soldier's role in support of eligible civilian organizations. This
program provides real-world, joint training opportunities for Army
National Guard Soldiers within the United States. The projects provide
ancillary benefits to the local communities in the form of construction
projects or medical services to underserved populations.
More than 7,000 Soldiers and Airmen from across the United States
and its territories participate annually in Innovative Readiness
Training sponsored projects. Army National Guard projects include:
--Operation Alaskan Road, a joint, multi-year fifteen mile road
construction project on Annette Island, Alaska
--Expansion and improvement of the Benedum Airport infrastructure in
Clarksburg, West Virginia
--Task Force Grizzly, Task Force Diamondback and Task Force Lobo
continue to improve existing road networks and build barrier
fencing in support of the U.S. Border Patrol in California,
Arizona and New Mexico
--The South Carolina Guard's REEFEX project. REEFEX uses
decommissioned Army vehicles to create artificial reefs in the
Atlantic Ocean off the coast of New England and South Carolina.
Training the Nation's Warfighter
The Army National Guard's unique condition of limited training
time, dollars and, in some cases, difficult access to training ranges,
demands an increased reliance on low cost, small footprint training
technologies. Quick response by the Army National Guard to our nation's
missions requires a training strategy that reduces post mobilization
training time. New virtual technologies and simulators therefore become
critical tools to help the Army National Guard maintain a ready
operational force. Some of these training systems are:
--The Virtual Convoy Operations Trainer. This is a simulation aid
specifically adapted for current operations in Iraq and
Afghanistan. It is funded with a combination of Congressional
add-ons and National Guard Reserve Equipment Appropriation
funds. The Army Guard placed 14 trainers under contract and
fielded eight in fiscal 2005; the remaining six will be fielded
in fiscal year 2006.
--The Advanced Bradley Full Crew Interactive Skills Trainer virtual
gunnery system. This is a low cost, deployable training system
that appends directly to the Bradley Fighting Vehicle and
enhances home station training in advance of a live fire event.
--The Engagement Skills Trainer 2000. This system simulates weapons-
training events. These trainers provide initial and sustainment
marksmanship training, static unit collective gunnery tactical
training and shoot/don't shoot training. Soldiers use this
trainer primarily for multipurpose, multi-lane, small arms,
crew-served and individual anti-tank training simulation. The
trainer simulates day and night, as well as Nuclear, Biological
and Chemical marksmanship and tactical environments.
--The Laser Marksmanship Training System simulates weapons training
events that lead to live fire qualifications for individual and
crew served weapons. This system allows the Soldier to use
their own personal weapons to conduct individual and
sustainment marksmanship training using Nuclear, Biological and
Chemical equipment.
--The eXportable Combat Training Capability. This capability allows
us to take the Maneuver Combat Training Center environment to
the unit. We are able to tailor this training to meet any
operational focus from the conventional warfight to the
contemporary operational environment in Iraq and Afghanistan.
The eXportable Combat Training Capability, along with
traditional Maneuver Combat Training Center rotations, will
provide units with ``final exam'' certification as required by
the Army Force Generation model prior to deployments.
Information Technology
The Army National Guard successfully increased the bandwidth and
provided a secure data link to the Joint Force Headquarters in each of
the 50 states, Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, two U.S. Territories, and
the District of Columbia. The Army Guard's modern wide-area network
provides improved redundancy and increased network security.
TRANSFORMATION FOR THE 21ST CENTURY: READY, RELIABLE, ESSENTIAL AND
ACCESSIBLE
Ground-based Midcourse Defense
Defending against ballistic missile attack is a key component of
the National Security Strategy for Homeland Defense. In the initial
defensive operations phase, the Army National Guard plays a major role
in this mission as the force provider for the Ground-based Midcourse
Defense system. We have assigned Active Guard-Reserve manpower to
support this new role. The Ballistic Missile Defense program is
dynamic--undergoing constant refinement and change.
Soldiers assigned to Ground-based Midcourse Defense perform two
missions:
--Federal Military Mission.--The federal military mission is to plan,
train, certify, secure, inspect, coordinate, and execute the
defense of the United States against strategic ballistic
missile attacks by employing this system; and
--State Military Mission.--In accordance with Title 32, the state
military mission is to provide trained and ready units,
assigned personnel, and administrative and logistic support.
Logistics and Equipment
The Army National Guard continues modernization to the digital
force with the emerging technologies that will dramatically improve
logistical support for these systems, substantially reduce repair
times, increase operational readiness rates and eliminate obsolete and
unsustainable test equipment. Use of these technologies allows the Army
Guard to operate heavy equipment at a higher operational rate while
reducing the overall costs for these systems.
The Army National Guard currently has a significant portion of the
Army's maintenance infrastructure. This Cold War infrastructure is
expensive and redundant. Under the Army's new maintenance strategy, the
Army Guard and other Army elements are consolidating maintenance
systems. This enhances maintenance and improves efficiency. Army
maintenance personnel now effectively diagnose and maintain equipment
at two maintenance levels instead of four.
Personnel Transformation
The human dimension of Army National Guard transformation is the
crucial link to the realization of future capabilities and to the
enhanced effectiveness of current capabilities. Transformation of human
resource policies, organizations, and systems will enhance Army
National Guard ability to provide force packages and individuals at the
right place and time. Future web-based systems will integrate personnel
and pay, provide accurate human resource information for commanders,
and give Soldiers direct access to their records. Evolving current
systems such as Standard Installation Defense Personnel System and the
Reserve Component Automation System applications extend current
capabilities and enhance readiness, providing support for development
of an electronic record brief and automated selection board support.
Aviation Transformation and Modernization
Army National Guard aviation completed 109 percent of the flying
hours projected for fiscal year 2005, an average of 9.9 aircrew flying
hours per month--the highest level since 1996. During fiscal year 2005,
an average of 307 aircrews were deployed each month in support of
Operations Noble Eagle, Enduring Freedom, the Balkans (Kosovo Force and
Stabilization Force Bosnia), and Operation Iraqi Freedom.
Army National Guard aircrews flew more than 94,000 hours this past
year in support of the Global War on Terrorism. This is a 58 percent
increase over fiscal year 2004. More than 245,000 hours were flown in
support of the Army Guard missions for homeland security, training,
counterdrug, and combat operations. Despite the fact that 30 percent of
the Army National Guard aviation force structure was deployed, the Army
aviation transformation process continued. As aircraft were
redistributed to modernize units, aircrew qualification and proficiency
training was accelerated to meet emerging deployments.
On the home front, the Army National Guard aviation community
continued to support domestic contingencies by flying over 7,485
missions, transporting nearly 62,117 civilians to safe havens, and
transporting Army National Guard Soldiers to hurricane-ravaged zones.
Support aircraft were flying recovery and relief missions in Louisiana
within four hours of Katrina's passage. In addition to moving
approximately 7,300 tons of equipment, food, sandbags, and life saving
supplies, we rescued almost 16,000 of our citizens during Hurricane
Katrina and Rita relief and recovery efforts. At the peak of the relief
and recovery efforts, the Army National Guard had 151 aircraft on
station supporting Louisiana and Mississippi.
In Texas after Hurricane Rita, the Army National Guard flew 185
missions, transported 117 civilian and military personnel, moved 31
tons of supplies, and conducted 19 rescue or life-saving missions.
Aviation assets from 28 states rallied to support Louisiana,
Mississippi, and Texas in their relief and recovery efforts after
Katrina and Rita. A total of 5,341 flight hours have been flown since
August 2005.
The Army National Guard aviation force continues modernizing, but
at a pace much slower than originally planned by the Army prior to the
onset of combat operations in Afghanistan and Iraq. Associated aircraft
losses and the continuing need for more operational aircraft in theater
slowed aircraft transfers from the active Army. This is especially true
for the critically needed UH-60-Blackhawk helicopter (the bulk of the
Army Guard's aviation force). An expanded summation of Army National
Guard aviation assets and requirements are listed below:
Training in ``One Army''
Training centers support our ability to conduct performance-
oriented training under real world conditions. The Army National Guard
modernizes and restructures to effectively meet evolving warfighting
requirements. We face a number of continuing challenges in sustaining
power support platforms and modernizing Army National Guard live fire
ranges and range operations for the Pennsylvania Guard's Stryker
Brigade Combat Team. The Army National Guard will consolidate range and
training land investment documentation under the Sustainable Range
Program.
The Army National Guard achieves training excellence by leveraging
Distributed Learning. Distributed Learning improves unit and Soldier
readiness by increasing access to training resources and reducing
unnecessary time away from the home station. Interactive Multimedia
Instruction courseware, satellite programming and distance learning
offer needed instruction in such areas as Military Occupational Skill
Qualification reclassification for Soldiers and units.
SUMMARY
The Army National Guard engages in a full spectrum of civil-
military operations. Our Soldiers represent every state, territory, and
sector of society. Today, they represent their nation serving honorably
throughout the world. In these critical times, the Army National Guard
must maintain readiness. A vital part of the Army's force structure,
the Army Guard remains a community based force committed to engage in
overseas missions while protecting and serving our cities and towns.
The Army National Guard proves itself capable of carrying out its goals
of supporting the Warfight, defending the Homeland and transforming
into a ready, reliable, essential and accessible force for the 21st
century.
The National Guard is foremost a family. This year we remember the
spirit and sacrifice of Guard families who lost homes and loved ones
during the Gulf Coast hurricane season. For his selfless service
responding to Hurricane Katrina, we honor the memory of: Sergeant
Joshua E. Russell, Detachment 1, Company A, 890th Engineer Battalion.
LIEUTENANT GENERAL DANIEL JAMES III, VICE CHIEF, NATIONAL GUARD BUREAU
AND DIRECTOR, AIR NATIONAL GUARD
MESSAGE FROM THE DIRECTOR
What an incredible year this has been for the nation and the Air
National Guard! The Air Guard continues to serve with distinction at
home and abroad. At home, the Hurricane Katrina relief effort brought
into sharp focus our role as America's Hometown Air Force. We flew over
3,000 sorties, moved over 30,000 passengers, and hauled over 11,000
tons of desperately needed supplies. Air Guardsmen saved 1,443 lives--
heroically pulling stranded Americans off rooftops to safety. Air
National Guard medical units treated over 15,000 patients at eight
sites along the Gulf Coast, combining expert medical care with
compassion for our fellow Americans.
Abroad, the Air Guard brings the will of the American people to the
Global War on Terrorism. The Air Guard fulfills 34 percent of the Air
Force's missions on 7 percent of the Air Force's budget, a definite
bargain in fiscally constrained times. Our contributions over the past
four years have been tremendous. Since September 11, 2001, we've
mobilized over 36,000 members and have flown over 206,000 sorties
accumulating over 620,000 flying hours. One-third of the Air Force
aircraft in Operation Iraqi Freedom were from the Air Guard. We flew
100 percent of the Operation Enduring Freedom A-10 missions and 66
percent of the Iraqi Freedom A-10 taskings. We accomplished 45 percent
of the F-16 sorties. The A-10s flew more combat missions in the Iraqi
war than any other weapon system.
We flew 86 percent of the Operation Iraqi Freedom tanker sorties.
We accomplished this primarily through the Northeast Tanker Task Force.
In keeping with our militia spirit, that task force was initially
manned through volunteerism. A total of 18 units supported it; 15 were
from the Air National Guard.
Air National Guard Security Forces were the first security forces
on the ground in Iraq. Intelligence personnel have been providing
unique capabilities for Central Command and organizational support for
the U-2, Predator, and Global Hawk. Medical personnel have been using
the new Expeditionary Medical Support system capability, providing
critical care to the warfighter. Civil Engineers have built bare bases
in the desert and trained Iraqi firefighters while Weather personnel
worldwide provided over 50 percent of the Army's weather support.
Financial Management personnel have been diligently working to keep
benefits moving to our members despite challenging pay, allowance and
benefit entitlements and complex administration systems. Air National
Guard Command, Control, Communications and Computer personnel have kept
vital information flowing on one end of the spectrum and provided
Ground Theater Air Control System Personnel on the other. And our
tireless chaplains have been providing outstanding spiritual aid out in
the field. We have been able to participate at these levels because we
provide Expeditionary and Homeland Defense capabilities that are
relevant to the nation.
Today as we look toward our future relevancy, having proven
ourselves as indispensable and equal Total Force partners, we have to
be prepared to transform with the Total Force. We are now in a position
to make the decisions that will influence our next evolution . . .
transforming the Air National Guard.
Some of today's capabilities may not be required in the future. The
future Air Force will rely heavily on technological advances in space,
command and control, intelligence and reconnaissance systems,
information warfare, unmanned aerial vehicles, and the ability to
conduct high volume and highly accurate attacks with significantly
fewer platforms. For the Air Guard to remain Total Force partners, we
have carved out our strategy in those areas and will explore new
organizational constructs. Among those constructs are various forms of
integrated units where we can combine individual units with other Air
Guard units or with another service component. We have to expand our
capabilities as joint warfighters and make the necessary changes to
integrate seamlessly into the joint warfighting force. To remain
relevant we must continue to listen to the messages that are being sent
today.
Now is the time for us to lead the way by considering, selecting
and implementing new concepts and missions that leverage our unique
strengths to improve Total Force capabilities in support of
expeditionary roles and homeland defense. This can only be accomplished
by involving all Air National Guard stakeholders, working toward a
common goal . . . enhanced capabilities to assure future relevance for
the Air National Guard.
By addressing together the complex issues that face us, we will
keep the Air National Guard ``Ready, Reliable, Essential and
Accessible--Needed Now and in the Future.''
HOMELAND DEFENSE: HERE AND ABROAD FOR OVER 90 YEARS
Air Sovereignty Alert
Since September 11, 2001, thousands of Air National guardsmen have
been mobilized to operate alert sites and alert support sites for
Operation Noble Eagle in support of Homeland Defense. Our Air National
Guard has partnered with active duty and reserve forces to provide
Combat Air Patrol, random patrols, and aircraft intercept protection
for large cities and high-valued assets in response to the increased
terrorist threat. The Air National Guard has assumed the responsibility
of all ground alert sites and some irregular Combat Air Patrols
periods. This partnering agreement maximizes our nation's current
basing locations and capitalizes on the high experience levels within
the Air Guard and its professional history in Air Defense operations.
To continue operations at this indefinite pace has posed some
unique funding and manning challenges for both the field and
headquarters staffs. As we move into the fiscal year 2006 Program
Objective Memoranda exercise, the active Air Force and Air National
Guard will continue to work towards a permanent solution for our alert
force and seek ways to incorporate these temporary Continuum of Service
tours into permanent programs.
Space Operations: Using the Stars to Serve the Community
For the Air Guard, space operations provide a critical
communications link to communities throughout the nation in the form of
satellite support for everyday uses, television, computers, and
wireless phones, but also serve as an important military deterrence
from external threats. Colorado's 137th Space Warning Squadron provides
mobile survivable and endurable missile warning capability to U.S.
Strategic Command. Recently, Air National Guard units in Wyoming and
California have come out of conversion to provide operational command
and control support to Northern Command and to provide round-the-clock
support to the Milstar satellite constellation. Alaska's 213th Space
Warning Squadron ensures America's defense against nuclear threat by
operating one of our nation's Solid State Phased Array Radar that
provides missile warning and space surveillance.
The Air Force has approved space missions for the 119th Command and
Control Squadron in Tennessee to support the U.S. Strategic Command,
and the 114th Range Flight in Florida is partnered with an active Air
Force unit performing the Launch Range safety mission. There are future
plans by the Air Force to transition additional space program missions
and assets in Alaska and other states to Air National Guard control.
SUPPORT THE WARFIGHTER ANYTIME, ANYWHERE
The Air National Guard has been contributing to the Global War on
Terrorism across the full spectrum of operations. During the peak of
Operation Iraqi Freedom, we had over 22,000 members mobilized or on
volunteer status to support the Global War on Terrorism worldwide. In
Operation Iraqi Freedom we flew 43 percent of the fighter sorties, 86
percent of the tanker sorties, 66 percent of the A-10s close air
support sorties and 39 percent of the airlift sorties. At the same time
we were flying almost 25 percent of the Operation Enduring Freedom
fighter sorties and over 20 percent of the tanker sorties.
However, our capabilities do not reside only in aircraft: 15
percent of our expeditionary combat support was engaged during this
same period. This includes 60 percent of security forces, many of whom
were mobilized for the longest duration. Additionally, about 25 percent
of our intelligence, services and weather personnel were mobilized.
Logistics and transportation capabilities are vital to homeland defense
as well as our expeditionary mission.
Air National Guard men and women are proud to defend and protect
our nation at home and abroad. Often, however, support equipment
requirements overseas necessitate that equipment remain in place,
causing a shortage of equipment for training at home. We are working
with Air Force and Defense Department leaders to develop a solution.
Medical Service Transformation--Expeditionary Combat Support, Homeland
Defense, and Wing Support
The Air National Guard's Surgeon General led the Air National Guard
Medical Service through its most revolutionary transformation in
history by reconfiguring its medical capabilities into Expeditionary
Medical Support systems. These systems provide highly mobile,
integrated and multifunctional medical response capabilities. They are
the lightest, leanest and most rapidly deployable medical platforms
available to the Air National Guard today. This system is capable of
simultaneously providing Expeditionary Combat Support to the warfighter
for Air and Space Expeditionary Force missions, Homeland Defense
emergency response capabilities to the states and support to the Air
National Guard Wings.
The Expeditionary Medical Support capability allowed ten percent of
Air National Guard medical unit personnel to deploy for Operation Iraqi
Freedom, compared to only three percent in the early 1990s for
deployments for Operations Desert Shield and Desert Storm. The U.S.
Central Command has validated that the Expeditionary Medical Support
system is a perfect fit for the Chief of Staff, U.S. Air Force Global
Strike Task Force and Concept of Operations.
The Expeditionary Medical Support system also plays a critical role
in Homeland Defense. The Air National Guard Medical Service plays a
vital role in the development and implementation of the National
Guard's Chemical, Biological, Radiological, Nuclear, and High-Yield
Explosive Enhanced Response Force Package. This package will provide
support to state and local emergency responders and improve Weapons of
Mass Destruction response capabilities in support of the Civil Support
Teams. The Air National Guard has contributed to the 12 trained CERFP
teams and will build towards 76 Expeditionary Medical Support teams by
2011.
The Guard's short-term objective is to obtain 20 Small Portable
Expeditionary Aerospace Rapid Response equipment sets, two for each
Federal Emergency Management Agency region. This would allow for
additional reachback capability for the Civil Support Teams and the
states. This has been a prelude to the next step in the Air National
Guard Medical Service Transformation.
At Readiness Frontiers, over 100 medical planners received Federal
Emergency Management Agency training to enhance Air National Guard
Medical Service responsiveness to homeland disasters. This is the first
time the medical service has taken on an endeavor of this magnitude and
allows for future training opportunities in building routine
relationships with military, federal and civilian response personnel.
The Air National Guard medical service's new force structure
provided by the Expeditionary Medical Support system delivers
standardized and much-improved force health protection, public health,
agent detection, and health surveillance capabilities to better support
all Air Guard Wings. This will enhance the protection of the wings'
resources and improve the medical readiness of its personnel.
Eyes and Ears in the Sky--Air National Guard Intelligence,
Surveillance, and Reconnaissance Systems and Support
The Air National Guard's Intelligence, Surveillance, and
Reconnaissance personnel and systems play an increasingly important
role in the defense of our nation. Air Guard men and women are
essential to support Global Hawk, Predator, and U-2 collection
missions.
Due to a significant increase in Air Force mission requirements,
the Air Guard continues to expand its intelligence collection and
production capability. The Air Guard has also expanded its imagery
intelligence capability through the use of Eagle Vision, which is a
deployable commercial imagery downlink and exploitation system. This
system provides valuable support to aircrew mission planning and
targeting, as well as imagery support to natural disasters and
terrorism.
Other developing Air Force capabilities entrusted to the Air
National Guard include the F-16 Theater Airborne Reconnaissance System
and the C-130 SCATHE VIEW tactical imagery collection system. The
Theater Airborne Reconnaissance System will be improved to provide
near-real-time support to warfighter ``kill-chain'' operations in day-
night, all weather conditions. SCATHE VIEW provides a near-real-time
imaging capability to support humanitarian relief and non-combatant
evacuation operations. To support signal intelligence collection
requirements, the Air Guard continues to aggressively upgrade the
SENIOR SCOUT platform. SENIOR SCOUT remains the primary collection
asset to support the nation's war on drugs and the Global War on
Terrorism in the southern hemisphere.
Comprehensive and Realistic Combat Training--An Asymmetric Advantage
The National Guard Bureau has a fundamental responsibility to
ensure that the men and women of the Air Guard are properly trained to
meet the challenges they will face to protect and defend this country.
This can be done through the effective development and management of
special use airspace and ranges. To support this training requirement,
the Air Guard is responsible for 14 air-to-ground bombing ranges, four
Combat Readiness Training Centers, and the Air Guard Special Use
Airspace infrastructure.
To ensure that our units remain ready and relevant, they must have
access to adequate training airspace and ranges that meet the demands
of evolving operational requirements. The National and Regional
Airspace and Range Councils, co-chaired by both the Air Guard and the
Air Force, continue to identify and resolve airspace and range issues
that affect combat capability and are engaged with the Federal Aviation
Administration in the redesign of the National Airspace System.
The four Combat Readiness Training Centers provide an integrated,
year-round, realistic training environment (airspace, ranges, systems,
facilities, and equipment), which enables military units to enhance
their combat capability at a deployed, combat-oriented operating base
and provide training opportunities that cannot be effectively
accomplished at the home station. As such, these centers are ideal
assets for the Joint National Training Capability. The centers offer an
effective mix of live, virtual and constructive simulation training.
The Air National Guard continues to pursue National Training Capability
certification for these centers and ranges.
It is imperative to the warfighter that the Air Guard maintains its
training superiority. As the warfighting transformation and joint
operational requirements evolve, it is essential that the airspace and
range infrastructure be available to support that training. There are
challenges. The Air National Guard has a shortfall in electronic
warfare training. To keep our Citizen-Airmen trained to the razor's
edge, we must have the Joint Threat Emitter to simulate the various
surface to air missile and anti-aircraft artillery threats that any
future conflict might present.
TRANSFORMATION FOR THE 21ST CENTURY: RELEVANT NOW . . . AND IN THE
FUTURE
Supporting a ``Capabilities Based'' Military Force
The Air National Guard is a solid partner with the Air Force, the
Air Force Reserve, and the Department of Defense. The Defense
Department's priority is Transformation . . . and therefore it is the
priority of the active services and the reserve components.
The Air Force is pursuing innovative organizational constructs and
personnel policies to meld the various components into a single,
unified force. Ongoing shifts in global conflict and U.S. strategy
suggest an increasing attention to activities such as homeland defense,
nation-building, and others that may require different mixes of
capability that are not necessarily resident at sufficient levels in
the active component. This ``Future Total Force'' integration will
create efficiencies, cut costs, ensure stability, retain invaluable
human capital, and, above all, increase our combat capabilities.
One example of this transformational initiative is the proposed
movement of Air National Guard manpower to Langley AFB, an active duty
base, from Richmond, an Air National Guard base, with the intent of
leveraging the high experience of Guard personnel to improve the combat
capability for the active force.
Another transformation effort is to ``integrate,'' where sensible,
units from two or more components into a single wing with a single
commander. Active, Guard, and Reserve personnel share the same
facilities and equipment, and together, execute the same mission. This
is a level of integration unmatched in any of the Services.
Emerging Missions
The Air National Guard is working to embed new and innovative
capabilities into the force. These include: Predator unit equipped and
associate, Global Hawk, Deployable Ground Stations/Distributed Common
Ground System, F-15 Aggressor, C-130 Flying Training, Cryptological and
Linguist Training, Expeditionary Combat Support, as well as support to
Joint Forces with Battlefield Airmen, Air Operations Centers,
Warfighting Headquarters, Space Control and Operations.
On November 25, 2004, the Secretary of the Air Force and Chief of
Staff of the Air Force outlined a Total Force vision for Air Guard
Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance by calling for the
standup of two MQ-1 Predator flying units in Texas and Arizona by June
2006 to help fill worldwide Reconnaissance, Surveillance, and Target
Acquisition requirements. Air Guard Predator operations will first fill
worldwide theater requirements, but will also likely evolve into
providing direct defense for the Homeland in conjunction with the
Department of Homeland Security and U.S. Northern Command.
Adoption of emerging missions by Air National Guard units promotes
all three National Guard priorities for the future. The addition of new
weapons systems to the Air Guard provides essential capabilities that
enable homeland defense and homeland security missions. New systems
including RQ/MQ-1 Predator, and RQ-4 Global Hawk, provide intelligence,
surveillance, and reconnaissance capabilities to Air National Guard
forces. Other capabilities, such as air operations center support, will
provide ready experience in planning, command and control, and mission
leadership that will be invaluable in federal/state mission capable
units.
Modernizing for the Future
The Air National Guard modernization program is a capabilities-
based effort to keep the forces in the field relevant, reliable and
ready for any missions tasked by the state or federal authorities. As a
framework for prioritization, the modernization program is segmented
into three time frames: short-term, the current and next year's Defense
budget; medium-term, out to fiscal year 2015; and long-term, out to
fiscal year 2025 and beyond.
The Air National Guard remains an equal partner with the Air and
Space Expeditionary Forces that are tasked to meet the future
challenges and missions. Budget constraints require the Air Guard to
maximize combat capability for every dollar spent. The Air National
Guard includes all aircraft, ground command and control systems, and
training and simulation systems in this modernization effort. The
requirements necessary to focus this effort must be grounded in clearly
defined combat capabilities and missions.
The following summarizes the Air National Guard's force posture by
weapons system:
The E-8C Joint Surveillance Target Attack Radar System remains a
highly coveted asset by all combatant commanders. It provides wide
theater surveillance of ground moving targets operated by the first-
ever blended wing of Air National Guard, Air Force and Army, the 116th
Air Control Wing, at Robins AFB, Ga. Keeping the system modernized
while maintaining the current high Operations Tempo in combat theaters
will be a continuing challenge in the future. The most urgent
modernization needs for the Joint Surveillance Target Attack Radar
System include re-engining, radar upgrades, installation of the Traffic
Alert Collision Avoidance System, and integration of a self-protection
suite.
The A-10 remains the only Air Force fighter/attack aircraft
operating out of Afghanistan today. Six Air Guard squadrons account for
38 percent of combat-coded A-10s in the Combat Air Force. The A-10 is
undergoing modification to modernize the cockpit, provide a data link,
improve targeting pod integration, and add Joint Direct Attack
Munitions capability. Future improvements to the A-10 include a SATCOM
radio, an updated Lightweight Airborne Recovery System for combat
search and rescue missions, and improved threat detection. Recent
conflicts highlighted a thrust performance deficiency making upgrading
the TF-34-100A engine a priority.
Air National Guard F-16s continued to provide crucial combat
capabilities during 2005 in Operation Iraqi Freedom, Operation Enduring
Freedom and Operation Noble Eagle. The Block 25/30/32 F-16 continued
its modernization program by fielding the Commercial Central Interface
Unit, Color Multi-Function Displays and AIM-9X while pursuing future
integration of the Radar Modernized Programmable Signal Processor,
Advanced Identification Friend or Foe, Joint Helmet Mounted Cueing
System and the smart triple ejector rack. The Block 52 F-16s are nearly
finished with their Common Configuration Implementation Program that
brought these systems and LINK16 capabilities to their fleet. Air Guard
Block 42 F-16s will begin their common configuration upgrades later
this year.
The F-15 modernization includes the continued installation of the
BOL Infrared countermeasures improvements system, continued delivery of
upgraded engine kits and installation of the Multifunctional
Information Distribution System Fighter Data Link. The next upgrades
include the retrofit of a permanent night vision cockpit lighting
system, continued integration and purchase of the Joint Helmet Mounted
Cueing System, and the delivery of the replacement Identify Friend or
Foe system.
The HC-130 is completing installation of the Forward Looking
Infrared system, an essential capability during combat rescue
operations. The HC-130 starts integration and installation of the Large
Aircraft Infrared Counter Measure system, increasing survivability in
face of the ever-increasing threat from hand-held missiles.
The HH-60 program started installation of the new M3M .50 caliber
door gun, replaced personal equipment for the pararescue jumpers with
state-of-the-art weapons and technologies. The initiation of the HH-60
replacement program will begin to slow any further modernization.
C-130 enhancements included the multi-command Avionics
Modernization Program which upgraded nearly 500 aircraft to a modern,
more sustainable cockpit. Additionally, the Air National Guard
continued acquisition of the AN/APN-241 Low Power Color Radar,
continued installation of the Night Vision Imaging System, and the Air
National Guard-driven development of Scathe View to include various
technological spin-offs having application in a myriad of civilian and
military efforts. Other Air Guard programs include the AN/AAQ-24 (V)
Directional Infrared Countermeasures System, propeller upgrades like
the Electronic Propeller Control System and NP2000 eight-bladed
propeller, and a second generation, upgraded Modular Airborne Fire
Fighting System. Additionally, the Air National Guard partnered with
the Air Force for the first multiyear buy of the new C-130J aircraft to
replace the aging C-130E fleet.
The KC-135 weapons system completed the installation of the cockpit
upgrade and continued the engine upgrades to the R-model. The KC-135
continued to be the air bridge for the multiple combat deployments
across the globe. Keeping the aging fleet modernized will continue to
challenge the Air National Guard as the refueling operations evolve to
meet the next mission.
The Air National Guard Modernization Program is key in continuing
to field a relevant combat capability, ensuring dominance of American
air power for the next 15 to 20 years. We must sustain an open and
honest dialogue from the warfighter through Congress, in order to
maximize the investment of precious and limited resources.
Force Development
Our personnel are our greatest asset and force multiplier. To
capitalize on their talents, the Air National Guard has implemented a
new force development structure to get the right people in the right
job, at the right time, with the right skills, knowledge and
experience. We are taking a deliberate approach to develop officers,
enlisted, and civilians by combining focused assignments with education
and training opportunities to prepare our people to meet the Air
National Guard needs. Through targeted education, training, and
mission-related experience, we will develop professional Airmen into
joint force warriors with the skills needed across all levels of
conflict. This is at the ``heart'' of our Officer and Enlisted Force
Development plans. These plans are a critical communication tool to
capture the member's ``career'' development ideas, desired career path
choices, assignment, and developmental education preferences. The
bottom-line of our Force Development efforts is to provide an effects-
and competency-based development process by connecting the depth of
expertise in the individual's primary career field with the appropriate
education, training, and experience. The desired effect is to produce
more capable and diversified leaders.
Recruiting quality applicants and taking care of our people will be
key in maintaining the end strength numbers needed to accomplish our
HLD missions, our successful transformation, and our support to the war
fighter. Air National Guard retention remains at an all-time high.
However, recruiting is a challenge, as the parents, teachers, and
counselors now play a larger role in their child's decision to join the
military. Therefore, the Air National Guard expanded funding of thirty
eight storefront recruiting offices. These offices offer a less
imposing sales environment than the traditional flying wing location.
As part of the Total Force, the Air National Guard realizes it is
essential that we transform into an effects-based, efficient provider
of human combat capability for our warfighters, partners, and our
Nation. Our Vision and Strategic Plan sets the transformational flight-
path for the personnel community in support of the Air Expeditionary
Force, security for the homeland, our states' missions, and roles in
the community. Furthermore, we will advance our continued commitment to
a diverse Air National Guard, not just in gender and ethnicity, but in
thought, creativity, education, culture, and problem-solving
capabilities.
Information Networking for the Total Force
The Air National Guard Enterprise Network is critical to the
successful transmission of information within a unit, between units,
and among the various states. We are making progress towards
modernizing our nationwide information technology network that serves a
vital role in homeland security and national defense. A healthy and
robust network for reliable, available and secure information
technology is essential to federal and state authorities in their
ability to exercise command and control of information resources that
potentially could impact their various constituencies.
Greater emphasis must be placed on maturing the Air National Guard
Enterprise Network. The rapidly changing hardware and software
requirements of our warfighting and combat support functions come with
a significant cost to upgrade and maintain a fully capable Information
Technology network. The Air Guard network has typically been supported
at the same level it was during the 1990s. Without a significant
infusion of resources to acquire new technology, our ability to
accomplish other missions will suffer. Modernization of the Air
National Guard Enterprise Network will enhance interoperability with
other federal and state agencies.
SUMMARY
The Air National Guard will continue to defend the nation in the
War on Terrorism while transforming for the future. We will do this
across the full spectrum of operations in both the Expeditionary and
Homeland Defense missions. The Air National Guard will also continue to
draw upon our militia culture and linkage to the community as we
execute our multiple missions and roles. The men and women of the Air
Guard are currently serving proudly in the far corners of the globe--
and here at home--and will continue to do so with distinction.
Today's guardsmen and women are your doctors, lawyers, police
officers, cooks, teachers, and factory workers, white and blue-collar
workers. They are your civilians in peace; Airmen in war--we guard
America's skies.
MAJOR GENERAL TERRY L. SCHERLING, DIRECTOR OF THE JOINT STAFF NATIONAL
GUARD BUREAU
JOINT STAFF OVERVIEW
During 2005, the National Guard's pursuit of mission objectives
once again proved to be a remarkable accomplishment. Support for
Homeland Defense, the Warfighter, and Transformation guided our
ambitious initiatives to serve our nation and our communities over the
entire spectrum of domestic and overseas operations.
Although the National Guard continued to be essential to our
nation's success in Operations Enduring Freedom and Iraqi Freedom,
Guard support to the warfight is not limited to our role on the
battlefield. We demonstrate our ability to support the warfight
anytime, anywhere, through dynamic evolutions to our State Partnership
Program, Family Programs, and Employer Support of the Guard and Reserve
Program. Our State Partnership Program supports homeland security by
helping to develop dependable collaborative partners for the United
States. Since our last posture statement, we accomplished 425 events
between partner states and foreign nations, and added two new
partnerships: Rhode Island with the Bahamas and Ohio with Serbia and
Montenegro. We expect to add another six partnerships in fiscal year
2007. Not since World War II have so many Guard members been deployed
to so many places for such extended periods. Our Family and Employer
Support programs continue to serve as a foundation to provide relevant
and consistent support to our Soldiers, Airmen, families, employers,
and communities during all phases of the deployment process.
Our progress in homeland defense may be even more remarkable. More
than 2,500 National Guard members provided consistent and reliable
counterdrug support to the nation's law enforcement agencies.
Initiatives are underway to leverage our 16 years of counterdrug
experience and apply it to overseas drug trafficking problems in the
Middle East. In addition to noted successes in our counterdrug program,
we have continued to enhance all of our homeland defense capabilities.
The Department of Defense acknowledged our Mission Assurance Assessment
as essential to protect the nation's critical infrastructure. Our
Weapons of Mass Destruction Civil Support Teams, recognized for their
specialized expertise and rapid response times, have been expanded to
55 full-time teams across the nation. We are now focusing on our 12
Chemical, Biological, Radiological, Nuclear, and High-Yield Explosive
Enhanced Response Force Packages as critical assets to the national
response for the Global War on Terrorism.
These and other National Guard capabilities were brought to bear
frequently in 2005 in support of civil authorities by responding to
national events, floods, wildfires, hurricanes and more. During the
record 2005-hurricane season, the National Guard deployed over 50,000
members in response to Hurricane Katrina alone, saving over 17,000
lives, providing millions of meals and liters of water, and ensuring
safety and security to numerous communities. Some regarded our response
as one of our ``finest hours.''
Yet, we have never rested on our laurels. We continue to transform.
The Joint Combined State Strategic Plan is aiding our ability to plan
for domestic operations, helping the National Guard, state governors,
and U.S. Combatant Commanders assess force capabilities for HLS and
HLD. The Department of Defense National Security Personnel System will
apply to the 50,000-member National Guard Military Technician
workforce, transforming the way our civilian personnel system works. We
implemented the Joint Continental United States Communication Support
Environment to address requirements for collaborative information
sharing and other Command, Control, Communications, and Computer
capabilities that can support HLS and HLD stakeholders. Our Joint
Training Centers continue to evolve through continuous and in-depth
analysis of lessons learned and homeland security training
requirements.
This past year the National Guard provided a remarkable
demonstration of how effectively we can and do execute our state and
federal missions simultaneously. The National Guard is always ready,
always there.
HOMELAND DEFENSE: HERE AND ABROAD
``In times of crisis, our nation depends on the courage and
determination of the Guard.'' President Bush, August 2005.
National Guard Reaction Force
The National Guard has over 369 years of experience in responding
to both the federal government's warfighting requirements, and the
needs of the states to protect critical infrastructure and ensure the
safety of our local communities. To improve the capability of the
states to rapidly respond to threats against the critical
infrastructure within our borders, the Chief of the National Guard
Bureau has asked the Adjutants General of the states, territories and
Commanding General, District of Columbia to identify and develop a
Rapid Reaction Force capability. The goal is a trained and ready
National Guard force available to the governor on short notice, capable
of responding in support of local and state governments and, when
required, the Department of Defense. The National Guard Bureau is
working with both Northern and Pacific commands to ensure that National
Guard capabilities are understood and incorporated into their response
plans.
Critical Infrastructure Program--Mission Assurance Assessment (MAA)
During the past year, the National Guard provided support to the
country by responding to severe weather, wild fires, several National
Special Security Events and Hurricanes Katrina and Rita. The year's
events also guided the National Guard's preparations to implement MAA.
This is a National Guard Homeland Defense prototype program in which
teams of National Guard Soldiers or Airmen are trained to conduct
vulnerability assessments of Department of Defense critical
infrastructure in order to prevent or deter attacks and plan emergency
response in case of a terrorist attack or natural disaster. The program
is designed to educate civilian agencies in basic force protection and
emergency response; develop relationships between first responders,
owners of critical infrastructure, and National Guard planners in the
states; and to deploy traditional National Guard forces in a timely
fashion to protect the nation's critical infrastructure. In developing
this concept, National Guard Bureau has worked with the Office of the
Assistant Secretary of Defense for Homeland Defense and the Joint Staff
to establish policies and standards. During 2005, the National Guard
trained six Critical Infrastructure Program--Mission Assurance
Assessment Detachments to conduct vulnerability assessments. The
National Guard plans to train four additional detachments in 2006 to
cover the four remaining Federal Emergency Management Agency Regions.
The MAA teams' pre-crisis preparatory work facilitates the National
Guard in continuing its time-honored tradition of preventing attacks,
protecting and responding when necessary in defense of America at a
moment's notice.
Support to Civil Authorities
In 2005, the National Guard provided unprecedented support to
federal, state, and local authorities, providing assistance during
natural and manmade disasters, and supporting HLS and HLD operations.
National Guard forces performed HLS missions protecting airports,
nuclear power plants, domestic water supplies, bridges, tunnels,
military assets and more. By the end of the year, the Guard expended
over one million man-days of support in assistance to civilian
authorities at the local, state and federal level.
Hurricanes Katrina and Rita and, to a lesser degree, Wilma,
affected states across the South. The National Guard provided
assistance in the form of humanitarian relief operations that included
construction, security, communications, aviation, medical,
transportation, law enforcement support, lodging, search and rescue,
debris removal, and relief supply distribution. Liaison officers sent
to the affected areas assisted with coordination of air and ground
transportation ensuring expeditious delivery of desperately needed
equipment and supplies. Working closely with the governors of the
affected states and the Federal Emergency Management Agency, the Guard
proved instrumental in providing support to the beleaguered citizens
and in reestablishing security of the affected areas.
Weapons of Mass Destruction Civil Support Teams
Eleven additional National Guard Weapons of Mass Destruction Civil
Support Teams (CST) were authorized in 2005, enhancing our ability to
respond to chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear, and high-yield
explosive events. There are now 55 authorized teams. Since September
11, 2001 the 34 existing certified teams have been fully engaged in
planning, training, and operations in support of local and state
emergency responders. The remaining 21 teams are progressing rapidly
toward certification. These are highly trained and skilled, full-time
teams, established to provide specialized expertise and technical
assistance to an incident commander.
Their role in support of the incident commander is to ``assess,
assist, advise, and facilitate follow-on forces.'' State governors,
through their respective Adjutant General, have operational command and
control of the teams. The National Guard Bureau provides logistical
support, standardized operational procedures, and operational
coordination to facilitate the employment of the teams and ensure back-
up capability to states currently without a certified team.
2005 was a busy operational year for our teams. They assisted
emergency responders throughout the country. 18 CSTs provided personnel
and equipment that were vital to the National Guard response to
Hurricanes Katrina and Rita. These teams conducted assessments of
contamination levels remaining after the floodwaters receded. They
provided critical communications and consequence management support to
local, state, and federal agencies. Most importantly, they provided
advice and assistance to the local incident commanders that
dramatically impacted the recovery effort.
Chemical, Biological, Radiological, Nuclear, and High-Yield Explosive
Enhanced Response Force Package
To enhance the chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear, and
high-yield explosive response capability of the National Guard, 12
States were selected to establish a task force comprised of existing
Army and Air National Guard units, with Congress authorizing an
additional five in the fiscal year 2006 Defense Appropriation. The task
force is designed to provide a regional capability to locate and
extract victims from a contaminated environment, perform medical triage
and treatment, and conduct personnel decontamination in response to a
weapon of mass destruction event. The units that form these task forces
are provided additional equipment and specialized training, which allow
the Soldiers and Airmen to operate in a weapon of mass destruction
environment. Known as a chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear,
and high-yield explosive Enhanced Response Force Package (CERFP), each
task force operates within the Incident Command System and provides
support when requested through the Emergency Management System. Each
task force works in coordination with U.S. Northern Command, U.S.
Pacific Command and other military forces and commands as part of the
overall national response of local, state, and federal assets. Each
CERFP has a regional responsibility as well as the capability to
respond to major chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear, and high-
yield explosive incidents anywhere within the United States or
worldwide as directed by national command authorities. This capability
augments the CST and provides a task force-oriented structure that will
respond to an incident on short notice. While the exact numbers are not
known, it is estimated that the Texas National Guard CERFP medical
element treated over 14,000 patients from Hurricanes Katrina and Rita
through late September.
During 2005, 11 of the 12 teams completed National Fire Protection
Association certified specialized training in confined space/collapsed
structure operations. The twelfth is projected to complete search and
extraction training during 2006.
National Special Security Events
The Department of Homeland Security designates certain high-
visibility events that require an increased security presence as
National Security Special Events. In 2004 and 2005, the G8 Summit, the
Democratic National Convention, the Republican National Convention,
President Ronald Reagan's funeral, and the Presidential Inauguration
received such designation.
The National Guard Bureau Joint Intelligence Division, in
coordination with the Joint Force Headquarters--State intelligence
offices, provided support to each event. Support missions included
traffic control-point operations, a civil disturbance reaction force,
aviation and medical evacuation support, a chemical support team, and
support to the District of Columbia Metropolitan Police Department and
the U.S. Secret Service for crowd screening. Army and Air National
Guard personnel from several surrounding States were employed for these
missions.
Intelligence for Homeland Security
The National Guard Bureau has honed partnerships with U.S. Northern
Command, Department of Homeland Security, Joint Force Headquarters--
State, and national agencies to enhance information sharing. We are
aggressively engaged in seeking creative ways for the National Guard's
joint structure's capabilities to support U.S. Northern Command's
requirements for situational awareness of homeland security activities
within the 54 states, territories, and District of Columbia. As part of
the homeland security effort, the National Guard Bureau is exploring
working relationships with federal agencies such as the Defense
Intelligence Agency, National Reconnaissance Office, National Security
Agency, Federal Bureau of Investigation, and National Geospatial
Intelligence Agency.
SUPPORT THE WARFIGHTER ANYTIME, ANYWHERE
State Partnership Program
The State Partnership Program is the National Guard's preeminent
activity supporting Regional Combatant Commanders' Theater Security
Cooperation. This program demonstrates the distinct role and capability
a citizen-militia can provide a country's civilian leadership to
transform their military and society. The program partners U.S. states
with foreign nations to promote and enhance bilateral relations. It
supports Homeland Defense by nurturing dependable collaborative
partners for coalition operations in support of Secretary Rumsfeld's
Concepts of Global Engagement and the Global War on Terrorism.
The program reflects an evolving international affairs mission for
the National Guard. It promotes regional stability and civil-military
relationships in support of U.S. policy objectives. State partners
actively participate in many and varied engagement activities including
bilateral familiarization and training events, exercises, fellowship-
style internships and civic leader visits. All activities are
coordinated through the theater Combatant Commanders and the U.S.
ambassadors' country teams, and other agencies as appropriate, to
ensure that National Guard support meets both U.S. and country
objectives. Since our last Posture Statement, there have been over 425
events involving U.S. states and their foreign partners.
Since the last Posture Statement, two new partnerships were
formed--Rhode Island/Bahamas and Ohio/Serbia and Montenegro. Nigeria
has formally requested a partnership. Identification of a partner state
is in progress. Several countries have initiated the formal process of
requesting a partnership.
This program is challenged to adapt to rapidly changing
international conditions and events. Mature partnerships demand careful
consideration of the appropriate partnership role and mission. The
program's expansion in emerging geographic regions will require
insightful selection of partner states, roles and missions and the
appropriate path to promote political, military and social stability in
partner countries while making the best use of National Guard
resources. Expansion and integration in the Horn of Africa and the
Pacific Rim are areas of challenge for our program. An ongoing
challenge is to ensure states receive optimal support and the partner
countries reap the greatest benefit.
NGB is working to establish and formalize Foreign Affairs and
Bilateral Affairs Officer positions and training with the services and
the combatant commanders, Ambassadors and partner countries. These are
vital initiatives to support expansion of the roles and missions of the
program.
In fiscal year 2007 and beyond, working with the geographic
combatant commanders, we expect to take the program to the next level
of security cooperation. We look for increased interaction at the
action officer/troop level. The partner countries are looking for more
hands on engagement events, unit exchanges, and exercises as well as
working with their partner states during actual operations. A prime
example is the liaison support given by Alaska to their partner state,
Mongolia, when they deployed troops to Iraq. The National Guard seeks
to satisfy this desire for deeper relationships while increasing the
number of partnerships. In 2007, we can potentially add six
partnerships.
National Guard Family Program
The National Guard Bureau Family Program is a Joint Force
initiative that serves as the foundation for support to Army and Air
National Guard family members. As the Guard faces an unprecedented
increase in military activity and extended deployments, the highest
priority of the National Guard Family Program is to provide families
with the assistance to cope with mobilization, deployment, reunion, and
reintegration.
Not since World War II have so many Guard members been deployed to
so many places for such extended periods. The role and support of the
family is critical to success with these missions. The National Guard
Family Program developed an extensive infrastructure to support and
assist families during all phases of the deployment process. There are
more than 400 National Guard Family Assistance Centers located
throughout the 54 states, territories and the District of Columbia.
These centers provide information, referral, and assistance with
anything that families need during a deployment. Most importantly,
these centers and these services are also available to any military
family member from any branch or component of the Armed Forces.
The State Family Program Directors and Air Guard Wing Family
Program coordinators are the program's primary resources for providing
on-the-ground family readiness support to commanders, Soldiers, Airmen,
and their families. The National Guard Bureau Family Program office
provides support to program directors and coordinators through
information-sharing, training, volunteer management, workshops,
newsletters, family events, and youth development programs, among other
services. To enhance this support, the National Guard Family Program,
through the Outreach and Partnership program, is leveraging federal,
state, and local government agency resources and forming strategic
partnerships with veteran, volunteer, and private organizations.
The greatest challenge lies in awareness and communication. The
feedback we receive indicates that many family members are unaware of
the many resources available to them during a period of active duty or
deployment. Our primary goals are to increase the level of awareness
and participation with existing family resources, and to improve
overall mission readiness and retention by giving our warfighters the
peace of mind of knowing that their families are well cared for.
Veterans' Affairs
Sustained mobilization of the National Guard since 9/11 has
resulted in a larger number of Guard members eligible for entitlements
available through the Department of Veterans Affairs. Last year, the
Chief of the National Guard Bureau, the Department of Veterans Affairs
Under Secretary for Health and Under Secretary for Benefits signed a
memorandum of agreement to establish a Veterans Affairs program to
improve the delivery of benefits to returning Soldiers and ensure a
seamless transition to veteran status. The agreement resulted in the
appointment of a permanent liaison at the National Guard Bureau and at
the Department of Veterans Affairs, and assignment of a state benefits
advisor in each of the 54 Joint Force Headquarters--State. The benefits
advisors coordinate the entitlement needs of members at the state level
with the Department of Veterans Affairs, other veterans' service
organizations and community representatives. This new program builds
upon the strength and success of the National Guard Family Program and
capitalizes on the services already provided by the Department of
Defense.
Employer Support of the Guard and Reserve
The National Guard and Reserve continue to be full partners in a
fully integrated Total Force. This means our National Guard and Reserve
service members will spend more time away from the workplace defending
and preserving our nation. Employers have become inextricably linked to
a strong national defense as they share this precious manpower
resource. The basic mission of the Employer Support of the Guard and
Reserve (ESGR) program is to gain and maintain support from all public
and private employers for the men and women of the National Guard and
Reserve.
A nationwide network of local employer support volunteers is
organized into ESGR committees within each state, the District of
Columbia, Guam, Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands. In this way,
employer support programs are available to all employers, large and
small, in cities and towns throughout our country. Today, nearly 3,000
volunteers serve on local ESGR committees. With resources and support
provided by the national office and the National Guard Bureau, the 54
ESGR committees conduct Employer Support and Outreach programs,
including information opportunities for employers, ombudsman services,
and recognition of employers whose human resource policies support and
encourage participation in the National Guard and Reserve. In view of
the importance of employer support to the retention of quality men and
women in the National Guard and Reserve, and in recognition of the
critical contributions from local committees, the National Guard Bureau
provides full time assistance and liaison support to the Joint Forces
Headquarters--State and the 54 ESGR committees.
The National Guard Bureau remains committed to the development of
strategic partnerships with government agencies, veterans service
organizations and public sector employers to ensure employment
opportunities for our redeploying service members with an emphasis on
our disabled veterans. One of the most important tasks our country
faces is ensuring that our men and women in uniform are fully
integrated into the civilian workforce when they return from service to
our country.
Youth ChalleNGe Program
The award-winning National Guard Youth ChalleNGe Program is a
community-based program that leads trains and mentors at-risk youth at
30 program sites throughout the country to become productive citizens
in America's future. As the second largest mentoring program in the
nation, the ChalleNGe program is coeducational and consists of a five-
month ``quasi-military'' residential phase and a one-year post-
residential mentoring phase. A cadet must be a volunteer, between 16
and 18 years of age, drug free, not in trouble with the law, unemployed
or a high school dropout.
The program has served as a national model since 1993 and the 25
states and the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico that offer the program
graduated more than 55,800 young men and women. Participants graduate
from the program equipped with the values, skills, education, and self-
discipline necessary to succeed as adults in society. Significantly,
although many ChalleNGe candidates are from at-risk populations, over
70 percent of ChalleNGe graduates have attained either a General
Equivalency Diploma or a high school diploma. Furthermore,
approximately 20 percent of all graduates choose to enter military
service upon graduation.
The National Guard Counterdrug Program
For over 16 years, the National Guard Counterdrug program has
assisted more than 5,000 law enforcement agencies in protecting the
American homeland from significant national security threats. The
Guard's operations assist these agencies in obstructing the
importation, manufacture, and distribution of illegal drugs; and by
supporting community based drug demand reduction programs. The program
also supports the U.S. Northern and Southern Command combatant
commanders. Given the growing link between drugs and terrorism, the
National Guard's program continues to complement America's homeland
security efforts. Although primarily a domestic program, initiatives
are underway to leverage the National Guard's years of domestic
counterdrug experience and apply it to overseas drug trafficking
problems in the Middle East.
This National Guard Bureau program, as executed by the 54 states
and territories, through their respective governors' Counterdrug plan,
supports the Office of National Drug Control Policy strategies. Support
for these strategies is embedded within six general mission categories
including: program management; technical support; general support;
counterdrug related training; reconnaissance and observation; and drug
demand reduction support. In 2005, approximately 2,475 National Guard
personnel provided counterdrug support to law enforcement agencies and
continued to remain ready, reliable, and relevant for their wartime
mission by actively participating in their unit of assignment through
weekend drill, annual training, and individual Soldier and Airman
professional development.
In fiscal year 2005, National Guard support efforts led to 61,125
arrests and assisted law enforcement agencies in seizing nearly 2.4
million pounds of illegal drugs, eradicating over two million marijuana
plants, and confiscating over 4.5 million pills. Also, as a result of
this joint effort, 11,490 weapons, 4,357 vehicles and more than $213
million in cash were seized.
In addition to counterdrug support operations, Air and Army
National Guard aviation assets supported HLD and HLS operations as part
of a joint task force along the northern border during Operation Winter
Freeze. The success of that operation was to a great degree directly
related to the program personnel's long-standing experience with law
enforcement agencies.
During rescue and recovery operations in support of Hurricane
Katrina, our program played a major role. Thirty-five aircraft deployed
to the Gulf Coast from 25 different states. These aircraft performed
search and rescue operations and providing valuable photographic and
infrared reconnaissance to assist officials in determining damage
levels of the levees and the surrounding communities. In addition, the
program organized Task Force Counterdrug Light Assault Vehicle, a task
force comprised National Guard Soldiers and Airmen with Light Assault
Vehicles from Nebraska, Oregon, California, Tennessee, and Michigan.
These vehicles, which have an amphibious capability not commonly found
in Guard units but critically needed in the flooding following Katrina,
logged more than 800 hours and 6,000 miles and performed over 600
rescues.
TRANSFORMATION FOR THE 21ST CENTURY
Transformation to a Joint National Guard Bureau
The National Guard Bureau crafts the strategies that will result in
the implementation of the Secretary of Defense's guidance to improve
National Guard relevancy and support to the War on Terrorism, Homeland
Defense and Homeland Security. The National Guard Bureau has presented
an updated concept and implementation plan to achieve formal
recognition as a joint activity of the Department of Defense to the
services, a step that would formally establish the National Guard
Bureau as the Joint National Guard Bureau.
Joint Force Headquarters--State
The Joint Force Headquarters--State were established
(provisionally) in October, 2003 in each of the 50 states, the
Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, two U.S. Territories and the District of
Columbia, to reorganize the previously separate Army National Guard and
Air National Guard headquarters into a joint activity that exercises
command and control over all assigned, attached or operationally
aligned forces. These were formed in compliance with guidance from the
Secretary of Defense to forge new relationships that are more relevant
to the current environment between National Guard Bureau, the Office of
the Secretary of Defense and the Joint Staff with a primary focus on
improving Department of Defense access to National Guard capabilities.
The Services and the Director of the Joint Chiefs of Staff have
formerly approved the mission statement, and a Joint Operations Center
is now operating 24 hours a day, 365 days a year, in each Joint Force
Headquarters--State.
All Joint Force Headquarters--State were directly involved in
coordinating support for various disasters and emergencies this year to
include the recovery efforts following the 2005 Gulf Coast hurricanes.
Progress continues toward the goal of 54 fully operational Joint Force
Headquarters--State by September of 2006. ``Core'' Joint Mission
Essential Task Lists were customized to the task conditions and
standards necessary for each particular state, approved by the
respective Adjutant General, and loaded into the Joint Force
Headquarters--State Joint Training Plan. Draft Joint Training Plans are
complete for all Joint Force Headquarters--State to plan for, and
capture, joint training during exercises and real-world events. Many of
these headquarters' have already participated in Vigilant Shield and
Vigilant Guard homeland defense exercises. The remaining states are
scheduled for these exercises in 2006-2007.
Joint Combined State Strategic Plan
The Joint Combined State Strategic Plan is designed to categorize,
assess, and forecast future capabilities to support Joint Domestic
National Guard operations by providing the ability to track and assess
ten joint core capabilities needed to support Homeland Defense and
Homeland Security. They are: command and control, Civil Support Teams,
maintenance, aviation/airlift, engineer, medical, communications,
transportation, security, and logistics. This plan serves as both a
strategic tool and as an operational planning tool for the governor and
U.S. combatant commands. This program's potential for future
development coupled with its ability to track these vital competencies
makes the plan a decisive tool for continuing transformation of the
National Guard.
Recent Hurricane Katrina relief efforts highlight the importance of
having this information readily available. The National Guard was able
to identify and mobilize units based on current availability and
specific functional capability. In addition, individual states have
used the state based joint combined strategic plan to render support to
civil authorities during life threatening snowstorms and severe
flooding this past winter. As a dynamic program, the plan is undergoing
initiative enhancements to enable identification of additional,
individual state-specific capabilities. This will allow for tracking
specific situational response capabilities to hurricanes, tornadoes,
floods, mass casualties, and fires among others at the state and
regional level.
Joint Continental United States (CONUS) Communications Support
Environment (JCCSE)
U.S. Northern Command and the National Guard Bureau jointly
developed the JCCSE construct to address requirements for collaborative
information sharing and other command, control, communications, and
computer (C4) systems capabilities in the post 9/11 Homeland Defense
and Defense Support to Civil mission environment. The detailed, long-
term vision for the JCCSE is outlined in the joint U.S. Northern
Command and National Guard Bureau document, Joint CONUS Communications
Support Environment (JCCSE) Concept for Joint C4, October 15, 2005,
which defines JCCSE as, ``. . . the vital organizations and net-centric
information technology capabilities required by the National Guard to
support U.S. Northern Command, U.S. Pacific Command, U.S. Strategic
Command, U.S. Joint Forces Command, and other DOD and non-DOD partners
by extending interagency and intergovernmental trusted information
sharing and collaboration capabilities from the national level to the
state and territory and local levels, and to any incident site
throughout the United States and its territories.''
JCCSE is an umbrella construct that involves organizational and
process development as well as requisite supporting enhancements to
existing National Guard information technology capabilities. Due to the
ongoing threats to the U.S. homeland in the post 9/11 environment, NGB
took preemptive action to establish initial capabilities--the Interim
Satellite Incident Site Communications Set (ISISCS)--that are
geographically dispersed throughout the CONUS, as well as Hawaii, and
have proven invaluable in real world operations in support of
Department of Defense security missions and for disaster response
operations related to Hurricanes Ivan, Katrina, and Rita. When fully
implemented, JCCSE will provide robust state-federal net work
connectivity as well as national level management and integration of
long haul, tactical, and other DOD capabilities related to C4 systems.
JCCSE will provide U.S. Northern and U.S. Pacific Commands, NGB, and
the 54 Joint Force Headquarters--State with connectivity to any task
force headquarters location, staging area, or incident site. JCCSE will
be a major step forward in sharing information among federal, state,
local, tribal, private sector, and non-governmental entities for
incidents occurring in the states and territories related to HLD/DSCA
mission taskings, major disasters or emergencies, and catastrophic
incidents.
Open Source Information System
The Open Source Information System is a Virtual Private Network
used for open source research and sharing of unclassified, but
sensitive, information between the National Guard Bureau and all 54
Joint Force Headquarters--State, as well as other federal and DOD
agencies. This system provides sensitive community-based, law-
enforcement information at the lowest possible cost. The project is
demonstrating the significant value-added concept of sharing installed
technology with communities.
The National Guard Bureau, in partnership with the Army's Foreign
Military Studies Office at Fort Leavenworth, Kansas, has developed
training on the use of the Open Source Information System as well as
open source information research skills and methodologies. This effort
will provide the necessary tools for research and information sharing
at the unclassified level to ensure interoperability, reliability,
efficiency, operations security and economies of scale.
Homeland Security Joint Interagency Training Centers
The Joint Force Headquarters of each state must possess the ability
to establish one or more Joint Task Forces to support homeland defense.
Additionally, as a result of legislation enacted in 2004, the legal
authority exists to establish a Joint Task Force within each state
composed of both National Guard members in non-federal status and
active component military personnel. In order to better prepare
National Guard leaders for the challenges of ``dual-status'' Joint Task
Force command, the National Guard Bureau developed and implemented a
formal training program for senior leaders from every state and
territory. The dual-status Joint Task Force commander is a
transformational concept that leverages the unique capabilities
resident in the total force and strengthens unity of command in support
of the homeland defense mission.
National Guard Joint Interagency Training Centers were established
in October 2004 at Camp Dawson, West Virginia and in San Diego,
California. During fiscal year 2005, over 5,000 students from the
National Guard and its interagency partners attended training at the
centers. These training facilities conduct individual or collective
training and educate Department of Defense entities and federal, state,
and local authorities. The centers teach specialized courses in
Incident Management, Continuity of Government/Continuity of Operations
and Vulnerability Assessment. Areas of emphasis included protecting the
domestic population, U.S. territory, and critical infrastructure
against threats and aggression.
These centers provide homeland security training development and
delivery, and work to ensure training availability, quality, and
standardization. They serve the homeland security training needs of
National Guard units, specifically those with Homeland Defense, Civil
Support, and Emergency Preparedness missions. The centers will continue
to evolve through continuous and in-depth analysis of homeland security
training requirements. The training centers continue to be a critical
capability that achieves the homeland defense priorities of the
National Guard Bureau.
STATE ADJUTANTS GENERAL
Alabama--Major General (Ret) Crayton M. Bowen
Alaska--Major General Craig E. Campbell
Arizona--Major General David P. Rataczak
Arkansas--Major General Don C. Morrow
California --Major General William H. Wade, II
Colorado--Major General Mason C. Whitney
Connecticut--Brigadier General Thaddeus J. Martin
Delaware--Major General Francis D. Vavala
District of Columbia--Major General David F. Wherley, Jr.,
Commanding General
Florida--Major General Douglas Burnett
Georgia--Major General David B. Poythress
Guam--Major General Donald J. Goldhorn
Hawaii--Major General Robert G. F. Lee
Idaho--Major General Lawrence F. Lafrenz
Illinois--Major General (IL) Randal E. Thomas
Indiana--Major General R. Martin Umbarger
Iowa--Major General G. Ron Dardis
Kansas--Major General Tod M. Bunting
Kentucky--Major General Donald C. Storm
Louisiana--Major General Bennett C. Landreneau
Maine--Major General John W. Libby
Maryland--Major General Bruce F. Tuxill
Massachusetts--Brigadier General (MA) Oliver J. Mason, Jr.
Michigan--Major General Thomas G. Cutler
Minnesota--Major General Larry W. Shellito
Mississippi--Major General Harold A. Cross
Missouri--Major General (MO) King E. Sidwell
Montana--Major General Randall D. Mosley
Nebraska--Major General Roger P. Lempke
Nevada--Brigadier General (NV) Cynthia N. Kirkland
New Hampshire--Major General Kenneth R. Clark
New Jersey--Major General Glenn K. Rieth
New Mexico--Brigadier General (NM) Kenny C. Montoya
New York--Major General Joseph J. Taluto (Acting)
North Carolina--Major General William E. Ingram, Jr.
North Dakota--Major General Michael J. Haugen
Ohio--Major General Gregory L. Wayt
Oklahoma--Major General Harry M. Wyatt, III
Oregon--Major General Raymond F. Rees
Pennsylvania--Major General Jessica L. Wright
Puerto Rico--Colonel (Ret) Benjamin Guzman
Rhode Island--Brigadier General John L. Enright, Acting
South Carolina--Major General (Ret) Stanhope S. Spears
South Dakota--Major General Michael A. Gorman
Tennessee--Major General Gus L. Hargett, Jr.
Texas--Major General Charles G. Rodriguez
Utah--Major General Brian L. Tarbet
Vermont--Major General Martha T. Rainville
Virginia--Brigadier General Robert B. Newman, Jr.
Virgin Islands--Brigadier General (VI) Eddy G. L. Charles, Sr.
Washington--Major General Timothy J. Lowenberg
West Virginia--Major General Allen E. Tackett
Wisconsin--Major General Albert H. Wilkening
Wyoming--Major General Edward L. Wright
Senator Stevens. General Vaughn, we would be happy to have
your statement.
STATEMENT OF LIEUTENANT GENERAL CLYDE A. VAUGHN,
DIRECTOR, ARMY NATIONAL GUARD, DEPARTMENT
OF THE ARMY
General Vaughn. Chairman Stevens, Senator Inouye,
distinguished members of the subcommittee: General Blum has
adequately captured my statement. I will ask that it be read
into the record and I will just hit a couple points.
The States, territories, and the District of Columbia
continue to measure up and meet every mission as called by the
President or the Governors. We still today have over 50,000
mobilized on duty. A success story that is brewing up--and if I
could have that chart real quick so we can see this. We have
got a black line, I think that is big enough for all to see.
That is where our end strength is going.
We are on track to make 350,000. That end strength, as you
can see on there, turned down in late 2003, in October. Where
it stabilized and turned back up at the low point was June
2005, which is the point in time where we had the most people
that we have ever had, the most soldiers that we have ever had,
deployed. Now, that speaks to something. That speaks to a lot
of appreciation when these soldiers return home to their
communities. You have had a lot to do with that and we thank
you very much for your great and strong support. We are going
to make this end strength at the end of this year.
I look forward to your questions. Thank you very much.
Senator Stevens. Thank you very much, General.
Congratulations. That is good news.
General Ickes, we would be happy to have your comments.
STATEMENT OF MAJOR GENERAL CHARLES ICKES II, ACTING
DIRECTOR, AIR NATIONAL GUARD, DEPARTMENT OF
THE AIR FORCE
General Ickes. Thank you, sir. Mr. Chairman, members of the
subcommittee: I really appreciate this opportunity to address
you today.
By the way, with me today, one of our chiefs. Chief Arnold,
if you would stand up for a minute. He works for us at the
Guard Bureau. In June he will retire with nearly 41 years of
dedicated service to the Nation. He runs one of our strategic
initiatives divisions and he has been instrumental to me
personally in helping us set a path for the Air National Guard
into the future. This is typical of what the Air Guard brings
every day to the fight.
Chief, thank you for being with us.
Senator Stevens. Thank you very much.
General Ickes. I would certainly like to start by thanking
the subcommittee for not only your fantastic support, but to
tell you how important National Guard and Reserve equipment
appropriation (NGREA) is to us as we move forward in the Air
National Guard. The support that you give us in that area is
vital. It is vital because it allows us to do those
modernization and upgrading issues that we so vitally need. It
allows us to address those, and you have been so helpful in
that area and I cannot tell you how big of a positive impact
that has for us.
The Air National Guard is engaged in every mission set that
the United States Air Force has today. We are truly part of the
total force. We are involved whether it be airlift, alert, and
Hurricane Katrina-like operations, both outside the Continental
United States (OCONUS) and at home. We are totally engaged,
excited, and supportive of these mission areas.
During Hurricane Katrina and Rita last year, the vast
majority of the aircraft you would have seen flying during
those operations were Air National Guard units in support of
the Governors and the emergency management assistance compact
(EMAC) agreements and the compacts that are established. During
Katrina operations we flew 389 separate sorties in 1 day. We
flew nearly 3,000 sorties during that operation, supporting
General Vaughn, General Blum, and the Governors to meet the
needs of the Nation. I could not be prouder of those folks, and
all they have done.
Your assistance with the Air National Guard has been able
to help us with unique business practices to field precision
targeting pods, data links, and upgrade our numerous engine
requirements. Our currently deployed forces now possess the
ability to provide the combatant commanders (COCOMs) with
previously unseen and vital urban close air support (CAS), a
mission that a few years ago none of us were really that
prepared to do, but thanks to your support, we have been able
to make great strides in those mission areas.
In the future we seek modernization of our precision strike
capabilities, 24-hour combat ID, and enhanced survivability of
our large aircraft as we put large aircraft infrared
countermeasures (LAIRCOM) systems on them.
Last year's achievements underscore the critical needs to
maintain our ability to act as an operational force, but yet
still remain and maintain a strategic capability. We provide
surge for wartime needs, or for national emergencies, while
being operational at the same time. We maintain capability when
we are properly resourced, and we work that constantly with
everybody.
We fully support the President's budget, and we understand
that budgets are always tight. There are areas, though, that we
continue to look to address to make sure that we adequately
meet the needs of our 106,800 guardsmen. We have to be able to
continue to attract, recruit, and retain these individuals.
This year we will highlight recruiting and retention bonuses,
and the things that go with it, to allow us to be competitive
in a very competitive recruiting market.
We have already reallocated some funds this year to address
those needs. We are focusing on increased advertising,
storefront recruiting offices, administrative assistance to our
recruiters, and to capitalize on those programs that we have
already begun.
Some other things that are impacting us. In the 2005
National Defense Authorization Act, we were approved enhanced
authority for bonus programs, but we did not--we were not, able
to source adequately the funds. We are working to do that now.
Training is vital to both the current and future
capabilities of the Air National Guard. It is what makes us
special and unique. We need your help with this shortfall in
our training budgets.
We need to continue to focus on, as we transform the
National Guard along with the Air Force as part of the total
force team, those total force initiatives (TFI) are properly
funded and adequately resourced, so that we have new mission
sets for those organizations, much like Senator Bond addressed.
We are bringing on new capability as we speak, such as
Predator in Nevada, Arizona, California, Texas, and shortly in
North Dakota.
Those of us in the Air National Guard responsible for
keeping our traditional guardsmen trained and ready, our full-
time technicians, are concerned that they have been under
considerable strain. We are concerned about that force, but we
are addressing that, and are keeping our eye on it.
Another issue that has cropped up for us is contract
logistics support for some of the new weapon systems we are
bringing on board. We are finding more and more that we are
finding shortfalls in those areas for the C-130J, for C-17s,
and for the joint surveillance and target radar system (STARS)
unit down in Georgia.
Our depot maintenance program is only funded at about 75
percent, and that will continue to be a challenge because we
tend to fly legacy aircraft in the Air National Guard. We need
to maintain those. Older aircraft need a little bit more care
and feeding.
I just want to thank you once again for all your great
support. I want to thank you for all you have done in
recognizing the contributions of our guardsmen, and I stand
ready to answer any questions you may have. Thank you.
Senator Stevens. Thank you very much, General.
Senator Dorgan, each of us had an opening statement. Before
we start our 7 minutes each, would you like to have any opening
statement?
STATEMENT OF SENATOR BYRON L. DORGAN
Senator Dorgan. Mr. Chairman, I am sorry I was delayed. I
will defer. I would only say, I am sure as all of you have, how
much all of us appreciate the work that the Guard has done and
thank you for bringing some soldiers here to share their
stories with us. They are inspiring stories and talk once again
of service and commitment, duty, and honor. So thank you very
much.
And I will await my chance to ask questions.
Senator Stevens. Thank you, Senator.
NATIONAL GUARD AND RESERVES OPERATION TEMPO
General Blum, we have some statistics on the tempo of
operations for the Guard and Reserve. Are you planning any
special initiatives to try to deal with and manage the high
operations tempo?
General Blum. Yes, Mr. Chairman, we are. We are working
very closely with the Department of the Army and the Air Force
to give our citizen-soldiers and airmen a predictable model of
when they, their families, and their employers can expect to be
called to extended active duty. I am not talking about for
local disasters. They could get called out tonight; they
understand that.
For extended deployments in the air expeditionary force or
in the army force generation model, we are moving every day
closer to a predictable model that will allow an Army National
Guardsman to know that once he has done an extended tour in
Iraq, Afghanistan, somewhere else overseas, or here at home
necessary and required for the defense of the Nation, he would
probably be reasonably guaranteed a dwell time between 5 and 6
years before he was called again from the States to go
overseas.
I think the employers will tolerate that. We think the
families will tolerate that, and indications are from our
service members that they find that is an acceptable model that
they can live with. It also meets our regeneration model is
practicable because we generally replenish our units at a rate
of about 18 percent a year, which over 5 years means that you
would not put an undue or unfair burden on a family, an
employer, or a single guardsmen that they would not be
otherwise willing, ready, and able to bear.
Senator Stevens. I am not going to mention the individual,
but I was contacted by an individual, a member of the Reserve,
I think it was, who I was told the person had served in Iraq,
returned home, and thought that was it, and entered a special
program for advancement that was really not employment, it was
more like an internship, the paid type of upgrading process,
then was served another notice to go back to Iraq. If he does
that he loses his promotional capability and he does not have a
job now, like he did when he went over before.
Now, are you set up so these individual circumstances can
be examined on request of individual members if they are called
up as quickly as that?
General Blum. Mr. Chairman, in the National Guard of the
United States Army and Air Force the adjutants general in each
State are empowered to make those type of decisions.
Senator Stevens. This is Reserve now. That is you, is it
not?
General Blum. Well, sir, I only have the National Guard
under me. The second panel could probably address that better,
but we recognize that as an issue. None of us--I do not want to
speak for any of the Reserve chiefs that come behind me, but
none of us want any of our reservists, whether the Guard or
Reserve, to be punished because of their service, or to be
unduly called to the service of their Nation repeatedly and
unnecessarily.
In the Guard we have empowered the Adjutants General to
ensure that any soldier that did not want to willingly re-serve
again sooner than 5 years would. In fact, soldiers have the
ability to cross-level and get some other person with the same
specialty or skill set to take their place, so that we do not
put an unfair burden on any of our citizen-soldiers.
I think the other Reserve chiefs will tell you how they do
it in theirs, but that is how we do it in the Guard. I push
that down to the State and local level.
NATIONAL GUARD END STRENGTH AND FORCE STRUCTURE
Senator Stevens. Have you had any negotiations with the
service secretaries, the chiefs of staff, concerning end
strengths and force structure changes that you have not
discussed here now?
General Blum. That we have not discussed here, Mr.
Chairman? No. We have had very candid--what I share with this
subcommittee I share with the service secretaries. I do not
change my story. We have told Secretary Harvey and Secretary
Wynne, the Secretary of the Army and the Air Force, that the
Army and Air National Guard will meet their end strength and
they will do it in the next calendar year. I am absolutely
confident that the trend that General Vaughn showed you on that
chart is a very healthy and real trend.
We also, I might add, have the highest percentage of
deployable forces within the Army and Air National Guard we
have ever had in the history of the Army and Air National
Guard. These are not hollow numbers. These are real deployable
citizen-soldiers. By the end of this year we will have 350,000
of those in the Army and about 106,700 of those in the Air
Force, in the Air Guard.
Senator Stevens. The President's budget said 333,000. The
Army Secretary testified that he thought you would go up to
350,000. Is that the agreement now?
General Blum. The agreement is that they will fund us to
350,000. The agreement was that they would restore all of the
money that was taken out as a result of program decisions
memorandum (PDM), which was--and I do not want to get this to
the penny, but it is roughly $189 million in personnel, $219
million in operation and maintenance (O&M), and about $63
million in the defense health program that they absolutely are
committed to restore to our coffers.
Senator Stevens. What about the Air Force? We have got an
overall reduction in strength of 40,000 in the future years
defense plan (FYDP), I am told.
General Blum. That is correct, sir. That is supposed to
take effect in 2008 and we are under very serious
negotiations--and that is the word, negotiations,
collaboration--with the Department of the Air Force, because I
cannot understand, nor can they adequately describe to me how
that manpower bill was determined. They realize that there is a
flaw in the calculation, and they are working with us to
determine exactly what that manpower build really needs to be.
It may be that the Air National Guard needs to be smaller.
It may be that the Air National Guard needs to remain the same
or it actually may need--we may actually need to grow. An
informal manpower study that we have run--and we have asked the
Air Force to validate it and run their own for us--actually
shows us being a growth of 12,000 to 19,000 to do all of the
missions that the Air Force wants the Air Guard to do.
We are not saying they are right, we are not saying they
are wrong. We are saying we are going to work together with
them. We have the time before 2008 to get the numbers right and
to get the size of the Air Guard right for this Nation and for
the United States Air Force. Secretary Wynne and General Mosely
have pledged their commitment to work with the Air National
Guard leadership on this.
Senator Stevens. Thank you very much.
Senator Inouye.
EQUIPMENT FUNDING
Senator Inouye. General Blum, last September a report was
issued indicating that there was a need for $20 billion for the
Army National Guard and $5 billion for the Air National Guard
for equipment. The Congress responded by providing $1 billion.
Can you tell us what your long-term plans are?
General Blum. Senator Inouye, we will work with the
leadership of the United States Army. The United States Army is
challenged in this area as well. It is not unique to the Guard.
It is worse for us in the Guard because we started at a lower
level of equipping to begin with, so we are further in the
hole, so to speak. They understand that.
General Schoomaker and Secretary Harvey have appeared and
testified to other subcommittees of Congress and the Senate and
they have repeatedly assured us that there is $21 billion in
the planning and operational maintenance (POM), in the future
year defense plan (FYDP), in the budget, to address these
issues for the Army National Guard. Frankly, they understate
their contribution because there is about another $2 billion in
there in aviation modernization. When you put it together there
is almost $23 billion of good faith in the budget that the Army
has in place to improve the equipment situation that exists in
the Army National Guard.
It is right now about as dire as I have seen it here at
home in modern history but the other side of the coin is that
we have the best equipped, best led, best trained force
overseas right now that this Nation has ever fielded. That
includes Active, Guard, and Reserve. It is truly seamless when
you get overseas.
The problem is that we have cross-leveled what we did not
have now for 4\1/2\ years to ensure that the soldiers that go
overseas have exactly what they need to do their job and that
has depleted our stocks here at home. We are seriously looking
at strategies to replenish those stocks of supplies and
equipment. The United States Army leadership, particularly
General Schoomaker and Secretary Harvey, have expressed their
absolute commitment to making that a reality.
EQUIPMENT READINESS
Senator Inouye. General Blum, there seems to be a common
practice that when your troops, the Air and the Army National
Guard, leave Afghanistan and Iraq they leave back their
equipment. Obviously, from my standpoint it would affect
readiness and I would think that it would make them unable to
meet their State needs. But it is a common practice.
I am just wondering, what do you think about that?
General Blum. Senator Inouye, you are absolutely correct.
The National Guard is often asked to leave the equipment that
we cross-leveled and ensured that the soldiers would have when
they left the United States. We are often asked to leave that
in theater, in place, in Iraq and Afghanistan. That is a good
thing to do, in my judgment, because it saves lots of time and
millions and millions of dollars in moving equipment back and
forth.
I fully support leaving the equipment in theater. What I
think needs to be addressed is the unintended consequence of
leaving us uncovered with equipment back here at home to train.
We have the most experienced force that we have ever had; 60
percent of our force now is combat veterans. They are used to
having equipment in their hands that is modern and capable, and
if they are going to stay with us, if we are going to be able
to retain these skilled, experienced people, we are going to
have to have equipment to train and keep them--keep the edge on
their capabilities.
We are also going to need that equipment to train the new
people that we are recruiting. We need the nonlethal equipment,
the trucks, the medical sets, the communications, aviation, the
engineer equipment, that are absolutely vital if we are going
to be able to do our homeland defense and homeland support
missions when we are called upon to support agencies such as
the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) or the
Department of Homeland Security (DHS). Whether we are called
out by the Governor or we are called out by the President, we
are going to need that equipment.
The problem has been we have not paid sufficient attention
to re-equipping or resetting the force back here at home fast
enough for that domestic mission to have equipment to train
with and to have equipment to respond to natural disasters or
terrorist events here in the United States.
Senator Inouye. You are not getting it?
General Blum. Sir?
Senator Inouye. You are not getting it?
General Blum. We are starting to get it now. I think that
the senior leadership of the Army and the Air Force understand
the urgency to do this now. They are, I think, genuinely
committed to helping us remedy this problem. It will not get
fixed overnight, however, Senator. It is going to take--it is
going to take, frankly, years. My issue is that I do not know
if we have years. Sooner is better for me, because this is not
equipment that it is nice to have; it is essential to have. We
may need it as soon as the next 60 days in the southeastern
part of our Nation for the hurricane season that is beginning.
NATIONAL GUARD ROLE IN THE QUADRENNIAL DEFENSE REVIEW
Senator Inouye. The recent Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR)
came forth with a new force structure plan which drastically
changes your force structure. Did you have any role to play in
this or was it just imposed upon the Guard?
General Blum. We did not play a very effective role in it,
let us put it that way, Senator. General Schoomaker and
Secretary Harvey have both testified that it could have been
done better. They are committed to making sure that it is done
better in the future and that we are not as surprised as we
were last time.
Senator Inouye. Time does not permit it, but can you
provide this subcommittee how you would do it better?
General Blum. Well, sir, I will try to simplify it. If I am
going to play football on a football team, it is nice to get
called to the huddle if you are going to know what play you are
supposed to run. They are committed to making sure that we get
called to all of the huddles, not just some of them.
Senator Inouye. So you did not have a huddle?
General Blum. I am sure there was a huddle. I am not sure
that we were in the huddle.
Senator Inouye. Thank you very much, sir.
Senator Stevens. Well put, General. I think we are going to
try to deal with that.
Senator Burns.
Senator Burns. How does it feel like to be General
Carpenter and be the lonesome end, if you remember those days.
General Blum. Yes, sir, I do.
AIR NATIONAL GUARD F-15 MODERNIZATION
Senator Burns. We have already covered--Senator Inouye
already covered some--one of my questions, and that was the
equipment, and we understand that our 163d is coming back,
about 35 percent of their equipment, and there being a real
bind in replacing some of that equipment. I am certainly glad
you are taking care of that.
General Ickes, I am kind of concerned about, you said a
while ago on your budget that the President has set down--as
you know, we are converting in Montana from 16's to 15's, and I
did not see any real strong funding for modernizing the new F-
15C's that we are getting up there. To be more specific, there
is a piece of equipment called the active electronically
scanned array radar (AESAR). Is that being addressed or are we
going to have to--are we going to have to take care of that?
Senator Bond. Yes.
Senator Burns. You and me are going to do that? Me and you,
huh? Okay. We killed a bear; paw shot him.
But I would still like for you to address that situation.
General Ickes. Yes, sir. I believe the Air Force does
believe that it is a--the AESAR radar, as it is addressed, is a
major enhancement to the capability of the F-15. Our concern
remains if the Air Guard, which has 100 percent of the fixed
alert facilities in the United States and is given that
responsibility to protect the sovereign skies of the United
States, we ought to probably have the best equipment on our
aircraft to meet that mission set.
As there are certain potential threats that come down the
road in the future, we want to make sure that we can adequately
address that. Congress did appropriate some money and we are in
the process right now of addressing $50 million some across the
F-15 fleet within the Air National Guard. That certainly will
not address anywhere near enough of the aircraft, the F-15's
within the Air National Guard. So as we address a modernization
road map, that is certainly one of the things that our F-15
community has spoken to as something they think would be vital
to be relevant into the future.
So yes, sir, there is money out there now.
Senator Burns. Well, I thank you for that response and we
will be following this very closely. I would also say that the
northern border unit that we have now going in up there of
course we are going to be looking at. It is getting itself in
place up there right now. I will not be here for the second
panel, but I want the subcommittee to know that our Red Horse
Brigade that operates out of Montham is a hybrid force. It has
both Reserves and regulars in it. In fact, the first commander,
commanding officer of that brigade, was a Reserve officer.
This kind of a blend of people has helped us in our force
and it works. There are some folks that say that they are a
little skeptical about the cooperation and how each one of us
is looked at. So that has worked up there, and of course I
think we will see probably more of that both probably as far as
the Army, the boots on the ground, and kind of people will also
be a hybrid type of organization.
But I am still concerned about the equipment, the
replacement of that equipment for our folks to train. We are
moving into a fire season in Montana. I do not think we will
have a huge fire season this year. We have got more than
adequate moisture, which we thank the Lord for, and we will
move on. But we will be monitoring these kind of situations.
General, maybe we should sit down and talk about those kind of
things as far as the Air Guard is concerned and your concerns
there.
I appreciate your good leadership on this. With that, that
is the only question that I have and I would yield the floor,
and thank you very much for coming and your testimony.
Senator Stevens. Thank you very much, Senator.
Senator Mikulski.
EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS FOR NATURAL DISASTERS
Senator Mikulski. Many of my questions have been covered,
about equipment and some other issues. I want to get to the
question of, were you in the huddle, General Blum, not about
the QDR, but about emergency planning in terms of our response
to natural disasters.
Let me get to my point. Both panelists and you have said
that hurricane season starts June 1, fire season. Each State
has its own natural disaster propensities. The Guard, both Army
and Air Force, were valiant during Katrina and worked at an
incredible tempo. Your testimony, General Ickes, just speaks
for itself. Behind every number is a person and a family.
So my question is this. I am worried that we are not
prepared again. We keep moving people around. We keep moving
boxes around. But the question is: Are we prepared? In getting
ready for both hurricane season and natural disasters, has
there been a real plan established where there would be a
disaster of such horrific proportion, like Katrina was, for the
way the National Guard will be organized, mobilized, the
prepositioned materials, et cetera?
I am worried about hurricanes. I am worried if avian flu
does come to America it will be the National Guard that will
have to maintain civic order, perhaps even the quarantine of
our own people. Could you tell me, are you in the huddle? Are
we being prepared? Because I think you have the right stuff. I
am just concerned that we do not have the right organizational
mechanism to mobilize our response the way we need to be
mobilized.
General Blum. Senator Mikulski, let me assure you that our
excellent response last year, which was historic in its scope
and speed, unprecedented in military history of the world to a
natural disaster, will be better this year if needed because,
frankly, you have given us $800 million, your subcommittee has
given us $800 million. We have spent that on equipment on
exactly what we told you we needed to respond better this year.
Last year we had three deployable command and control
satellite communications systems deployed. This year we will
have 19----
Senator Mikulski. General, it is not only about equipment.
You know, the response to Katrina was late, uneven, disjointed.
There was a lack of a national command and control structure.
When a State's own responses are so overwhelmed by the nature
of the disaster, only a national response can come in. As you
know as guardsmen and someone under the doctrine of mutual
assistance, has that been rectified?
General Blum. I cannot with absolute certainty say it has
been rectified. I can tell you that we have had avian flu
exercises this year. We have had multiple hurricane exercises
this year. I am gratified by the fact that more people are
coming to the huddle that you describe than we used to see
coming to the huddle, including FEMA. We have a big one coming
up on May 17 with all of the National Guard leadership in FEMA.
Senator Mikulski. Who would be in charge?
General Blum. Well, absolutely it would be the Governor of
the State where the hurricane occurs initially, and then if
they request Federal assistance who will be in charge will be
designated by the administration and the Department of Homeland
Security. It could very well be FEMA. It would be very likely
that it would be----
Senator Mikulski. Then how would you be mobilized for a
national response? What the Air Force did is beyond a local
National Guard and they themselves might have been killed. The
base might have been destroyed. Their families will be in
disarray or evacuating.
General Blum. From the uniformed side, we will--I will
absolutely tell you that the situational awareness or the
information sharing between the United States Northern Command
and the National Guard has improved and will be better this
year than it was last year. You will also see an improved
communication and sharing of information with the Joint Staff
of the Department of Defense this year. Better than it was in
the early stages last year. You will even see better
communication between the adjutants general and the supporting
States with one another than they did, even as compared to how
extraordinarily well they did last year.
We have learned a lot of things the hard way last hurricane
season. We hope to do better on many of those things this year.
I will never say that we are absolutely prepared because you
never know exactly what we are going to be facing, but we are
better prepared than we were last year as an inter-agency
coordinated effort.
I do not know if that adequately answers your question.
Senator Mikulski. Well, it does, but you need to know I
worry about it.
General Blum. Well, you should, you should.
Senator Mikulski. We can talk more about it or even
privately about it, because I think both the Army and the Air
Force, and then coupled with our Coast Guard, were fantastic.
But you need to be able to have the response at the right time.
RETENTION IN THE ARMY NATIONAL GUARD
Army retention. One of the issues I think, is the retention
of the noncommissioned officers (NCO's) or at the sergeant
level a significant challenge? Because no matter how well we
recruit, you need an officer corps, and it's the NCO that seems
to play such a part in both training and even the social glue
of individual units in our States. Am I right in that analysis,
and how are we doing on retaining them?
General Vaughn. I think you are exactly right, Senator. We
are very proud of our retention inside the Army Guard. It goes
back to those units that have been deployed and done very
meaningful things. You know what we are faced with with our
recruiting situation. We are going to have the youngest
National Guard that we have ever had, but we are also going to
have the most combat veterans we have ever had.
Every place we go, we see folks that would have--we see
soldiers really that would have left the force except for one
thing: They wanted to go with their unit on a deployment. When
you were talking about folks that went back the second time a
while ago, there are 1,000 soldiers out of Minnesota that went
with the 1st of the 34th that did not have to go.
Now, what we are seeing is those soldiers when they come
back--normally they would not have been in anyway, but they
extended, and what they are telling us is they will stay with
us to groom that next level of leadership in the NCO corps
before they leave. That is all we are asking them to do,
because we are going to have a very young force.
I think we are doing real well in retention. We thank this
subcommittee for all of that help. Across the Army we are doing
well. Thank you.
Senator Mikulski. Thank you.
Mr. Chairman, I have other questions. I know others will be
asked. My time is up. I would just like to comment to the Air
Force. I have a very keen interest in military medicine that
the leadership of the subcommittee is aware of. I think the
advances we have made in Iraq at limiting both mortality and
morbidity has been fantastic. It is because of not only the new
battlefield techniques, but because of what the Air Force does,
from lifting the soldier from the battlefield to the hospital
in Iraq or Afghanistan and to Germany.
I think it has been a story that has not been told, and
every physician, including the civilian community, is amazed at
the brilliance of it and the medical ingenuity. But it could
not be done without the Air Force doing the heavy lifting. So a
very, very, very special thanks.
Senator Stevens. Thank you, Senator.
Let me remind Senators we have another panel and we have a
vote starting at, two votes starting at 12 noon.
Senator Bond.
Senator Bond. Mr. Chairman, I have agreed to yield to
Senator Domenici for one quick question.
HOLLARAN AIR FORCE BASE: F-22 CONSTRUCTION
Senator Domenici. One question. My question has to do with
Holloman Air Force Base and the fact that the F-22's are
scheduled to be assigned there. As you know, at the other
assignments the Air National Guard flies the F-22's in
conjunction with the regular Air Force. My question is how will
the New Mexico National Guard be used for operating the F-22
squadrons at Holloman?
General Ickes. Yes, sir, Senator. As a matter of fact, 2
weeks ago I was in discussions with The Adjutant General (TAG)
and his staff down in New Mexico to how we best leverage those
great Air Guardsmen down there to move into the F-22 mission.
Much like we are going to be and we are in Virginia and Hawaii.
We have great opportunities in the F-22. What we are
looking at is how we can come up with a concept that will allow
the unit to be able to recruit and retain down at Holloman and
be a vital part of that mission. We have found at Langley with
the folks that we have put in the F-22. The Air Force is
ecstatic about the skill sets that we are bringing the
experience in both our air crew and our maintainers. We are
looking for the best way to do that.
I would tell you that it will be something like a
detachment-type (DET) of construct probably initially. It
probably will not be a full-up robust unit down there
initially, just because of how we will sustain a full-up unit
down there. The TAG is very eager to look at organizational
constructs that would work to get the New Mexico Guard into
that.
Senator Bond. Thank you very much, General Ickes.
NATIONAL GUARD SEAT ON THE JOINT CHIEFS OF STAFF
General Blum, what does the National Guard represent now in
terms of percentage of the total force?
General Blum. About 32 percent of the total capability of
the United States Army and about 34 percent of the total
capability of the United States Air Force.
Senator Bond. Can you tell me how many hold the rank of
general and lieutenant general respectively in the active duty
Army and in the Air Force?
General Blum. No, sir, I am not prepared to give you that
number right now.
Senator Bond. I think in the Army there are 12 generals and
49 lieutenant generals, the Air Force 13 generals and 37
lieutenant generals.
The National Guard has how many generals and how many
lieutenant generals?
General Blum. We do not have any generals and, as far as
lieutenant generals, we have----
Senator Bond. Three.
General Blum [continuing]. Three.
Senator Bond. So that is zero percent of the full generals,
3 percent of the lieutenant generals, although you comprise
over 30 percent of the force. Should we increase the grade
authorization of the Chief National Guard Bureau (CNGB) to four
star in order to provide him or her a seat at the Joint Chiefs
of Staff (JCS), thus giving the Guard a stronger voice?
General Blum. Is that a direct question to me, sir?
Senator Bond. Is that a--yes. Should we?
General Blum. It would be probably inappropriate for me to
comment and my feelings on that really do not matter. Those
decisions really need to be decided in other places. What I
have got to do is decide how to do the job with the tools I
have in front of me.
Senator Bond. I understand the Department of Defense
position. Do you have a personal opinion on which you can give
me some guidance?
General Blum. Well, sir, if you are asking me would it aid
a future chief in their ability to do the job, I think that is
certainly worthy of very serious consideration. However, it
would be inappropriate for me to discuss that because I am
currently in that position.
Senator Bond. We understand that and we take that into
account.
But let me just, a couple points and I want to see if I
have got these correct. Since 9/11 the role of the Guard has
become more important to the security of the Nation. In
response to 9/11, Congress created an Assistant Secretary of
Defense and the Department of Homeland Security, but did not
establish any formal connection between those entities and the
National Guard Bureau (NGB), and under the current law the NGB
is still limited to serving as a channel of communication
between the services and it has no formal connection to the
Joint Chiefs of Staff, no voice of its own inside the Joint
Chiefs of Staff.
Is that a correct statement of the structure?
General Blum. Sir, if you look at--this question I am more
comfortable to address, frankly, because it is not tied to an
incumbent or anything like that. The U.S. Code right now
establishes in law the job of the Chief of the National Guard
Bureau. It is restricted to a channel of communication between
the States and the Chief of Staff of the Army and the Air Force
and the Secretary of the Army and the Air Force. It does not
recognize any direct connection to the Department of Defense.
It does not establish any connection to the Joint Staff. It
does not reflect any that Goldwater-Nichols changes.
We were completely excluded from that and obviated from
those reforms. We are still left in the 1947 construct. We are
a unique organization that is still viewed through policy,
regulation, authorities, and resources largely as a strategic
reserve. Yet we are an operational force today and will be a
more and more essential operational force in the future.
So I would say the policies, the regulations, the
authorities, and the resources need to seriously be looked at
to bring them into line with an operational force that is
unique, in all of DOD; and that has shared responsibilities
with the dual mission for both the governors and the President.
Senator Bond. As we have discussed, this year the Army
through the Pentagon sent Congress a budget proposal which
reduced the size, proposed reducing the size of the Army Guard
force structure, holding back some of the manpower funding
based on recruiting downturns. I believe that senior Army
leadership has acknowledged the fact in congressional testimony
these decisions were made without full and complete
consultation with the States or the adjutants general. Is that
a fair statement?
General Blum. Yes, sir, and that has been the testimony of
the Secretary of the Army and the Chief of Staff of the Army.
Senator Bond. We have also heard from the subcommittee
previously in BRAC consultations the Air Guard was left out of
making what I consider, I have already stated, is a very bad
decision. When hurricane--well, when you have four-star
generals making decisions like this, from what little I know
about military discipline, a three-star general listens to a
four-star general, the four-star general gives the orders to
three-star generals. Is that a fair account of the structure?
General Blum. Yes, sir, that is the way it is set up to
work and it works very well.
Senator Bond. That is why we want to change it.
When Hurricane Katrina struck, the biggest military
deployment response effort was conducted, not by the Department
of Defense, but States sending National Guards under the
emergency management assistance compact and set up specialized
informed dialogue between the States and the Federal
Government.
Even though the National Guard Bureau had no formal
connection to the Department of Defense or the White House, you
were in fact called upon to give advice and provide
coordination, were you not?
General Blum. Absolutely, particularly after the first 24
to 36 hours.
Senator Bond. I understand the National Guard Bureau has
been in the forefront of cutting edge ideas, like the joint
force headquarters, State chem-bio response, National Guard
quick reaction. You have pioneered these capabilities as
America needs them. But I understand it has been slow to get
DOD funding, at least in part because the National Guard Bureau
does not have a formal mandate to develop unique capabilities
such as this. Is that correct?
General Blum. That is fair, sir. That is a fair statement.
That is accurate.
Senator Bond. I will say that I will make a statement that
adding a four-star general will not endanger national security.
Thank you, General Ickes. Following up on the comment made
by Senator Mikulski, our congressional delegation (CODEL) to
Iraq and Afghanistan, we were flying a National Guard C-130,
supposedly going directly to Kabul. We detoured to Kandahar,
picked up a severely injured Afghan officer. They established a
field hospital on the C-130, dropped him at Bagram Air Base,
and we saw how magnificent the work of the National Guard,
Wyoming Guard flying in Rhode Island aircraft.
Thank you.
Senator Stevens. Thank you very much.
Senator Dorgan.
Senator Dorgan. Mr. Chairman, thank you.
TOTAL FORCE INTEGRATION AND NORTH DAKOTA
General Ickes, I wonder if you could update me on the plans
for the 119th, the Happy Hooligans in Fargo?
General Ickes. Well, sir, right now what we are trying to
figure out in the Air Guard, working with the Air Force, is--
and General Blum has alluded to it--there is a myriad of
requirements that we are looking to fill, capability that we
want to bring. That drives us to somewhere to around 112,000 to
119,000 guardsmen.
But yet we understand when we start matching resources to
requirements there will be some adjustments made. So now what
we are trying to figure out in this total force initiative is
what are we going to be able to do.
For North Dakota specifically, Predator is, the unmanned
air vehicle (UAV) systems are on their way to North Dakota. We
will be standing that up shortly. I was in discussion with the
TAG this morning about the bridge missions for the State to
make sure that we have a bridge capability. General Blum has
committed to them being our first joint cargo aircraft
organization. So we are working for a way that we do not lose
that flying capability in the organization, and we will be
discussing that more today.
But we are trying to figure out, are we going to have
adequate resources to stand up this new total force integration
capability as we go into the future? We have the people, we
have the missions. We have just got to make sure resources
match that, and training.
Senator Dorgan. Well, the administration's budget proposal
to cut the Air Guard by roughly 14,000 over 5 years, how will
that affect the total force integration? How might it affect
the total force integration?
General Ickes. It will have a big impact, sir, if we have
to meet that requirement. General Blum has been working close--
we work close with General Wood, the head programmer of the Air
Force. We are trying to figure out how to move into new
transformational organizations so that we can find some
efficiencies.
But our concern is that, as we have done some preliminary
studies, the Guard--there is enough capability and requirement
for more than we have today. Now we have to prioritize and then
figure out, what are we going to be able to do? It is going to
be a challenge for us as we move into the future.
We understand the Air Force's needs to modernize the fleet.
We want to be part of that. We will be part of that. But there
are some challenges.
Senator Dorgan. The flying mission, the Happy Hooligans,
the 119th, the bridge you are talking about there might be some
C-130's, is that correct?
General Blum. Yes, it might, Senator. But we may even have
a better solution that we are going to discuss on that with the
Governor today. Actually, later today we will meet with the
Governor. We have been able to come up with another option that
we would like North Dakota to consider that may be even,
frankly, better than that.
But if nothing better than that develops, then we will
probably do what we have discussed and that would be the C-130
bridge.
LENGTH OF DEPLOYMENT
Senator Dorgan. Let me ask, General Blum. One of the issues
with respect to the National Guard in my State and others when
they are deployed is that generally speaking, while they are
citizen-soldiers, have jobs, homes, families they are leaving
to go, in many cases now to deployment in Iraq, they are taken
on their deployment and gone in many cases 14, 16, in some
cases 18 months. Active duty soldiers when deployed in most
cases leave their base station here in the United States and
are gone 12 months and back.
So the fact is the citizen-soldiers here are gone from home
the longest. Tell me, are you working through--I know that you
addressed some of that earlier this morning. Are you working
through ways to reduce that time away from home for the
deployments for the Guard?
General Blum. The short answer is yes, sir, we are. If you
want more detail, I will tell you how we are doing it.
Senator Dorgan. If you would, yes.
General Blum. There are several factors there that are
involved. One is the mobilization piece. When they are called
up they have to be given the equipment they did not have, they
have to be given the training that they did not receive, they
have to get processed for all of the dental and medical issues
that were not resourced or covered previously because they were
a strategic reserve.
As you bring them in to make them an operational force, it
takes time and resources to do that. That extends the time.
All soldiers in the United States Army spend 1 year boots
on the ground right now. General Schoomaker and the Army
leadership is committed to shortening that as fast as they
possibly can, but right now they are unable to do that. We do
not want to look unaccessible or unreliable. We want to remain
an essential, integral part of the United States Army and Air
Force. We serve overseas the same length of time as the active
duty people.
The additional time you are talking about is the time that
could be shortened if equipment were in the hands and training
were in the hands of the reservists or the national guardsmen
before they were called. That would dramatically shorten the
time. The active duty people still do training before they
deploy as well and I do not take any quarrel with that at all.
There is always specialized training required. But this time
could be shortened through process and resource.
EQUIPMENT, WEAR AND DEPLETION
Senator Dorgan. In my remaining minute and a half, let me
ask about equipment. There has been a lot of stories and a lot
of evaluation about just plain wearing out of equipment. We
have a very large emergency supplemental bill on the floor of
the Senate now. Much of that is to try to replace equipment
that is wearing out. We are using that equipment much more
heavily than was anticipated.
Tell me what you are facing with that equipment situation?
General Blum. Exactly the same issues, except it is
exacerbated because we started with less than all of the
equipment we were supposed to have to begin with. As I said
earlier, the entire United States Army has this problem. It is
not unique to the Guard or the Reserves, but the Guard and the
Reserves have a more significant problem because they were
underresourced at the beginning and as the resources are
depleted that pushes you further and further in the hole.
I do not know if that is adequate for your answer, but that
is the overall big picture.
Senator Dorgan. It is a pretty serious problem, I think.
General Blum. Oh, it is an incredible problem for the
United States Army over the total Army, not just the Guard, but
the Guard suffers disproportionately because we started lower
on our inventory to begin with.
Senator Dorgan. General Vaughn, General Blum, General
Ickes, thank you very much for being here.
Senator Stevens. Thank you, Senator.
Senator Leahy.
Senator Leahy. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
NATIONAL GUARD SEAT ON THE JOINT CHIEFS OF STAFF
I am pleased all the witnesses are here. I have read the
testimony. Unfortunately, we are at Judiciary at the same time.
I know much of my questions have already been asked.
We look over the past year and we have seen troops from our
National Guard providing upward of 50 percent of the troops in
Iraq. We know the National Guard provided perhaps the best
response of the Government to Hurricane Katrina, and General
Blum and I have talked about these matters before.
A lot of us were very disappointed to see the Army and the
Air Force attempt to cut the end strength of the National Guard
on purely budget grounds without considering they have broad
responsibilities. Senator Bond has already discussed this, but
he and I are co-chairs of the Guard Caucus and we fought these
cuts very hard. We have actually 73 members in a time when,
unfortunately, the Senate has become far more partisan than
what the three of us are used to as more senior members here.
This was a strong showing of bipartisanship, 73 Senators
joining the letter to the Secretary opposing this.
I kind of look at the National Guard as a 21st century
fighting force with a kind of 19th century organizational chart
or flow chart. I think the interesting thing is how well you
have worked around some of those obstacles. That is why Senator
Bond and I are introducing the National Defense Enhancement and
Guard Empowerment Act of 2006, which has been discussed.
General Blum, you were circumspect in your answers to
Senator Bond on that. I do not want to pressure, but tell me
this. Would your successor be in a better position to address
the needs of the Guard if the chief sat on the Joint Chiefs of
Staff?
General Blum. I would have to say that that would be a more
advantageous position to have your points, your agenda, and
your voice heard. I would think, I would think that it could
not be anything other than an advantage for someone to be in
that position. I can see no disadvantage for a future chief.
You could not provide him a better platform to have his voice
heard, let me at least put it to you that way.
You are asking me a very awkward question.
Senator Leahy. I understand. I had a follow-up on that,
which I will not ask because that would be even more awkward.
I have not heard anybody on this panel try to dissuade
Senator Bond and me from going forward. I had an interesting
discussion with the Secretary of Defense where he disagrees
with us and in fact made his position very clear. I however
made mine very clear. And he and I have known each other for
well over 30 years and we sometimes agree and when we disagree
we are never so shy that we refrain from letting each other
know where we disagree.
Let me ask you this. The Army and the Air Force when they
were putting forward the request for cutting the Guard's force
structure by 17,000 and 14,000 respectively, were you or your
two chief deputies involved in the deliberations and
decisionmaking?
General Blum. I think it has been testified before by
myself, Secretary Harvey, General Schoomaker, the Chief of
Staff of the Army, that that entire episode could have been
done and handled much better. There is a definite commitment
amongst the senior leadership of the United States Army and the
Guard Bureau to make sure that we speak with one voice and that
we move forward, from what has been a very ugly and consistent
past history that is well known by all the members of this
subcommittee. This is not a new development. This is a pattern,
a historical pattern, that we are trying to get away from. We
are trying to move forward in a new, more positive direction
with the current leadership.
But the history is replete with examples where the Guard
and Reserve leadership were informed more than they were
involved.
MISSION READINESS
Senator Leahy. Well, what bothers me is that also it comes
down almost like you are doing it with a slide rule on money
and ignoring mission. I am more interested in looking first at
what the mission is and then determining whether we can fulfill
the mission. I think it sort of goes the other way around, and
I think that is unfortunate.
We have seen a broadly expanded mission in Iraq and
Afghanistan. I certainly see it from my little State of
Vermont, that we have had on a per capita basis one of the
highest, if not the highest, number of casualties in the
country. We certainly have not found anybody who has refused to
go. They are there. They salute and off they go. And I am told
by those who have visited from outside our State that
Vermonters have handled themselves extremely well.
General Blum. Yes, sir, they have.
Senator Leahy. But I think that could be said of a whole
lot of States. And I also know that our regular Army and Air
Force have done an extremely good job over there, but they
could not do the job that they have been tasked to do, or our
marines, without the backup of the Guard. Then we have, of
course, the homeland things. Katrina, we saw that, when you
guys responded so well. But we also saw an enormous amount of
equipment used up.
My time is up. I think you know where I stand on this. We
will keep trying to replace the equipment you need for Katrina,
from Katrina, and Iraq and Afghanistan, because, much as we
would like to say the need will never occur again, we know it
will.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
General Blum. Thank you, Senator.
Senator Stevens. Thank you very much.
ROLE OF THE NATIONAL GUARD
Thank you very much, Generals. I was just sitting here
talking to Senator Inouye and we are reminded about the fact
that about 27, 28 years ago Senator Stennis decided on the
recommendation of Senator Hollings and myself to ask the Guard
to have their people who had duty time 2 weeks a year to
perform that over in Europe, and that led to the whole concept
of trying to think about how we could use the Guard and Reserve
forces in terms of augmenting the commitments we had at that
time to maintain forces in Europe.
We have come a long way now. We also were the ones that put
in the first bill to make your rank four star, General. When
that failed, everyone moved up to three stars, but we had two
people assigned to be advisers to the Chairman of the Joint
Chiefs to represent Guard and Reserve interests on the
immediate staff.
Now we are going back again to the four-star level and
obviously questions here from the Guard Caucus indicate that,
and Senator Inouye and I will once again join them in trying to
bring about a restructuring. In the final analysis, that will
be a decision by the Armed Services Committee, but we think we
have a role in this also, so we are going to be advisers, but
certainly rely on your judgment as to how this might work out.
It is not going to be too convenient to have a fifth member
of the Joint Chiefs who really has a role that intercedes with
two other chiefs. We have to find some way with the Armed
Services Committee to reconcile that problem. But I certainly
do agree it is time now that the forces that you represent, you
and the generals who follow you represent, are part of the
total force and they should not--that force should be at the
table. It should be in the huddle, General, and we look forward
to helping to do that.
General Blum. Mr. Chairman, if I might, for the record I
would like to state my position on one thing. I do not support
the National Guard being a separate service. I hope no one
takes any of the testimony or draws conclusions. First of all,
I have not really seen the details of what is being proposed
here today, and it is very awkward for me to comment.
Senator Stevens. We are not asking you to and I do not
think we should.
General Blum. And I certainly want to go on record as
saying that the role of the Army National Guard and the Air
National Guard as Federal reserve components of the Army and
the Air Force should be maintained and probably strengthened,
and that the unique dual role mission of the National Guard,
which is really probably the core of what is misunderstood most
or not well understood or well known throughout the halls of
the Pentagon, is the root of a lot of the problems.
I would say that you want to maintain that unique dual
role, and I would say that you want to maintain the Army and
Air National Guard of the United States as Federal Reserves of
the Army and the Air Force, but clearly, clearly the
legislation that exists today does not recognize the Department
of Defense, it does not recognize the Joint Staff, it does not
recognize Northern Command's existence, it does not recognize
the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Homeland Defense. Those
things are absolutely in need of serious addressing. There is
no question.
The National Guard needs to be, as well as the other
Reserve components need to be, brought up and caught up with
the Goldwater-Nichols Act. We were left out of that.
Senator Stevens. Well, the experience you are going through
now and we have been through in terms of this involvement for
Afghanistan and then Iraq certainly demonstrates the need for
rethinking of the organizational structure that utilizes the
Guard and Reserve. That is what we are saying. I think we are
trying to bring about that really recognition of what this
experience has demonstrated. I hope we are successful.
General Blum. Senator Leahy, I will not get into your
discussions with the Secretary of Defense, but I do know that
he recognizes what I just described as an issue that needs to
be resolved, and he has a very keen interest in resolving.
There is no question about it. This is definitely on his radar
screen to be addressed.
ADDITIONAL COMMITTEE QUESTIONS
Senator Stevens. Thank you very much.
General Blum. Thank you, sir.
Senator Stevens. We thank the three of you.
[The following questions were not asked at the hearing, but
were submitted to the Department for response subsequent to the
hearing:]
Questions Submitted to Lieutenant General H Steven Blum
Questions Submitted by Senator Ted Stevens
Question. The National Guard has deployed a substantial amount of
equipment overseas. How has the loss of that equipment affected
readiness levels nationwide? How do you plan on replenishing that
equipment?
Answer. As one would expect, the readiness levels of the Army
National Guard (ARNG) units have declined substantially. The ARNG has
contributed approximately 86,000 pieces of equipment valued at over
$2.8 billion as ``theater provided equipment'' (TPE). While the Army
has the role and responsibility of equipping the ARNG, the ARNG and
Army have been working closely together to develop a strategy that will
transform our formations into modular units. In the 2005-2011 Program
Objective Memorandum (POM) Army has ``firewalled'' over $21 billion of
equipment dedicated to the ARNG. In addition, Army has requested $2.2
billion in the fiscal year 2007 supplemental to repay the ARNG for
equipment contributed to TPE. The ARNG is currently working with the
Army on the 2008-2013 POM to further modernize and transform the ARNG.
The ARNG also has developed an Unfinanced Request for an additional $33
billion that, if funded, would fill the ARNG to 100 percent of
Objective Table of Organization and Equipment requirements, thus
fulfilling the Army's ultimate goal.
Question. I am concerned with the President's fiscal year 2007
budget request for National Guard Counter-Drug programs. Each year the
administration does not request sufficient funds for State Plans
Programs, and this year is no different. Why is it important that the
National Guard continue to support our nation's counter-drug program?
Answer. National Guard Counterdrug (NG CD) Program personnel in
every state and territory work to: provide specialized military support
of the drug related homeland security activities of federal, state, and
local law enforcement, in the form of criminal activity analysis, law
enforcement officer training, aviation support, criminal activity
observation and reporting, linguist support, and engineering support;
educate America's youth about the dangers of drug abuse and addiction,
to reduce the demand for drugs; and lend specialized drug fighting
skills to the military Combatant Commanders abroad in their fight
against terrorism and drugs.
The National Guard is an effective force multiplier for law
enforcement's drug interdiction efforts. In fiscal year 2005 National
Guard Counterdrug personnel assisted law enforcement in seizing the
following: cocaine (353,225 pounds); crack cocaine (11,950 pounds);
marijuana plants (2,043,734 plants); marijuana, processed (1,986,178
pounds); methamphetamine (6,137 pounds); heroin (2,139 pounds); ecstasy
(560,971 pills); other/designer drugs (4,621,339 pills); weapons
(11,490); vehicles (4,357); and currency ($241,988,784).
The National Guard Counterdrug program faces serious financial
challenges. Approximately 90 percent of the CD Budget is used to fund
personnel Pay and Allowances. Budget increases have not kept pace with
the inflation in manpower costs. As the buying power of the budget
shrinks, the Counterdrug program loses capability each year.
Presidential Budget Directive (PBD-95) directed a recommended
minimum level of National Guard Counterdrug capability, measured in
terms of end strength, to be 2,763 Guardsmen. In fiscal year 2007, the
National Guard Counterdrug Program would require an additional $61
million above the President's budget to achieve this personnel level.
The five Counterdrug schools for law enforcement officers have
identified requirements for $20 million above the President's budget.
Updating the sensors on the RC-26 surveillance aircraft to preserve
viability will cost $38 million above the President's budget. These
sensors also provide real time downlinks during crisis operations.
______
Questions Submitted by Senator Thad Cochran
Question. General Blum, can you provide the committee your thoughts
on the implications of the Guard becoming our nation's operational
force instead of the strategic force of the past, and how we balance
that with their state's missions?
Answer. The National Guard has transformed itself from the Cold War
strategic reserve into an operational force with a focus on joint and
expeditionary warfare that is capable of responding to a broad range of
civil and humanitarian crises. Whether supporting a variety of state
missions in a domestic scenario or deploying to over 40 nations on five
continents in the past year alone, the Guard is more ready, reliable,
essential and accessible today than at anytime in its nearly 400 years
of existence. Since the terrorist attacks of September 2001, the Guard
has been employed around the world and here at home as an operational
force in a variety of contingencies and, with the exception of those
units mobilized for war, is still under-resourced for many of the
missions it now performs. Army Guard units in particular remain manned
at Cold War levels, lack a robust cadre of full-time support personnel,
and are equipped well-below wartime requirements. Since September 11,
2001, Guard units deploying to the warfight have been well-equipped,
but the response to Hurricane Katrina revealed serious shortcomings in
the equipping of Guard units for Homeland Security and Defense. Guard
units returning from overseas came back with an average of only about
35 percent of the equipment with which they deployed, leaving them far
less capable of meeting training requirements and, most importantly,
fulfilling their missions here at home. To fulfill these missions, the
Guard's highest priorities for re-setting and re-equipping continue to
be satellite and tactical communications equipment, medical equipment,
utility helicopters, military trucks and engineer equipment. We must
also ensure that this equipment is identical to the equipment required
for wartime use so that Guard units remain interoperable with their
active component counterparts for both Homeland Defense and Homeland
Security operations. Additionally, we must invest in an extensive non-
lethal weapons capability for use in both domestic and overseas
contingencies. By re-equipping with these priorities, the Guard will be
able to effectively and ably continue its service to the American
people, both at home and abroad.
Question. General Blum, as I understand it, instead of divisions
being the centerpiece of the Army, modular brigade combat teams will be
a strategically agile force that can ``plug into'' joint and coalition
forces in an expeditionary manner. Could you describe what the Army
National Guard will look like at the end of fiscal year 2007 and the
rate at which the Army National Guard will become a modular force?
Answer. The Army is involved in the most dramatic restructuring of
forces since World War II. The centerpiece is modular transformation
and an increase in the Army's operational force with the building of
brigade combat teams (BCTs) and associated multi-functional and
functional support brigades. The Army National Guard is building toward
28 BCTs and 48 multi-functional and functional support brigades. The
Army is currently conducting Force Management Review 2009-2012 to
assess the optimum balance of force capabilities across all three
components. A key element of this review is the collaborative effort
with the Army National Guard Adjutants General to address warfighting
requirements, current operational demands and potential Homeland
Defense missions. The results of this effort may change the number and
type of BCTs and support brigades in the Army National Guard beginning
in fiscal year 2008.
______
Question Submitted by Senator Arlen Specter
Question. I understand that the National Guard and the Active
Components (AC) are working together to ensure the Guard and the AC use
as many of the same analytical and reporting systems as possible to
ensure they are compatible in combat. Will this effort, however,
provide all of the functionality the Guard needs for normal peacetime
operations and to rapidly and effectively respond to domestic
emergencies?
Answer. While DOD and the Army provide analytical and reporting
tools our soldiers can use to operate as a cohesive enterprise, none
have the ability to work outside of the federal force. Therefore, we
are working on the requirements for a program, dubbed the ``National
Guard Enterprise,'' to encompass all the National Guard requirements
for all purposes. The program will work with all the DOD systems and
will have the capabilities to work with state and local systems,
provide management for all the state National Guard requirements, and
provide the National Guard with good incident management capability.
The North Carolina National Guard has already funded interoperable
communications systems for themselves, and we're going to try it in our
Joint Operations Centers at the National Guard Bureau and in several of
the Gulf states initially and see where we can go from there. We'll
move carefully and cautiously because I want it to work correctly, and
I don't want any of our airmen or soldiers using a system that doesn't
work the same as the systems used in the combat theater.
______
Questions Submitted by Senator Pete V. Domenici
KIRTLAND NATIONAL GUARD'S ROLE WITH F-16 SQUADRONS
Question. What is the long range plan for National Guard F-16
squadrons like the New Mexico National Guard at Kirtland Air Force
Base?
Answer. The F-22 mission is an ideal follow-on flying mission for
the New Mexico Air National Guard. The current F-16 block 30 platform
is scheduled for retirement in fiscal year 2012-2017. The Air Force
needs the high experience inherent in Air National Guard units to
maximize the potential of the F-22. A likely organizational structure
for Holloman Air Force Base is the ``Classic Associate'' model.
NATIONAL GUARD'S ROLE IN BORDER SECURITY
Question. Existing Federal law allows the National Guard to work on
counter drug initiatives such as building fences and barriers along the
border. As a border state senator, I know first-hand the success these
initiatives have had in our war on drugs.
Last year I introduced border security legislation that would
expand the ability of States to use the National Guard in additional
border efforts, including building roads, participating in search and
rescue operations, and monitoring the international border. Under my
legislation, the National Guard would not participate in any law
enforcement activities and would be coordinated through the Departments
of Defense and Homeland Security.
I believe such legislation could expand on current border security
efforts, like an operation recently conducted in New Mexico that
involved the U.S. Army assisting border patrol agents by surveying the
border and notifying border patrol agents of illegal crossers.
Additionally, I think such legislation could save lives, as the
National Guard could participate in search and rescues operations for
the many individuals who try to cross the border in the desert
Southwest and suffer dehydration or worse.
Can you tell us a little bit about the National Guard's current
role on the international border?
Do you believe allowing the National Guard to participate in
surveillance efforts, search and rescue operations, and construction
projects could be a valuable source of training for our Guardsmen?
Answer. The National Guard has for years provided support to
security along the Nation's borders. Some of this has been in the form
of support to law enforcement agencies performed as part of the
National Guard counter-drug activities in border states. Additionally,
National Guard engineer units have participated in innovative readiness
training in which they hone their engineering, construction, planning
and logistics skills by building fencing along the border. Our
experience has been that this has indeed been good training.
EMERGENCY POWER SOURCES FOR THE NATIONAL GUARD
Question. I believe that as a key part of our nation's defense, the
National Guard must have the tools it needs to protect Americans,
including energy security that can be achieved through energy
diversity.
Do any of our National Guard Armories currently have alternative
energy sources that they can utilize in emergencies?
Have you considered what alternative energy sources might best be
suited for our Armories?
Answer. Some readiness centers constructed in the past several
years have included diesel-powered emergency generators. This item
became an official item of construction criteria in 2003 but was
permitted as an exception to criteria on a case by case basis before
that year.
We have not yet been able to come up with viable alternatives to
diesel-powered emergency generators. True alternative energy sources
are, at this time, cost prohibitive and often technically unfeasible.
NATIONAL GUARD AND PLAYAS
Question. New Mexico Tech operates a training, research,
development, test and evaluation complex in the town of Playas, New
Mexico. First responders, homeland security personnel, defense
personnel and others may utilize the unique training capabilities
offered in the remote, desert southwest town of Playas.
I understand that you have visited Playas and seen some of its
capabilities.
Does the Playas training center offer special training
opportunities to the National Guard?
Answer. The Playas, New Mexico, facility offers National Guard
units the opportunity to train with other government agency and
Department of Defense first responders using interagency procedures,
thus improving cooperation and coordination between these entities. The
facility's unique capabilities--including use of explosives, sufficient
airspace for unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) and air operations, and use
of urban settings for military operations--provides settings and
training opportunities that are unavailable at most training
facilities.
NATIONAL GUARD AND THE ARMY'S AIR DEFENSE ARTILLERY
Question. Thirty percent of the Army's Air Defense Artillery (ADA)
is being assigned to the National Guard. Defense against rocket-
artillery-mortar, cruise missiles, and tactical ballistic missiles are
now required of the ADA along with their traditional mission against
manned aircraft. Additionally, these greatly expanded capabilities must
be very mobile for integration into the Future Combat System.
Which ADA capabilities does the National Guard feel it can best
support?
How will the National Guard ADA units be able to integrate their
training into the net-centric, mobile units of the Future Combat
System?
Answer. The Army National Guard (ARNG) can be successful in all
mission areas of Air Defense Artillery (ADA), except for the theater
missile defense mission of the Patriot system, if properly resourced.
The key to success for the ARNG's integration into net-centric warfare
is for proper resourcing, especially in new equipment and full-time
manning.
______
Question Submitted by Senator Richard C. Shelby
Question. The National Guard has played a critical role in our
national security over the past several years. In light of their major
role in Iraq and Afghanistan, as well as their critical role
domestically in the hurricane response this past year, General Blum,
what role do you see the National Guard taking in order to meet the
security requirements of the United States, now and in the future?
How do you see the National Guard's role and mission changing in
the next several years?
Answer. The National Guard's role in meeting the security
requirements of the United States will continue to evolve as the
nation's requirements evolve, but the National Guard will continue to
remain a hallmark of performance to the nation as it has for nearly
four hundred years. As a transformed force capable of joint and
expeditionary warfare, the Guard also remains capable of responding to
a broad range of civil and humanitarian crises. The Guard fights narco-
terrorism through our counterdrug programs. We stand guard over
America's critical physical and cyber infrastructure. Our Airmen fly
the vast majority of air sovereignty missions over America's cities,
while our Soldiers man air and missile defense systems in the nation's
capital and Alaska. We conduct peacekeeping operations in Kosovo and
the Sinai, stand watch aboard military cargo ships as they transit the
Persian Gulf, guard prisoners in Guantanamo Bay, and train the Iraqi
and Afghan national armies. As recently as 2005, the Army National
Guard contributed half of the combat brigades on the ground in Iraq. As
much as the Guard does overseas, however, we must not lose sight of our
responsibility at home. Our commitment to the nation's Governors is to
not only provide each of them with sufficient capabilities under state
control, but to also provide the appropriate mix of forces to allow
them to respond to domestic emergencies. To meet this, the National
Guard Bureau is committed to the fundamental principle that each and
every state and territory must possess ten core capabilities for
homeland readiness: a Joint Force Headquarters for command and control;
a Civil Support Team for chemical, biological, and radiological
detection; engineering assets; communications; ground transportation;
aviation; medical capability; security forces; logistics; and
maintenance capability. By focusing the Guard's priorities on
recruiting and retention bonuses and initiatives, equipment reset and
modernization, and obtaining critical domestic mission resources, our
nation's future security will remain closely aligned with the
transformation of the Guard as it continues to meet these challenges
both at home and abroad.
______
Question Submitted to Lieutenant General Clyde A. Vaughn
Question Submitted by Senator Ted Stevens
Question. The Committee provided the Army National Guard an
additional $60 million for equipment in the National Guard and Reserve
Equipment account in the fiscal year 2006 Defense Appropriations Act,
and $700 million in title IX. Can you tell us what requirements these
funds will fill?
Answer. The National Guard and Equipment Account helps meet the
equipment and system requirements identified by the Chief of the
National Guard Bureau in the document entitled ``National Guard
Equipment Requirements, Protecting America at Home and Abroad,'' which
was sent to members of the House and Senate last September. These
requirements fall into ten areas: Joint Force Headquarters and Command
and Control; Civil Support Teams and Force Protection; Maintenance;
Aviation; Engineer; Medical; Communications; Transportation; Security;
and Logistics. One major area of focus for the Guard is improving
Interoperable Communications in Disaster Response.
______
Question Submitted to Major General Charles Ickes II
Questions Submitted by Senator Ted Stevens
Question. The Committee provided the Air National Guard an
additional $60 million for equipment in the National Guard and Reserve
Equipment account in the fiscal year 2006 Defense Appropriations Act,
and $200 million in title IX. Can you tell us what requirements these
funds will fill?
Answer. For fiscal year 2006 the Air National Guard was approved
$30 million in the National Guard and Reserve Equipment Account (NGREA)
to fund equipment purchases versus the $60 million addressed in your
question. The $30 million in fiscal year 2006 NGREA will fund equipment
purchases to fulfill requirements in Precision Strike, Data Link/Combat
Identification, 24 Hour Operations, Enhanced Survivability, Propulsion
Modernization, Simulation Systems and Training. $200 million in fiscal
year 2006 Title IX NGREA will help the Air National Guard fund
equipment requirements identified by the Chief of the National Guard
Bureau in the September 22, 2005, document entitled ``National Guard
Equipment Requirements, Protecting America at Home and Abroad.'' These
requirements include urgent needs to replace damaged and destroyed
equipment used in support of hurricanes Katrina and Wilma, improve
current capabilities, and modernize future capabilities. The equipment
will enable the Air National Guard to better to respond to natural
disasters, emerging homeland defense/homeland security needs, and
leverage organic capabilities in support of the Global War on
Terrorism.
Reserves
STATEMENT OF LIEUTENANT GENERAL JAMES R. HELMLY, CHIEF,
ARMY RESERVE, DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
Senator Stevens. We will now hear from the leadership of
the Reserve components: Lieutenant General James Helmly, Chief
and Commander of the Army Reserve; Vice Admiral John Cotton,
Chief of the Naval Reserve; Lieutenant General Jack Bergman,
Commander of the Marine Corps Reserve; Lieutenant General John
Bradley, Chief of the Air Force Reserve.
General Helmly, I understand this is your final appearance
before our subcommittee. We want to thank you for your
appearances in the past and your cooperation with this
subcommittee and wish you well in your next assignment.
We welcome General Bergman, who is making his first
appearance before us as Commander of the Marine Corps Reserve.
It is a pleasure to have you before us, sir, and we look
forward to working with you.
It really is a pleasure to have you all here. We are sorry
that the previous round has taken a little bit longer than we
thought, but we wanted to hear your statements. Your statements
are printed in full in the record and we would like to hear
your comments.
General Helmly.
General Helmly. Senator Stevens, Senator Inouye,
distinguished members of the subcommittee: Thank you for your
time today. My name is Ron Helmly, as you noted, and I am an
American soldier.
I am privileged today to be accompanied by two other
soldiers of your Army Reserve: Captain--and I would ask them to
stand as I call their names--Captain Matthew R. Brown and
Sergeant Brianne C. Dix. Both of these distinguished members of
our force have served in combat in Iraq. Their presence reminds
us all of why we are here, to support the men and women who
have answered our Nation's call to duty.
Captain Brown and Sergeant Dix are both representative of
all of our members and I know I speak for my fellow chiefs,
sailors, airmen, marines, coast guardsmen as well. They remind
us of why we lead and why we are appearing before this
subcommittee today.
Thank you very much, Captain Brown, Sergeant Dix.
Senator Stevens. Captain Brown, Sergeant Dix, we thank you
very much for being here. We appreciate it. Thank you.
General Helmly. Senator, I hope to convey to you clearly
today what the Army Reserve is doing to address the many issues
involved in changing our force from an industrial age force in
reserve to a more modern, skill-rich, complementary force that,
when brought to duty, capitalizes on the intrinsic value of
civilian-based skills, trains and prepares warrior-citizens who
can compliment our Army and joint forces.
PREPARED STATEMENT
I ask that our prepared statement, which consists of our
Army Reserve posture statement, be entered into the record as
our prepared statement. I thank you the subcommittee for your
time and for all you have done in the past and continue to do
for our soldiers, sailors, airmen, marines, and their families,
and I look forward to your questions. Thank you very much.
Senator Stevens. Thank you very much. We appreciate that.
[The statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of Lieutenant General James R. Helmly
PURPOSE AND ORGANIZATION OF THE POSTURE STATEMENT
The 2006 Army Reserve Posture Statement (ARPS) provides an overview
of the Army Reserve. It details accomplishments of the past year, as
the Army Reserve continued to implement profound changes while
simultaneously fighting the Global War on Terrorism. The Army Reserve
understands its vital role in The Army Plan. This plan, endorsed by the
Secretary of the Army in the 2005 and 2006 Army Posture Statements,
centers around four overarching, interrelated strategies. The Army
Reserve best supports The Army Plan by complementing the joint force
with skill-rich capabilities. The Army Reserve programs, initiatives
and requirements are designed to provide this additional support and
are best described in the following strategies: (1) managing change;
(2) providing trained and ready units; (3) equipping the force; and (4)
manning the force. These strategies ensure that the Army Reserve, as an
integral component of the Army, continues to meet its non-negotiable
contract with the American public: to fight and win our Nation's wars.
TODAY'S ARMY RESERVE
America remains a nation at war, fighting a Global War on Terrorism
that demands the skill, commitment, dedication and readiness of all its
armed services. Our adversary is intelligent, tenacious, elusive and
adaptive--a viable threat to the United States' national security and
freedom.
By law, the purpose of the Army Reserve--to ``provide trained units
and qualified persons available for active duty in the armed forces, in
time of war or national emergency, and at such other times as the
national security may require''--is a reminder that while the methods,
tactics and adversaries we face in the Global War on Terrorism are
drastically changed from that which we prepared for in the past, our
Nation's dependence on the Army Reserve has not changed.
Today's Army Reserve is no longer a strategic reserve, it is a
complementary, operational force, an inactive-duty force that uses the
energy and urgency of Army transformation and the operational demands
of the Global War on Terrorism to change from a technically focused,
force-in-reserve to a learning, adaptive organization that provides
trained, ready, ``inactive-duty'' Soldiers poised and available for
active service, as if they knew the hour and day they would be called.
This fundamental shift provides significant challenges to our
institution. Managing critical but limited resources to achieve higher
readiness and continuing to recruit high-quality Soldiers, and
sustaining a high tempo of operations are among the most essential of
these challenges.
As a fully integrated member of our nation's defense establishment,
the Army Reserve depends on the resources requested in the President's
budget. These funds allow the Army Reserve to recruit, train, maintain
and equip forces to prepare for present and future missions. As
detailed later in this document, the Army Reserve is simultaneously
undergoing deep and profound change in how it organizes, trains, mans,
manages, and mobilizes Soldiers and maintains its forces. We are
reshaping the force to provide relevant and ready assets with a
streamlined command and control structure. We are committed to
examining every process, policy and program, and changing them to meet
the needs of the 21st century as opposed to continuing them from the
past. We will remain good stewards of the trust of the American public.
The Army Reserve's future--an integral component of the world's
best Army, complementing the joint force with skill-rich capabilities,
skills and professional talents derived from our Soldiers' civilian
employment and perfected by daily use--is truly more a current reality
than a future one. Every initiative, change and request is geared to
one end--to make the United States Army Reserve a value added, integral
part of the Army: the preeminent land power on earth--the ultimate
instrument of national resolve--that is both ready to meet and relevant
to the challenges of the dangerous and complex 21st century security
environment.
The Army Reserve Soldier has always answered our country's call to
duty--and we always will!
Lt. Gen. James R. Helmly,
Chief, Army Reserve.
ARMY RESERVE HISTORY
HISTORICAL BACKGROUND AND TODAY
The Army Reserve is an institution with a long tradition of
adapting to the changing security needs of the Nation. The profound
changes currently underway today, with more than 40,000 Army Reserve
Soldiers mobilized in support of the Global War on Terrorism, are an
accelerated continuation of that tradition.
1908: The official predecessor of the Army Reserve was created in
1908 as the Medical Reserve Corps and subsequently titled the Organized
Reserve Corps. It was a peacetime pool of trained officers and enlisted
men that the Army mobilized as individual replacements for units in the
world wars of the 20th century. Today, the Army Reserve makes up 67
percent of the Army's total medical force with physicians, dentists,
nurses and veterinarians bringing their civilian skills and experience
to Soldiers on the battlefield.
1916: Using its constitutional authority to ``raise and support
armies,'' Congress passed the National Defense Act in 1916 that created
the Officers' Reserve Corps, Enlisted Reserve Corps and Reserve
Officers' Training Corps. The Army mobilized 89,500 Reserve officers
for World War I (1917-1919), one-third of whom were physicians.
Currently, more than 25,000 students at 1,100 colleges and universities
are enrolled in Army ROTC.
1920: After the war, the separate Reserve corps for officers and
enlisted men were combined into the Organized Reserve Corps, a name
that lasted into the 1950s. Today, the Army's Title 10 force is known
as the Army Reserve.
1940: In preparation for World War II, the Army began calling Army
Reserve officers to active duty in June 1940. In the year that
followed, the number of Reserve officers on active duty rose from less
than 3,000 to more than 57,000.
1941-1945: During World War II (1941-1945), the Army mobilized 26
Reserve (designated) infantry divisions. Approximately a quarter of all
Army officers who served were from the Reserve, including more than
100,000 Reserve Officers' Training Corps graduates. More than 200,000
Reserve Soldiers served in the war.
1950-1953: The Korean War (1950-1953) saw more than 70 units and
240,000 Army Reserve Soldiers called to active duty. While the Korean
conflict was still underway, Congress began making significant changes
in the structure and role of the Reserve. These changes transformed the
Organized Reserve into the United States Army Reserve.
1970s: By the 1970s, the Army Reserve was increasingly structured
for combat support and combat service support. The end of the draft
coincided with announcement of the Total Force Policy in 1973. The
effect of an all-volunteer force and the Total Force Policy was a shift
of some responsibilities and resources to the Army Reserve. Today, in
the spirit of the Total Force policy, when America's Army goes to war,
the Army Reserve goes to war.
1991: Army Reserve Soldiers were among the first reserve component
personnel called to active duty for operations Desert Shield/Desert
Storm and were among the last to leave the desert. More than 84,000
Army Reserve Soldiers provided combat support and combat service
support to the United Nations forces fighting Iraq in the Persian Gulf
and site support to United States forces elsewhere in the world.
1993: In the post-Cold War era, the Army restructured its reserve
components. Reduction in active-component end strength made the Army
even more reliant on the Army Reserve and the Army National Guard. A
1993 agreement among all three components called for rebalancing the
preponderance of reserve component combat formations in the Army
National Guard, while the Army Reserve would principally focus on
combat support and combat service support. Today, the Army Reserve
provides 30 percent of the Army's combat support and 45 percent of its
combat service support capabilities.
1995: Since 1995, Army Reserve Soldiers have been mobilized
continuously. For Bosnia and Kosovo, 20,000 Army Reserve Soldiers were
mobilized.
2006: As of February 2006, more than 147,000 Army Reserve Soldiers
have been mobilized in support of the Global War on Terrorism, with
more than 40,000 still serving on active duty.
STRATEGIC OVERVIEW
Today's security environment is volatile, uncertain, complex and
ambiguous. The elements of that environment often interact randomly and
without sufficient lead time to develop a deliberate response. The need
for Army Reserve Soldiers and units to be fully prepared to respond,
prior to mobilization, is paramount.
World conditions reveal a variety of emerging challenges to our
national security interests: Wider range of adversaries; Weapons of
mass destruction; Rogue state armies; Cyber network attacks; Worldwide
terrorism; and The global economy.
National conditions present additional challenges: Protracted war;
Homeland defense; Budget pressures; Public focus; Global War on
Terrorism (GWOT); Disaster response/relief; Declining manufacturing
base; and Propensity for military service.
Within such an environment, the Army Reserve is changing from a
strategic reserve to an inactive-duty force of skill-rich capabilities
with enhanced responsiveness to complement the Army's transformation to
a more lethal, agile and capabilities-based modular force. The Army
Reserve's force structure is no longer planned as a force in reserve--a
``supplementary force;'' rather, it is a force that complements the
Army and joint forces. Today's units are to be prepared and available
to deploy with their full complement of trained Soldiers and equipment
when the Nation calls.
This transformation will progress as the Army Reserve continues to
meet the ongoing operational challenges of the Global War on Terrorism,
while simultaneously supporting other missions around the globe.
MANAGING CHANGE
Accomplishments
Since the beginning of 2005, the Army Reserve has:
--Developed and applied a cyclic readiness and force management
model, currently called Army Force Generation (ARFORGEN).
Applied the ARFORGEN logic to how Army Reserve units are
scheduled and resourced for deployment. In 2005, about 75
percent of the Army Reserve mobilized units were from the Army
Reserve Expeditionary Force packages using the ARFORGEN model.
--Programmed inactivation of 18 general officer non-war-fighting
headquarters.
--Awarded 11 military construction contracts in 2005 to construct
nine new Army Reserve training centers that will support more
than 3,500 Army Reserve Soldiers in Kansas, Florida, Utah,
Pennsylvania, Maryland, New Jersey and Colorado.
--Awarded two major range improvement project contracts for Fort
McCoy, WI.
--Activated two functional commands, the Military Intelligence
Readiness Command and Army Reserve Medical Command, providing
focused training and force management for medical and military
intelligence Army Reserve forces.
--Began realignment of command and control of U.S. Army Civil Affairs
and Psychological Operations forces from Special Operations
Command to the U.S. Army Reserve Command to improve training
and force management.
--Initiated action to close or realign 176 Army Reserve facilities
under BRAC, a higher percentage than any other component of any
service, moving Army Reserve Soldiers into 125 more modern
facilities.
--Began applying Lean Six Sigma business management techniques to
improve supporting business processes and methods.
Transforming to meet today's demand for Army Reserve forces has led
to the development of a host of initiatives. When implemented, these
initiatives will accomplish the following:
--Ensure more focused and efficient management, increasing units' and
Soldiers' readiness.
--Increase the number of Army Reserve Soldiers in deployable units.
--Provide improved facilities and more effective training to Army
Reserve Soldiers.
--Streamline the command and control of Army Reserve forces.
--Increase the number of Soldiers in specialties needed to support
the GWOT.
--Improve Army Reserve business, resourcing and acquisition
processes.
Focused, Efficient Management: Army Reserve Expeditionary Force
The foundation for Army Reserve support to future contingencies is
the Army Reserve Expeditionary Force (AREF). Incorporating a strategy
for cyclically managing Army Reserve force readiness, AREF directly
supports the Army's Force Generation model. AREF applies Army
rotational force doctrine to decisions regarding training, equipping
and leader deployment. The management system applies packaged and
cyclic resourcing of capabilities instead of the outmoded, tiered
resourcing model, which supported a now obsolete, time-phased force
deployment list against prescriptive operational plans. AREF provides
more focused, efficient support to units about to deploy by developing
packages that can be called to duty as needed. The system also
capitalizes on constrained resources to best utilize equipping and
readiness dollars.
Under AREF, most Army Reserve units are assigned to one of the
expeditionary force packages. The packages move through a rotational
cycle of readiness levels, ranging from reconstitution to validation
and employment. The units in each package will have a one-year
``availability'' period during which they will be ``on call'' or
deployed. AREF enables the Army Reserve to achieve a high level of
readiness in planned, deliberate time periods and provides a means to
program and manage resources in advance. This resourcing strategy also
ensures that deploying units be trained individually and collectively
on the most modern equipment and have that equipment available when
needed.
When fully implemented, the AREF strategy will add rotational depth
to the force, spread the operational tempo more evenly throughout the
Army Reserve, and add predictability to the processes that support
combatant commanders, Soldiers, families and employers.
Increasing the Operational Force
In 2005, the Army Reserve began divesting itself of force structure
that exceeded its congressionally authorized end strength of 205,000.
The Army Reserve also began reducing the number of spaces in non-
deploying units. These actions allow more Soldiers to be assigned to
deployable units and to be fully prepared for mobilization. This
process requires a substantial ``leaning out'' of our training base and
support headquarters, while carefully maintaining high quality training
and support services. As an example of training base efficiencies, in
fiscal year 2005, the Army Reserve continued to develop the new 84th
U.S. Army Reserve Readiness Training Command that resulted from the
merger of the Army Reserve Readiness Training Center and the
Headquarters of the 84th Division (Institutional Training). This
consolidation improved the Army Reserve's individual training and
leader education capabilities while creating leaner training support
command and control structures. Reducing the number of units and
focusing efforts to get more Soldiers into deployable units will allow
more effective and cost-efficient management.
Improved Facilities and Training Support: Realignment and Closure
Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) 2005 enables the Army Reserve
to reshape its force and command, control and management headquarters,
improving readiness while realizing significant cost reductions.
The BRAC 2005 recommendations became law in November 2005. BRAC
provides the Army Reserve the opportunity to station forces in the most
modern, up-to-date facilities possible and to redesign a Cold-War
structure that no longer reflects current requirements. Under BRAC, the
Army Reserve will close or realign 176 of its current facilities. This
is a higher percentage than any other military component. Army Reserve
units from these older centers and facilities will move into 125 new
Armed Forces Reserve centers (AFRCs) that are shared with at least one
other reserve component, helping support ``jointness'' and efficiency.
This construction will eliminate duplication of facilities within the
same geographical areas serviced by different components of our Armed
Forces. Some of these moves have already begun. The new AFRCs will have
high-tech, distance learning, and video teleconferencing capabilities,
fitness centers, family readiness centers, and enhanced maintenance and
equipment storage facilities. These dramatic changes, closely
coordinated among Army Reserve planners and the BRAC agencies, were
synchronized with the Army Reserve's overall effort to reduce its
organizational structure and allow more deployable forces.
Streamline Command and Control
Assisted by BRAC, the executive restructuring of Army Reserve
forces creates a more streamlined command, control, and support
structure, develops future force units and reinvests non-deploying
force structure into deploying units. The Army Reserve will
disestablish the current 10 regional readiness commands (RRCs) that
provide command and control, training, and readiness oversight to most
of the Army Reserve units in the continental United States, and will
reduce the number of general-officer commands.
Simultaneously, four regional readiness sustainment commands
(RRSCs) will be established. These RRSCs, which will be fully
operational by the end of fiscal year 2009, will provide base
operations and administrative support to units and Army Reserve
Soldiers within geographic regions. For the first time, all of the Army
Reserve operational, deployable forces will be commanded by
operational, deployable command headquarters.
Some of the future force brigade-level units will include support
brigades (e.g., maneuver enhancement brigades, sustainment brigades,
engineer, combat support, chemical and military police brigades).
Two functional, deployable commands were converted in 2005. The
Army Reserve activated the Military Intelligence Readiness Command
(MIRC) at Fort Belvoir, VA, and the Army Reserve Medical Command (AR-
MEDCOM) at Pinellas Park, FL. The MIRC is integrated with the Army
Intelligence and Security Command, and the AR-MEDCOM is integrated with
the Army Medical Command. The AR-MEDCOM will eventually be further
converted to a medical deployment support command and will be
deployable. Aviation and military police commands are two additional
functional commands being activated.
The result of the reshaping of the Army Reserve forces will be a
more streamlined command and control structure and an increase in
ready, deployable assets to support the Global War on Terrorism.
Increasing Civil Affairs and Psychological Operations Assets
The skills required today to assist civil governments gain their
footing are not inherently military. It is in the ranks of the Army
Reserve where city managers, bankers, public health directors and other
such specialists vital to stability and support operations are found.
For example, 96 percent of the Army's current civil affairs Soldiers
are Army Reserve Soldiers; two of the three psychological operations
groups--with their valued skills--are in the Army Reserve.
Over the next five years, the Army Reserve will add 904 Civil
Affairs Soldiers and 1,228 Psychological Operations Soldiers to its
inventory. The addition of these critical skills to the Army Reserve
comes without additional Congressional funding; the positions will be
transferred from the existing force.
Additionally, the Chief of Staff of the Army has approved the
transfer of Army Reserve Civil Affairs and Psychological Operations
forces from the U.S. Special Operations Command to the U.S. Army
Reserve Command. This will fully integrate Army Reserve Civil Affairs
and Psychological Operations elements into the conventional force,
providing dedicated support to conventional operations.
Improving Business Practices
The Army Reserve is aggressively incorporating Lean Six Sigma
concepts and practices into its business processes. Six Sigma is a
problem-solving methodology that uses data and statistical analysis to
create break-through performance within organizations.
The Army Reserve is embracing this program not only as an
efficiency tool, but also as the very foundation for change. To
demonstrate this commitment, the Army Reserve has stepped forward as a
front-runner in Lean Six Sigma implementation within the Army. The
Chief, Army Reserve has mandated Army Reserve leaders to constantly
question and review current business processes within the Army Reserve
to assess their value to readiness and to seek ways to improve
responsiveness.
In conjunction with the Secretary of the Army's business
transformation order, the Army Reserve began development of its
deployment plan and completed classroom training of five Six Sigma
``green belts'' (coach-facilitators), who are currently working their
first projects. In addition, 40 senior leaders received two-day
executive level business transformation training.
The continuation of training is planned with a goal of
institutionalizing the Army Reserve program fully by achieving the
highest level Six Sigma certification within the Army staff. The
organizational structure to support the program is being defined and
established to ensure top-level support.
Compelling Needs
Continued support of Army Reserve Expeditionary Force and other
programs associated with Army Force Generation.
Steady funding line for BRAC-generated changes to Army Reserve
facilities.
PROVIDING TRAINED AND READY UNITS
Accomplishments
Since 9/11:
As of February 2006, the Army Reserve has mobilized more than
147,000 Soldiers' more than 25,000 of those Soldiers served on multiple
deployments.
98 percent of Army Reserve units have provided support to current
operations.
Fiscal Year 2005 and beyond:
Performed over 1,900 unit mobilizations in fiscal year 2005.
Provided a CH-47 Chinook aviation company to support Pakistan
earthquake relief efforts, transporting victims, relocating refugees
and delivering supplies.
Provided relief support in response to Indiana tornado damage,
locating victims, draining lakes and retaining pond areas.
Supported Gulf Coast hurricane relief efforts by flying CH-47
Chinook helicopters and providing two truck companies to transport
supplies, Soldiers and flood victims.
Scheduled Army Reserve units in 2006 and 2007 to align with the
Army Reserve Training Strategy (ARTS) to produce a trained and ready
force using a cyclic force readiness model.
Developed and implemented the Exercise WARRIOR to challenge units'
collective responsiveness under stressful, contemporary operating
environment conditions.
Refined existing functional exercises (targeted to a specific
branch) to LEGACY exercises to train technical skills in a tactical
environment.
Operations
In December of 2005, more than 40,000 Army Reserve Soldiers were
serving on active duty in 18 countries around the world. This is a much
changed world from the one the Army Reserve operated in less than a
decade ago.
The Army Reserve is on the leading edge in training Iraqi forces.
More than 750 Soldiers from the Army Reserve's 98th Division
(Institutional Training), Rochester, NY, and other Army Reserve units
returned from Iraq after spending a year training Iraqi military and
security forces. Soldiers from the 80th Division (Institutional
Training), Richmond, VA, replaced the 98th and continue this critical
mission today. Their continuing efforts, in conjunction with other
coalition forces, will enable the Iraqis to increasingly provide their
own security, thus hastening the eventual maturing of Iraq's fledgling
democracy. From supporting all military branches, running truck convoys
of food, ammunition, fuel and various other items, to responding to
ambushes and directly engaging the enemy, the Army Reserve has been an
integral element of the U.S. military and coalition efforts in Iraq,
Afghanistan and elsewhere throughout the CENTCOM area of
responsibility.
Civil Support
In September 2005, the Army Reserve deployed emergency preparedness
liaison officers, CH-47 heavy-lift helicopters, military history
detachments and truck companies to assist in the federal disaster
response to hurricanes Katrina and Rita.
During the mission, the Army Reserve made available three Army
Reserve centers to house National Guard Soldiers responding from other
states. Additionally, the centers provided operating space for the
Federal Emergency Management Agency and first responder
representatives.
The Army Reserve also provided desperately needed fuel for the
American Red Cross in order to sustain refrigeration of perishable food
for the evacuees.
As recent missions make clear, the Army Reserve has significant
numbers of potentially critical capabilities that may be needed in
future homeland defense and security missions. These capabilities
include skilled medical professionals who can practice anywhere in the
United States, hazardous materials reconnaissance, casualty extraction
from inside a combat zone, mass casualty decontamination, critical
medical care, engineering support and water purification.
As of September 2005, the Army Reserve, in conjunction with the
Pennsylvania State Fire Academy, had trained and certified more than
350 Army Reserve chemical Soldiers to the federal standard, and trained
more than 2,400 chemical and medical Soldiers to perform mass casualty
decontamination.
Twenty-five Army Reserve chemical defense units are fielded with
specialized weapons of mass destruction-response equipment for
hazardous material and mass casualty decontamination operations.
However, sustaining and upgrading these robust capabilities is not
achievable under current funding levels.
Army Reserve Training Strategy
As the world and its threats have changed, so have the ways the
Army Reserve approaches preparing and training its members to fight the
nation's battles and protect its vital interests. The Army Reserve
Training Strategy (ARTS) is the strategic training vision, establishing
the fundamental concepts to implement the train-alert-deploy model for
Army Reserve Soldiers. ARTS creates progressive training and readiness
cycles, which provides priorities for resources, managed readiness
levels and predictable training. Today's environment does not
accommodate yesterday's ``mobilize-train-deploy'' model. Today's Army
Reserve Soldiers must be trained and ready prior to mobilization as if
they knew the day and hour they would be called. ARTS is a critical
element of the Army Reserve Expeditionary Force, which supports the
Army Force Generation (ARFORGEN) model. As units advance through a
series of cumulative and progressively complex training events, each
training phase improves the level of unit readiness.
--During the reset/train phase of ARFORGEN, Army Reserve units begin
reconstitution as Soldiers complete needed professional
education and other skill-related training. The focus and
priority is on individual training. The culminating event for
the reset/train phase of ARFORGEN is the WARRIOR exercise; a
multi-functional, multi-echelon, multi-component, joint and
coalition event that improves unit proficiency at the company/
platoon level.
--Units in the second year of the Reset/Train force pool will
concentrate on perfecting their collective mission tasks by
participating in functional exercises at the squad/crew level.
The Army Reserve conducts a wide range of functional exercises
throughout the United States providing skill specific training
for Soldiers and units under field conditions. For example, the
Quartermaster Liquid Logistics Exercise provides a challenging
collective training venue for water purification, water
production, and petroleum, oil and lubricants (POL) units.
Other functional exercises are conducted for military police,
transportation, maintenance and medical units.
The readiness and training goals for Army Reserve forces are the
same as those for the Active component and in every instance the Army
Reserve has provided trained and ready Soldiers. While the standards
are the same, the conditions under which the Army Reserve prepares for
its missions are significantly different. The limited training time for
Army Reserve Soldiers competes with numerous civilian career priorities
and must be used effectively and efficiently.
Premier Training: Warrior Exercise (WAREX)
Warrior exercises are combined arms ``combat training center-like''
exercises. These exercises include opposing forces, observer-
controllers and structured after-action reviews. They provide branch/
functional training for combat support/combat service support units in
a field environment. Future warrior exercises will also serve as the
capstone, externally evaluated, collective training event to move Army
Reserve units from the Reset/Train Pool of AREF into the Ready Pool.
The 90th Regional Readiness Command conducted the first Warrior
Exercise in June 2005 at Fort Bliss, Texas, training more than 3,500
Soldiers.
Experience-Based Training
Capitalizing on recent experiences in the Global War on Terrorism
and lessons learned, Army Reserve training continues to adapt to meet
changing battlefield conditions and an agile, thinking enemy.
Counter Improvised Explosive Device Train-the-Trainer (T3)
Course
Initially unsophisticated and relatively easy to detect as a
roadside bomb, improvised explosive devices (IEDs) have become more
complex in design and increasingly lethal over time. The purpose of the
Counter Improvised Explosive Device (CIED) Train-the-Trainer (T3)
Course is to train trainers in countering IED threats, with the first
priority being those troops mobilizing and deploying to Iraq and
Afghanistan. The goal is to close the tactical performance gap between
unit pre-mobilization training tasks, conditions, standards, and the
actual tactical environment and mission expectations in theater.
The 84th U.S. Army Reserve Readiness Training Command at Fort
McCoy, WI, trained 360 Soldiers during several five-day CIED T3 courses
in fiscal year 2005. These trainers have returned to their home
stations to integrate CIED training into their training programs. CIED
training provides graduates the knowledge, skills and ability to
provide expert advice to their unit commanders as they develop a
training strategy that incorporates CIED tactics into multi-echelon,
pre-mobilization training.
Convoy Training
Convoys are now combat patrols. Recognizing the dangers of convoy
operations, the Army Reserve has developed and implemented a convoy
training program. In addition to counter attack methods, the training
familiarizes Soldiers with the driving characteristics of armored
vehicles. The program focuses on three specific areas:
--Counter Improvised Explosive Device train-the-trainer skills
--Integration of live fire into convoy operations training
--Development of a combat driver training program that will
progressively develop individual driver skills and unit convoy
capabilities as units migrate through the ARFORGEN/AREF cycle.
An initial, individual skills development program employing
High Mobility Multi-purpose Wheeled Vehicles (HMMWVs) with kits
installed to replicate the driving characteristics of up-
armored HMMWVs was initiated in 2005.
The priority of training is to units that are scheduled for
deployment.
Combat Support Training Centers
The Army Reserve plans, after BRAC implementation, to establish two
combat support training centers (CSTCs)--the CSTC at Fort Hunter
Liggett, CA, and the Joint Mobilization Training Center at Fort Dix,
NJ. These will provide much-needed training and maneuver space for
technical and field training in austere environments, more rigorous and
realistic weapons qualification, classroom training, and capability to
conduct Army Reserve unit collective training as well as support the
Warrior Exercise program described earlier. Both training centers will
also support joint, multi-component, interagency, and convoy training;
up to brigade level at Fort Hunter-Liggett, and up to battalion level
at Fort Dix.
Units in the Army Reserve must experience a combat training center
(CTC) or combat training center-like event to validate training and
readiness levels prior to mobilization. The Army Reserve continues to
partner with Forces Command to incorporate its combat support and
combat service support in the combat training center rotations.
Additionally, the Army Reserve will assist in the development of the
concept for exportable CTC capability for reserve component units
unable to access training at the National Training Center or Joint
Readiness Training Center. CTC and/or exportable training are
essential, not only for unit preparation for mobilization and
deployment, but also for the longer term leader development impacts
such training experiences provide.
Center for Lessons Learned Mobile Training Team Seminar
The Army Reserve collaborated with the Army's Center for Lessons
Learned (CALL) in 2005, dispatching mobile training teams (MTTs) which
conducted four regional seminars to unit leadership teams, with a
specific focus on those units identified for mobilization in 2006.
These CALL MTTs provided orientations on the Islamic and Iraqi culture,
the most recent lessons-learned emerging from theater, highlights of
unit after action reports, and the most effective combat tactics,
techniques and procedures. The MTT discussion topics also include a
current Operation Iraqi Freedom/Operation Enduring Freedom operations
overview highlighting challenges units can expect during the
mobilization and deployment process.
The Army Reserve Leadership Development Campaign Plan
The Army Reserve Leadership Development Campaign Plan, updated and
operationalized in 2005, establishes requirements and integrates
programs unique to the Army Reserve. Two of the more significant
components are:
The Senior Leader Training Program focuses on general officer and
colonel-level leaders with seminars focused on organizational change,
Army transformation and ethics-based leadership. All major subordinate
commands of the Army Reserve Command as well as the 7th Army Reserve
Command (Europe), 9th Regional Readiness Command (Hawaii), and the Army
Reserve Staff have undergone this training.
The Army Reserve Brigade and Battalion Pre-Command Course has been
upgraded to better prepare field grade commanders and command sergeants
major to lead Army Reserve Soldiers. In addition to a company pre-
command course for commanders, Army Reserve company command teams
(commanders, first sergeants and unit administrators) participate in a
new company team leader development course to better prepare unit
command teams for the challenges of leadership at the crucial company
level.
Enhancing Mobilization
In order to enhance the readiness of mobilizing units, the Army
Reserve is successfully using a process called phased mobilization. The
goal of phased mobilization is to minimize unit personnel
reassignments, enhance Soldier medical and dental readiness and skill
training, improve unit leadership, and enhance individual skill and
unit collective training prior to unit deployments.
Under the phased mobilization concept, selected unit personnel
mobilize in intervals prior to the entire unit's mobilization so that
they may perform Soldier leader training, Soldier skill training and
unit collective training. Phased mobilization allows selected Soldiers
to receive individual training according to a planned and phased
schedule that ensures they are fully trained and mission ready for
timely mission execution. Additional funding will be required to
support this crucial program.
Compelling Needs
Increase fiscal year 2007 Reserve Personnel, Army Reserve funding
levels.
--To resource Army Force Generation-phased training requirements
including new equipment training, improved collective training,
Warrior Exercises, leader education and mission environment
familiarization training.
Increase fiscal year 2007 Operations and Maintenance, Army Reserve
funding levels.
--For increased emphasis and additional operating tempo for warrior
task and drill training; skill reclassification training,
convoy live fire training and additional support.
--Training equipment sets to support Army Reserve Training Centers.
--For dedicated equipment training sets at centralized locations and
training equipment sets for schools and deployable units.
--To replace Army Reserve-owned Stay-Behind-Equipment left in
Southwest Asia.
--For Modular Force equipment needed for unit level collective
training in a field environment and to support designated
individual and collective training locations.
Establishment of Combat Support Training Centers.
--To establish and resource combat support training centers at a
minimum of two of the Army Reserve's four primary
installations.
EQUIPPING THE FORCE
Accomplishments
Since 9/11:
Mobilized virtually entire Army Reserve deployable strength without
a single unit being rejected for logistics readiness--more than 250,000
items (50,000 transactions) cross-leveled among Army Reserve units.
Developed and fielded a variety of logistics information management
programs to improve situational awareness and support decision making.
Developed and implemented innovative, effective, and economical
methods to improve logistics readiness--500 medium tactical trucks were
withdrawn from prepositioned stocks; used depot maintenance to upgrade
older medium tractors; rebuilt HMMWVs withdrawn from direct reporting
maintenance organizations.
Fiscal Year 2005:
All Army Reserve units in Operation Iraqi Freedom rotation in
fiscal year 2005 mobilized at deployment criteria.
Developed Army Reserve equipping strategy to make most effective
and efficient use of available equipment.
Delivered more than 3,000 M4s and 1,000 Squad Automatic Weapons
Replacing M16A1 rifles and M60 machine guns.
Reduced Army Reserve logistics reconstitution backlog from a daily
average of nearly 15,000 items in fiscal year 2004 to just over 7,500
in fiscal year 2005.
New Equipment Strategy--How it Works
The Army Reserve has developed a new strategy to make the most
effective and efficient use of its equipment. The strategy includes
maintaining equipment at four main areas: home station, strategic
deployment sites, individual training sites and collective training
sites. The new strategy supports the Army Force Generation and the Army
Reserve Expeditionary Force (AREF) management systems. It ensures the
best available equipment is provided to Army Reserve Soldiers where and
when they need it, as they move through the pre-mobilization training
phase of the AREF cycle to mobilization and deployment.
While individual equipment, such as weapons and masks, will
continue to be maintained at unit home stations, only enough of a
unit's major items--trucks, forklifts, etc.--to allow for effective
training and to support homeland defense requirements will also be
there. The system allows remaining major items to be positioned at
various other key training and positioning sites.
In the new model, units will be moved to the equipment located at
the training sites, rather than moving equipment to the units. Creating
centrally located equipment pools to support directed and focused
training will enable the Army Reserve to harvest efficiencies in
resourcing and maintaining its equipment.
Individual Training Sites
Some of the equipment will be consolidated in individual training
sites. In a site established for individual training, Soldiers qualify
on their individual skills--specified, job-related skills (e.g., nurses
are tested in medication procedures; lawyers, in international law).
This is the first phase of the training cycle, followed by training at
unit home stations.
Collective Training Sites
Another pool of consolidated equipment will be kept at collective
training sites. Following home station unit training, units progress to
collective training. Successful participation in exercises at these
sites validates units as ready to conduct their wartime mission.
Strategic Deployment Sites
Some of the major end items are consolidated at Strategic
Deployment Sites (SDSs). After inspection and assembly into unit sets,
major equipment items are placed in controlled humidity storage at the
SDSs. After units are validated through individual and collective
training cycles and called to deploy, equipment at these sites will be
shipped directly to theater.
Progressing through individual training, home station training and
then participating in larger exercise-driven collective training is the
normal training cycle to prepare for a deployment. Pre-positioning
equipment at these sites is a cost-efficient system of support.
Compelling Needs
Procurement of equipment to support modularity
Night vision systems.
Chemical/biological/radiological detection/alarm systems.
Medical equipment.
Light-medium trucks (75 percent do not support single-fleet policy,
integral to training and operational efficiency).
Medium tractors (50 percent do not support single-fleet policy,
integral to training and operational efficiency.
Sustainment
Sustainment of depot maintenance levels.
Recapitalization of tactical truck inventory.
Army Reserve tactical maintenance contract labor to reduce
mobilization and training equipment backlogs.
MANNING THE FORCE
The Soldier has always been and remains the centerpiece of the
Army. The Army Reserve is committed to making the best use of our most
precious resource and is intent that those programs that affect
Soldiers and families will be our top priority. First, Soldiers and
their families need to know what to expect up front. The expectation of
service in the Reserve is much changed from a decade ago. Army Reserve
Soldiers and incoming recruits need to know that. Today's advertising
and communications reflect the reality of the contemporary operating
environment and the culture that surrounds this proud institution. The
Army Reserve will not lower its standards, but will instead use a host
of incentives and changed policies to access the best candidates for
Army Reserve service.
Additionally, the Army Reserve will strive to ensure that the best
quality of care for our Soldiers and their families is provided while
constantly working to improve the quality of life for Soldiers,
civilians and their families. Future personnel plans will assure we can
maintain both personnel strength and readiness. The Army Reserve
leadership will manage personnel through accession and assignment,
reassignment, training and retraining or reclassification.
Additionally, leadership will manage relocation in adherence to the
AREF and its integration into the ARFORGEN model.
Accomplishments
Since 9/11:
As of February, 2006, 147,000 Army Reserve Soldiers had mobilized
in support of GWOT, some more than once.
Developed and refined several information technology/management
systems streamlining accountability and business processes.
Reduced attrition from 24.7 percent in 2001 to 22.5 percent in
fiscal year 2005.
Established an Army Reserve casualty affairs program and office to
care for Soldiers and their grieving families
Fiscal Year 2005:
Fully implemented the Trainees, Transients, Holdees and Students
(TTHS) Account--a personnel accounting practice that enhances the
readiness of Army Reserve units.
Initiated a family programs Web portal to provide information:
www.arfp.org/cys.
Created and fully staffed 63 mobilization/deployment assistant
positions in communities throughout the country.
Recognized Soldiers' sacrifices by presenting nearly 26,000 awards
in the Welcome Home Warrior-Citizen Program.
Realigned and enhanced incentives and benefits for Army Reserve
Soldiers and families.
Established an employer relations program that is building positive
and enduring relationships with employers.
Revised several personnel policies under the Chief, Army Reserve,
to better lead and manage Army Reserve assets.
Culture Change
A critical element to support profound change in the Army Reserve
is the cultural shift now occurring. Continuous reinforcement of Army
Values, the expectation of deployment, the ability to think
innovatively and leader development are all part of that cultural
shift. While past Army Reserve advertising messages focused on
benefits, downplaying the effort required for service, ``Honor is never
off duty'' is now our touchstone. The Soldiers Creed and the Warrior
Ethos are the bedrock of our force.
ARMY RESERVE ACCESSIONS--FISCAL YEAR 2005
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Amount
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mission................................................ 28,485
Actual................................................. 23,859
Delta.................................................. (4,626)
Mission percent........................................ 83.8
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Recruiting
While accessioning fell short by 16.2 percent of its goal in 2005,
a variety of initiatives and improvements, such as those listed below,
are underway to achieve our recruiting goals in 2006 to meet the needs
of both personnel strength and readiness. Leaders can now access,
assign or reassign, train, re-train or reclassify Soldiers into the
Army Reserve more efficiently, responsively and effectively.
Selected Reserve Incentive Program
The Selected Reserve Incentive Program (SRIP) was crucial in 2005.
It enhanced the recruiting of Soldiers in critical specialties to meet
the Army Reserve readiness needs. Continued Congressional support
listed below will be just as crucial in the upcoming years:
--Increased bonus incentives to Soldiers reenlisting and joining the
Army Reserve.
--Expanding eligibility years for Reenlistment Bonuses.
--Officer Accession, Affiliation, and the Specialty Conversion
bonuses added to the SRIP.
--Lump sum payment options for reenlistment bonuses with tax-free
payments to Soldiers in the combat zone.
Other initiatives
Increased Enlisted Affiliation Bonuses.
Addition of the ``High Grad'' Bonus, used to attract those
candidates with at least 30 or more semester hours of college credit.
Establishment of the Active Guard and Reserve Selective
Reenlistment Bonus.
Retention
By taking care of Soldiers during the current pace of operations
and war, retention goals in the Army Reserve were met. In fiscal year
2005, the Army Reserve achieved 101.5 percent of its annual
reenlistment goal.
Full Time Support
The Army Reserve's highest priority continues to be dedicated
support to our war-fighting Soldiers. The Global War on Terrorism
continues to place a high demand on the Army Reserve's war fighting
formations and their ability to mobilize in a highly trained state.
Among the most important resources that we have in ensuring
mobilization readiness of the 21st Century Army Reserve are our Full
Time Support (FTS) personnel: Active Guard and Reserve Soldiers (AGR),
Department of the Army civilians and our military technicians
(MilTechs). Congress has historically recognized the paramount
importance of adequate FTS levels for unit mobilization readiness.
The Army Reserve continues to maintain the maximum effective use of
our FTS personnel to meet unit readiness requirements prior to arrival
at the mobilization station.
Historically, the Army Reserve has had the lowest FTS percentage of
any DOD Reserve component.
--In fiscal year 2005, DOD average FTS manning level was 21 percent
of end strength, while the fiscal year 2005 total for the Army
Reserve was 11.3 percent.
--The projected increase for Army Reserve FTS in fiscal year 2006
takes the level only to 11.6 percent.
--Congress and the Army continue to support the goal of 12 percent
FTS by fiscal year 2010 in order for the Army Reserve to meet
minimum essential readiness levels as proposed by Headquarters,
Department of the Army, in fiscal year 2000.
In fiscal year 2005, the Army Reserve was tasked with FTS mission
requirements above and beyond programmed requirements, including:
--Replacing 78 Active component training advisers to the Reserve
components who will be reassigned to support Active component
missions.
--Providing U.S. Army Recruiting Command 734 additional recruiters
for fiscal years 2005 and 2006.
These un-programmed requirements placed an additional demand on our
already burdened FTS resources.
Quality of Life and Well Being of Soldiers and Family Members
Quality of life issues continue to be high on the list of things
that directly affect retention of Soldiers in the Army Reserve. The
Secretary of the Army has stated:
``My top priority will be the well-being of Soldiers and their
families. There is no more important aspect of our effort to win the
Global War on Terrorism than taking care of our people.''
The Army Reserve continues to improve its well-being efforts in the
myriad of programs, policies and initiatives in its purview. Family
programs remain a top priority.
Welcome Home Warrior Citizen Award Program
With congressional support, the Army Reserve was able to recognize
nearly 26,000 Army Reserve Soldiers with the Army Reserve Welcome Home
Warrior-Citizen Award in fiscal year 2005. The program ensures that
returning Warrior-Citizens understand that their contributions to the
mission and making our homeland more secure for all our citizens are
recognized and appreciated by the Nation and the Army. The response to
the program has been overwhelmingly positive in supporting efforts to
retain Soldiers, thus increasing unit readiness. With continued
congressional support, the Army Reserve will continue this program into
the ongoing fiscal year and beyond.
Well-Being Advisory Council
This new and very dynamic structure supports all five Army Reserve
constituent groups: Soldiers, families, civilians, retirees and
veterans. The needs of each of these constituencies are growing; our
programs continue to expand to meet these needs. The membership of the
council will include a variety of individuals from the commands and
organizations throughout the Army Reserve, including family member
volunteers. The council will meet twice each year to consider and
recommend disposition of well-being issues to the Chief, Army Reserve.
The council is our integral link to the Army Family Action Plan.
Army Reserve Child and Youth Services Program
The Army Reserve now has a Child and Youth Services (CYS)
Directorate staff to provide services that support the readiness and
well being of families, including those families that are
geographically dispersed. CYS programs and initiatives are designed to
reduce the conflict between parental responsibilities and Soldier
mission requirements. The Army Reserve CYS homepage is at www.arfp.org/
cys.
Educational Benefits
The Army Reserve Voluntary Education Services Program is a priority
of the Chief, Army Reserve. Continuance of these services is necessary
as an essential incentive we provide the Soldiers of the Army Reserve.
Army Reserve Voluntary Education Services is a DOD-mandated commanders
program that promotes lifelong opportunities for Selected Reserve
Soldiers through voluntary education services that enhance recruiting,
retention and readiness of Army Reserve Soldiers.
The Army Reserve Voluntary Education Services have continuously
provided an array of education programs since their inception. Recent
changes have decentralized the execution of the tuition assistance
program to allow for management decisions to be made closer to where
the Soldiers live and work. This also allows for tighter fiscal
controls and better coordination between Soldiers and colleges.
Other educational programs are listed below:
--Montgomery GI Bill;
--Defense Activity for Non-Traditional Education Support Testing
Program (DANTES);
--Student Guide to Success;
--Credit for Military Experience;
--Army/American Council on Education Registry Transcript System
(AARTS);
--Troops to Teachers Program; and
--Spouse to Teachers Program.
Support to Wounded Soldiers
The Army Reserve is dedicated to treating its Soldiers with the
care and respect they have earned. Supporting Soldiers wounded in
service to the country is one example of that commitment. The Disabled
Soldier Support System was renamed the U.S. Army Wounded Warrior
Program (Army W2) in November 2005. It continues to provide personal
support, advocacy and follow-up for these heroes. The Army W2
facilitates assistance from initial casualty notification through the
Soldier's assimilation into civilian communities' services (for up to
five years after medical retirement). Assistance includes:
--Information about family travel to the Soldiers' bedsides;
--Invitational travel orders for family members of seriously ill
patients;
--Pay issues;
--Options for continuing on active duty; and
--Assistance with Medical Evaluation and Physical Evaluation Board
processes.
Soldiers with 30 percent or greater disability ratings and in a
special category of injuries or illness--amputees, severe burns, head
injuries or loss of eyesight--are assessed for enrollment in the
program. Army W2 brings the wounded Soldiers and the organizations that
stand ready to assist these Soldiers and families together. The
Veterans' Administration and other similar veterans' service
organizations participate in the program.
Some of these Soldiers may be in the process of medical
retirements, pending other dispositions, such as being extended on
active duty, or enrollment in the Community Based Healthcare
Initiative, which allows selected reserve component Soldiers to return
to their homes and receive medical care in their community.
Base Operations Support
The Army Reserve is committed to providing better quality of life
services and critical support to Soldiers, their families and the
civilian work force. The increase in base operations support for fiscal
years 2006 and 2007 will greatly assist this effort, allowing for
better engineering support, safety programs, law enforcement, and force
protection, to name only a few areas.
More Efficient Management of Officer Promotions
Specific policy changes that were effected by the Chief, Army
Reserve, improved our personnel management capability. By creating
three separate reserve component competitive promotion categories, the
Army Reserve can retain and better manage its officers. Another change
enabled the Army Reserve to select officers based upon unique force
structure requirements. That change will provide business efficiencies
to better meet the manning requirements in all categories of the
Selected Reserve, producing greater predictability and equity among all
considered officers. The revised competitive categories meet the intent
of Congress to match the number of officers selected for promotion by a
mandatory promotion board to officers needed in the related categories.
Enhanced Care for Professional Development
Regional Personnel Service Centers (RPSCs), the Army Reserve
military personnel management offices, will provide active personnel
management for all Army Reserve Soldiers. Implementation of four RPSCs,
in support of the Army Reserve Expeditionary Forces model, will provide
standardized life-cycle management support to Army Reserve Soldiers
regardless of where they may be in the command. This initiative relies
on increased communication, interaction and involvement by commanders
and their Soldiers to assure trained and ready Soldiers.
Compelling Needs
Continued funding for enlistment, accession, affiliation,
conversion, and retention incentives and bonuses to meet readiness
requirements.
Attain minimum essential full time support level of 12 percent of
end strength by fiscal year 2010.
Strengthened medical and health services for Army Reserve Soldiers.
Continued funding for Army Reserve Soldier educational services and
opportunities (e.g., tuition assistance and scholarships).
Continuance of the Army Reserve Welcome Home Warrior-Citizen Award
Program.
THE WAY AHEAD
The changed conditions of warfare have greatly affected our armed
services, including and especially, the reserve components. We are now
engaged in a global war that will last a long time. We are on an
asymmetrical rather than a linear battlefield. We are in a protracted
war, not one with a defined beginning and end. The constant threat of
attacks on our homeland, including the use of weapons of mass
destruction, places a premium on readiness and responsiveness. Because
of these changing conditions, the Army Reserve has implemented a host
of initiatives that are creating deep, lasting and profound change.
Today, the deployment of our Army and Army Reserve, is no longer
the exception, rather it is the rule. The Army Reserve is using the
energy and urgency of Army transformation and the demands of the Global
War on Terrorism to change. We are changing our organization in deep
and profound ways, from a technically focused force-in-reserve to a
learning organization that provides trained, ready ``inactive duty''
Citizen-Soldiers, poised and available for active service, now as ready
as if they knew the hour and day they would be called.
To that end, the Army Reserve will require:
--Continued funding to support changes in personnel incentives;
--Adequate funding to support Army Reserve Expeditionary Force
training, equipping and maintenance strategies; and
--Support for legislative and policy changes to support recruiting
efforts, personnel management and mobilization.
Senator Stevens. Admiral Cotton.
STATEMENT OF VICE ADMIRAL JOHN G. COTTON, CHIEF, NAVAL
RESERVE, DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
Admiral Cotton. Good morning, Mr. Chairman, Senator Inouye.
Thank you very much for listening here today.
The Navy Reserve continues its full integration with the
Navy. In terms we have used this morning, we are in the huddle.
We are full participants on every play. Over 23,000 Navy
reservists are on orders at this moment, providing integrated
support to the fleet and combatant commanders in the away game;
2,100 Navy reservists are ashore in central command, providing
integrated combat service support.
PREPARED STATEMENT
I request that the statement is put in the record and, in
the interest of time, like to move on. We are standing by to
answer any questions you have, sir.
Senator Stevens. Thank you for your courtesies.
[The statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of Vice Admiral John G. Cotton
INTRODUCTION
Chairman Stevens, Senator Inouye, 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 (GWOT) 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 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. You supported adding an additional $10 million for the Non-
Prior Service Boot Camp program (Full Accession Program). This
additional funding allowed us to kick-start the program in fiscal year
2006. Navy is increasing funding for this program in fiscal year 2007.
Reserve Component (RC) Sailors are serving selflessly and are fully
integrated throughout the Department of Defense, 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
Navy consists of active and reserve military, civil service, and
contractors. The Total Navy 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 Department
of Defense and Department of Navy 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 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 Navy,
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, RC 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.--Our Active Component (AC) and RC 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 AC and RC
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 (IRR) members, will benefit
from increased opportunities to serve and REserve.
CHANGING DEMAND SIGNALS--NEW AND NON-TRADITIONAL MISSIONS
Navy Sailors continue to support the GWOT in Southwest Asia, around
the world and at home. Over 5,000 RC 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 RC 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 operational support is the equivalent
of 18 Naval Construction Battalions or two Carrier Strike Groups.
To define the Total Force requirements and maximize operational
support, Commander, Fleet Forces Command (CFFC) commenced a continuous
Reserve Zero-Based Review (RZBR) process in 2004. Navy and joint
mission requirements were prioritized, followed by a thorough analysis
of RC manpower available to meet those requirements. The ZBR continues
to facilitate Active Reserve Integration (ARI), placing RC billets in
various AC 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 RC.
The Navy supports 21 joint capability areas, built on the
foundations of Sea Strike, Sea Shield, Sea Basing and FORCEnet, and the
Navy RC is fully integrated in all enterprises. Excellent examples of
ARI are highlighted in CENTCOM, where 50 percent of the Navy individual
augmentee (IA) requirement is being met by RC Sailors. Operational
Health Support Unit (OHSU) 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 (NECC)
integrates the RC expeditionary and combat service support capabilities
into one Total Force command. The Naval Construction Force has 139
units comprised of AC and RC Sailors, and Naval Coastal Warfare
continues to rebalance active and reserve personnel to meet COCOM
requirements.
Fleet Response Units (FRU) are directly integrated with AC aviation
units. FRU Sailors maintain and operate the same equipment as Fleet
personnel, supporting the Fleet Response Plan (FRP) 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 (SAU),
which provides experienced maintenance personnel and qualified flight
instructors to Fleet Replacement Squadrons (FRS) and Training Commands.
Experienced RC technicians and aviators instruct both AC and RC 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 GWOT 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.
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 AC and RC Sailors needed
to support the Fleet while still providing effective surge operational
support.
Common AC/RC Pay System.--A common pay and personnel system that
provides for a seamless transition from AC to RC 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
decision making at all levels of the Department of Defense 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.
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 AC 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 AC and
RC 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 GWOT. 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 two 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 recruits are completing their AC 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 44 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 GWOT is not having an
appreciable affect on attrition. Yearly Navy Reserve attrition is
currently 27 percent and has remained at approximately the same level
for the past five years.
Enlisted Recruiting.--Fiscal year 2006 Navy Reserve enlisted
recruiting continues to be challenging, with 4,172 recruits attained
out of a year-to-date goal of 4,891 as of March 31, 2006. In fiscal
year 2005, although by the end of the year the Navy Recruiting Command
focused on the RC mission, it only accessed 85 percent of the fiscal
year 2005 RC enlisted goal, recruiting 9,788 against a target of
11,491. Navy attributes the recruiting shortfalls to several causes,
including the continued strong retention of AC Sailors. The GWOT has
caused an increase in the number of recruits needed by the Army and
Marine Corps, with competitive bonuses offered by all services.
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 combined the non-prior service
enlistment and prior service affiliation bonus into a single accession
authority payable as a lump sum with a maximum cap of $20,000. The
Reserve re-enlistment of $15,000 has also been authorized as a lump sum
payment. These programs will enhance the attractiveness of service in
the Reserve for those currently in our targeted ratings.
--Officer Recruiting.--Reserve Officer recruiting continues to fall
short. The primary market for RC officers is Navy veterans and,
as in enlisted recruiting, high retention of AC officers
reduces the pool of available candidates.
Other measures being taken to address the Reserve recruiting
shortfall include implementation of expanded authorities provided by
Congress in the fiscal year 2006 NDAA. 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.
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 IM/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 (PRIMS) to
more accurately capture fitness testing data.
Administrative Readiness.--Navy Reserve tracks administrative
readiness with the ``Type Commander (TYCOM) Readiness Management
System--Navy Reserve Readiness Module'' (TRMS-NRRM), 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'' (DRRS), 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.
TRANSFORMATION
Navy Reserve continues to lead DOD RC transformation. Through the
Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) process, Navy Reserve Centers (NRC)
are consolidating into larger, more centralized Navy Operational
Support Centers (NOSC) 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 (ROI) 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 RC Regions. Whenever possible,
our RC Sailors have indicated a strong desire to ``flex drill'' at
their AC supported commands, which achieves a greater level of
readiness and operational support, as well as Total Force integration.
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 AC and RC
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 AC and RC personnel and equipment, providing additional resources
to recapitalize the Navy of the future.
Our dedicated RC Sailors continue to volunteer to serve and
REserve, 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 RC Sailors have and will
continue to answer the call to ``be ready'' to support the Combatant
Commanders and prevail in the Long War.
Senator Stevens. General Bergman.
STATEMENT OF LIEUTENANT GENERAL JACK W. BERGMAN,
COMMANDER, MARINE CORPS RESERVE, UNITED
STATES MARINE CORPS, DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
General Bergman. Good morning, sir, Mr. Chairman, Senator
Inouye.
As a first-timer here, brevity I guess is very good on all
of our parts because time is of the essence. As the Marine
Corps, the Marine Corps Reserve, we are still focused on
getting that individual marine ready to go, after that to fight
the fight, focus on the family, and focus on the funding for
allowing our participation in the long war.
Thank you for the opportunity to be here. I look forward to
your questions.
Senator Stevens. Thank you, sir.
[The statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of Lieutenant General Jack W. Bergman
INTRODUCTION
Chairman Stevens, Senator Inouye 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 in attaining that level of excellence and 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 continued 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
ongoing 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 on the 10th of
June 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
(GWOT). 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 some 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 tactics and warfighting equipment continues to change and
evolve, our level of readiness for future challenges must 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 are held to identical training standards. A
strong Inspector-Instructor (I&I) system and a demanding Mobilization
and Operational Readiness Deployment Test (MORDT) program ensure 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 Marine Forces Reserve
in ways that will reverberate for years to come. When Hurricanes
Katrina and Rita battered the Gulf Coast, Marine Forces Reserve was
part of both the evacuation and the relief efforts in the area. Due to
the storms, Marine Forces Reserve 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 managed the mobilization and deployment of units to
the affected areas to support relief efforts. In some cases marines
were serving in their own communities that were devastated by the
storms.
As of this month, over 5,300 Reserve Marines are activated in
support of Operation Enduring Freedom, Operation Iraqi Freedom, and
Horn of Africa operations. Of these marines, approximately 4,000 are
serving in combat-proven ground, aviation and service support units led
by Reserve Marine officers and non-commissioned officers. The remaining
1,300+ Reserve Marines are serving as individual augments in support of
Combatant Commanders, the Joint Staff and the Marine Corps. Since
September 11, 2001, the Marine Corps has activated over 39,000 Reserve
Marines, and more than 97 percent of all Marine Forces Reserve 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 capabilities
by creating anti-terrorism battalions from existing units, as well as
provisional civil affairs groups 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, intelligence gathering,
Homeland security, and civil affairs capabilities.
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.
Force Units
Marine Forces Reserve has provided provisional civil affairs
groups, air-naval gunfire liaison detachments and counter intelligence
teams in support of Operation Iraqi Freedom.
The Marine Corps has two permanent civil affairs groups and, in
2005, formed two additional provisional civil affairs groups. The
decision was made to expand the Corps' civil affairs capability for the
Iraqi conflict by creating a provisional 5th and 6th Civil Affairs
Group (CAG) 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 at a transfer of
authority ceremony with the 4th CAG at Camp Fallujah on March 10, 2005.
Led by Col. Steve McKinley and Sgt. Maj. John Ellis, 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 SgtMaj
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 the civil affairs groups, Marine
Forces Reserve has provided detachments from both 3d and 4th Air Naval
Gunfire Liaison Company (ANGLICO)--based in Long Beach, California and
West Palm Beach, Florida 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 calling 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 LtCol Lionel B. Urquhart, a
manager for Roadway Transportation Services, and his senior enlisted
advisor SgtMaj Edward C. Wagner, supported Regimental Combat Team 2
(RCT-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 into 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 five more named operations in
an area covering 4,200 square kilometers. The scheme of maneuver for
entry into the town of Kubaysah employed the first heliborne and
mechanized combined assault in Area of Operation ``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 Reserve Marines 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 its greatest successes.
Fifth Battalion, 14th Marines (-) Reinforced, commanded by John C.
Hemmerling, 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 they transitioned from a reserve artillery battalion
into a composite battalion. The 1,000-strong battalion was comprised of
15 active and reserve units and detachments, and integrated active and
Reserve Marines down to the fire team level. 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 including convoy security operations;
law and order at forward operating bases; operate five regional
detention facilities; provide 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
consisting of suspected insurgents, terrorists and criminals--without
incident; safely escorted over 300 convoys throughout the Multinational
Force West area of operations; occupying and defending Camp Fallujah
and approximately 100 square kilometers of battle space surrounding it;
and recruiting over 1,000 Iraqi police candidates.
The 4th Marine Division also provided a significant presence during
Hurricane Katrina relief efforts on the Gulf Coast. From the Commanding
General, MajGen Douglas O'Dell--who was appointed to lead the entire
Marine Corps relief effort--to a multitude of units from Alabama,
Texas, Florida, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Virginia, Missouri and other
States, elements of the 4th Marine Division converged on the
beleaguered area to form the marine nucleus of support. Worthy of
particular note are the marines of the 4th Assault Amphibian Battalion
in Gulfport, Mississippi. Immediately after the storm passed, these
intrepid marines began combing their community in their amtracs in
search of victims, as well as rendering assistance to local
authorities. The last of these Marine Reserve units returned to their
home stations on October 1.
Fourth Marine Logistics Group
Fourth 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 (CSS) and
the personnel necessary to sustain all elements of the operating force
in multiple theaters and at various levels of war. Fourth 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 as 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 (LCE) 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 of 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 Civil Affairs Group.
Fourth Marine Aircraft Wing
Fourth 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 tasked sortie requirements. These assets were the first 4th
MAW F/A-18s to deploy in support of OIF and the first Marine F/A-18 A+
to deploy the Advanced Targeting Pod (LITENING) in a combat
environment. Marine Medium Helicopter Squadron (HMM) 764 and HMM 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 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-1W and
9 UH-1N aircraft from 3rd MAW. Immediately upon acceptance, they
transferred six of the AH-1Ws and four of the UH-1Ns to HMLA-775
Detachment A, which then repositioned all aircraft to Johnstown,
Pennsylvania. Additionally, Heavy Marine Helicopter Squadron (HMH) 772
was chosen to conduct the initial Night Vision Goggle (NVG) flight
training evolution designed for Navy MH-53E aircrew, in preparation for
their deployment in support of Operation Iraqi Freedom. This marked the
first time Navy MH-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, and ongoing detachments of engineers, refuelers, and
firefighters to OIF.
Hurricane Katrina made landfall on August 29, 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 rescue
efforts in New Orleans on August 31, 2005. The unit deployed four
aircraft, which transported 348,000 lbs 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 (SPMAGTF) 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 NAS JRB New Orleans. MACG-48 and MWSG-47 brought their
own specialized assistance in the form of aircraft controllers and
logistical support. Fourth MAW continued to support Katrina relief
efforts until October 2005.
ACTIVATION PHILOSOPHY
Reserve forces have been sustained 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 well balanced and cohesive units
within Marine Forces Reserve, ready for sustained employment and
warfighting. 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) Marines in
support of the next Operation Iraqi Freedom rotation and 290 SMCR
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 5,464 Reserve
Marines have been activated more than once; about 1,875 of whom are
currently activated. As of April 2006, approximately 61 percent of the
current SMCR unit population and 72 percent of the current Individual
Mobilization Augmentee (IMA) population have been activated at least
once. About 2.8 percent of our current Individual Ready Reserve (IRR)
population is deployed in support of OIF/OEF. If you include the number
of marines who previously deployed in an active status who have since
transferred to the IRR, the number reaches 57 percent. This is worth
particular note as the IRR provides needed depth and 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 GWOT is the primary focus of the Marine
Corps Reserve, other functions, such as pre-deployment preparation and
maintenance, recruiting, training, facilities management and long term
planning continue. The wise use of the Active Duty Special Work (ADSW)
program allows the Marine Corps to fill these short-term requirements
with Reserve Marines. For example, as of this month almost 4,600
marines are 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.
MARINE CORPS RESERVE CAPABILITIES
The Marine Corps Reserve recognizes the fiscal and security
environment of today and the future demands required to remain
effective, relevant and capable in support of the Total Force and
Combatant Commanders. To this end, we have been active participants in
the 2004 Force Structure Review Group and presently, the Capabilities
Assessment Group. Both initiatives, discussed in the ensuring
paragraphs, will better posture Marine Forces Reserve with a lethal
spectrum of capabilites to support irregular and traditional warfare.
Force Structure Review Group 2004 (FSRG 04)
FSRG 04 convened in April-May 2004 to rebalance Marine Corps total
force capabilities for sustained support to OIF and OEF. The effort was
end-strength and structure neutral--with proposed new capabilities
offset by reductions in lower priority, underused capabilities. A key
rationale for the effort included the necessity to build more
sustainable capabilities in job skill areas experiencing high demand
and high personnel tempo rates. In last year's testimony we reported
the results of FSRG 04, which called for decreasing Reserve Component
anti-aircraft, artillery, tank, and tactical aviation capability while
increasing anti-terrorism, civil affairs, intelligence, light armored
reconnaissance, and mortuary affairs capabilities within the reserve
component over a 3 year period (fiscal year 2005-07). Executing these
actions while simulaneously supporting OEF and OIF commitments is
challenging, and involves close collaboration among force structure,
manpower, training, operations, logistics, facility, and fiscal
planners. fiscal year 2006 contains the preponderance of actions which
are well underway and by the end of fiscal year 2007, will better
posture the reserve component to sustain the Long War.
Base Realignment And Closure 2005 (BRAC 05)
BRAC 05 moves 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 Years Defense
Program. Of the other two, the Federal City in New Orleans appears both
promising and challenging and 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, California,
to a Marine Corps Reserve-owned facility in Pasadena, California.
EQUIPMENT
The Marine Corps Reserve, like the active component, faces two
primary equipping challenges: supporting and sustaining our forward
deployed forces in the GWOT while simultaneously resetting and
modernizing the Force to prepare for future challenges. Our priorities
in support of the first challenge are to provide every deploying
Reserve Marine with the latest generation individual combat and
protective equipment; second, to procure essential communications
equipment; third, to procure simulation devices that provide our
marines with essential training and enhance survivability in hostile
environments; and fourth, to provide adequate funding to O&M accounts.
Our priorities in support of resetting and modernizing the Force
include the procurement and fielding of light armored vehicles to
outfit two new Light Armored Reconnaissance Companies, filling our
remaining communications equipment shortfalls, and adequately funding
upgrades to our legacy aircraft.
Training Allowance
The total wartime equipment requirement for Marine Corps units is
called the Table of Equipment (T/E). For Marine Forces Reserve, the T/E
consists of two parts: a Training Allowance (T/A) and In-Stores assets.
The T/A is the equipment our units maintain at their training sites.
Our units have established training allowances 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 Marine Forces Reserve 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. This
construct 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 Marine Forces Reserve units will have the
primary end items necessary to conduct their mission.
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), Marine Forces
Reserve will experience selected equipment shortfalls, particularly
communications and electronic equipment. This shortfall will be
approximately 10 percent across the Force in most areas, and somewhat
greater for certain low density ``big-box'' type equipment sets. The
shortfall will not preclude essential sustainment training within the
Force. Shortfalls are being mitigated over time by equipment procured
through the fiscal year 2005 Emergency Supplemental as well as fiscal
year 2005 and fiscal year 2006 National Guard and Reserve Equipment
Appropriations.
Individual Marine Equipment
As with all we do, our top focus is the individual marine and
sailor. Our efforts to equip and train this most valued resource have
resulted in obtaining the latest generation individual combat and
protective equipment: M4 rifles, Advanced Combat Optic Gunsight (ACOG)
rifle scopes, lower body armor, and night vision goggles, to name a
few. I am pleased to report that every member of Marine Forces Reserve
deployed over the past year in support of the Global War on Terror, as
well as those currently deployed in 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.
Ground Equipment
The ground equipment readiness (mission capable) rates of our
deployed forces average above 95 percent. This has been accomplished by
tapping into pre-positioned stocks in Norway and Maritime Prepositioned
Shipping, through organic maintenance capabilities, contractor support,
leveraging the Army ground depot capability, an established principal
end item rotation plan, and the established pool of ground equipment
(Forward In-Stores) which expedites the replacement of damaged major
end items. The corresponding ground equipment readiness (mission
capable) rates for non-deployed units average 85 percent, although we
do have shortages in home station equipment available for training due
to ``cross-leveling'' equipment in support of GWOT. Equipment that has
been cross-leveled to OIF includes communications equipment, crew-
served weapons, optics, and a reserve infantry battalion's equipment
set.
The harsh operating environments found in Afghanistan and Iraq,
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. With GWOT equipment usage rates ranging from
four to nine times normal peacetime usage depending on the end item,
hours/miles, and operational conditions, maintaining current readiness
levels will require extensive maintenance efforts, particularly for any
major end items returned to CONUS.
Aviation Equipment
The Marine Corps Reserve operates and maintains a diverse but aging
inventory of aircraft including: AH-1W Cobras, CH-46E Sea Nights, CH-
53E Super Stallions, F-5 Tiger Sharks, KC-130T Hercules, F/A-18A
Hornets, UH-1N Hueys, and Operational Support Airlift aircraft
consisting of UC-12 King Airs and UC-35 Citations. The average age of
our tactical aircraft is: CH-46E: 38 years; UH-1N: 34 years; F-5: 29
years; F/A-18A: 21 years; KC-130T: 19 years; CH-53E: 17 years; AH-1W:
12 years.
The harsh operating environments in Afghanistan and Iraq--extreme
temperatures, high altitudes, corrosive desert environment--have
created maintenance challenges, negatively affected the normal expected
service life of our rotary wing fleet, and accelerated the aging of the
inventory. The CH-46, for example, has been utilized in support of OIF
at 200 percent of its peacetime usage rate. With no active production
lines for our rotary wing aircraft, maintaining our inventory in a
mission capable status has been accomplished through an ever increasing
workload on our enlisted maintainers, yet despite difficult
circumstances they continue to excel. The aviation equipment readiness
(mission capable) rates of our deployed forces averaged 82 percent over
the past 12 months. The corresponding rate of units remaining in
garrison averaged 74 percent over the same period.
The President's budget request provides limited modernization
dollars for Marine Corps Reserve (and Navy Reserve) aircraft: $2.6
million for Adversary Aircraft (F-5 & USN F-16), $7.1 million for H-53
series aircraft, and $30.3 million for cargo/transport aircraft (e.g.,
KC-130T, UC-12, UC-35). Selective aircraft modernization needs
identified in the fiscal year 2007 National Guard and Reserve Equipment
Report and elsewhere include: AH-1W critical cockpit upgrade, CH-46
crashworthy crew chief seats, KC-130T Defensive Electronic
Countermeasures (DECM) and Night Vision Lighting (NVL) upgrade. With no
new aircraft slated for delivery to the Marine Corps Reserve, it is
essential that procurement funding continue for selective upgrade and
modernization of legacy aircraft, as well as adequately funding the O&M
account.
We have mitigated aircraft reset requirements as much as possible
through specific aircraft modifications, proactive inspections and
corrective maintenance; however, significant reset efforts exist.
Additional requirements for depot level maintenance on airframes,
engines, weapons, and support equipment will continue well after
hostilities end and our aircraft have returned to their home stations.
Assuming no top-line increase, the magnitude of the aviation reset
requirement cannot be accomplished within the procurement account of
the President's budget without having detrimental impacts elsewhere
within the Marine Corps. We greatly appreciate the support of Congress
in providing past supplemental appropriations.
Marine aviation is poised to undergo significant transformation
over the next 10 years. The initial impact to the Marine Corps Reserve
is slated to occur during fiscal year 2007 when one Reserve F/A-18A
squadron is programmed to deactivate. Coupled with the fiscal year 2005
deactivation of another Reserve F/A-18A squadron stemming from the
Department of the Navy's Tactical Aviation (TACAIR) integration
initiative, two Reserve F/A-18A squadrons will remain after fiscal year
2007.
National Guard And Reserve Equipment Appropriation (NGREA)
NGREA continues to provide invaluable support in providing
interoperable, state-of-the-art equipment to our Reserve Marines, the
Total Force and the ultimate customer--the Combatant Commanders. In
fiscal year 2005, NGREA provided $50 million ($40 million for Title III
and $10 million under Title IX) which is presently being obligated to
procure high priority aviation and ground needs such as: Aviation
Survivability Equipment (ASE) for AH-1W aircraft, Helicopter Night
Vision Systems (HNVS) for CH-53E aircraft, light weight troop seats for
CH-46 aircraft, SATCOM radios for KC-130T aircraft; significant
quantities of communication equipment including: Integrated Intra-Squad
Radios (IISR); PRC-117s, PRC-148s, PRC-150s; simulation devices
including: Indoor Simulated Marksmanship Trainer-Enhanced, Virtual
Combat Convoy Trainer, MTVR Training Simulator; and other miscellaneous
equipment including: Night Vision Systems, Laser Target Designators;
Counterintelligence HUMINT Equipment Suite (CIHEP) and power
distribution systems.
Fiscal year 2006 NGREA provided $30 million, which was released to
the Marine Corps for obligation in March 2006. Again focused on
supporting current warfighter needs, this funding will procure
communications equipment including PRC-148s and Improved Intra-Squad
Radios, multiple simulation devices including: Virtual Combat Convoy
Trainers, LAV Combat Vehicle Training Simulators, a Medium Tactical
Vehicle Replacement--Training System (MTVR-TS), and other miscellaneous
equipment including: Ground Laser Target Designators, In-Transit
Visibility Management Package/RFID Tags, Defense Advanced GPS
Receivers, Marine Expeditious Power Distribution Systems, CIHEP and
alternate power supplies.
Given the urgency of fielding this equipment to our mobilizing and
deploying marines, we coordinate with Marine Corps Systems Command and
other executing agencies to ensure NGREA is placed on contract and
delivered as soon as possible.
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 GWOT 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 prior 3
fiscal years. As of January 2006 the OSD attrition statistic 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 an 8.5 percent
benchmark 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 Marine
Forces Reserve 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 fifty vacant billets
this year, with plans to expand the program in the coming years.
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. Providing
information on education benefits, available childcare programs, family
readiness resources and health care benefits enhances their quality of
life and readiness.
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 service members 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 Marine Forces Reserve 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 participated in their courses
via distance learning. In this way, tuition assistance helped to
mitigate the financial burden of education and facilitated progress in
the marine's planned education goals. 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 they are key retention
and recruiting tools and an important part of our commandant's guidance
to enhance the education of all marines. The 2005 National Defense
Authorization Act included a new education assistance program for
certain Reserve and National Guard Service members. 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 service members.
Child Care Programs
Marines and their families are often forced to make difficult
choices in selecting childcare before, during and after a marine's
deployment in support of the Global War on Terror. We are deeply
grateful for ``Operation Military Child Care,'' 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 Child Care Resource and Referral Agencies. Without the
fiscal authorization provided by the Senate and House, these programs
could not have been initiated or funded. These combined resources have
immeasurably contributed to the quality of life of our marines' and
their families. I thank you all for your support in the past and the
future in providing sufficient funds for these key initiatives.
Family Readiness
Everyone in Marine Forces Reserve recognizes the strategic role our
families have in our mission readiness, particularly in our
mobilization preparedness. We help our families to prepare for day-to-
day military life and the deployment cycle (Pre-Deployment, Deployment,
Post-Deployment, and Follow-On) by providing educational opportunities
at unit Family Days, Pre-Deployment Briefs, Return and 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, un-married 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 One Source 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 use 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 on-site at Reserve Training Centers to support all
phases of the deployment cycle. Marine Forces Reserve is incorporating
this resource into Family Days, Pre-Deployment Briefs and Return &
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 on-site individual and group counseling.
Tricare
Since 9/11, 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 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 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 de-activation.
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, Marine Forces Reserve
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.
CONCLUSION
As I have stated in the beginning of my testimony, your consistent
and steadfast support of our marines and their families has directly
contributed to our successes, both past and present, and I thank you
for that support. As we push on into the future, your continued concern
and efforts will play a vital role in the success of Marine Forces
Reserve. Due to the dynamics of the era we live in, there is still much
to be done.
The Marine Corps Reserve continues to be a 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 9/11, 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.
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 Marine Forces Reserve 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.
______
Biographical Sketch of Lieutenant General Jack W. Bergman
Lieutenant General Bergman was commissioned a second lieutenant in
the Marine Corps Reserve under the Platoon Leader School program after
graduation from Gustavus Adolphus College in 1969. In addition to
attaining an M.B.A. degree from the University of West Florida, his
formal military education includes Naval Aviation Flight Training,
Amphibious Warfare, Command and Staff, Landing Force Staff Planning
(MEB & ACE), Reserve Component National Security, Naval War College
Strategy & Policy, Syracuse University National Security Seminar,
Combined Forces Air Component Command, LOGTECH, and CAPSTONE.
He flew CH-46 helicopters with HMM-261 at Marine Corps Air Station,
New River, North Carolina, and with HMM-164 in Okinawa/Republic of
Vietnam. Assigned as a flight instructor, he flew the T-28 with VT-6,
NAS Whiting Field, Florida. He left active duty in 1975 and flew UH-1
helicopters with the Rhode Island National Guard, Quonset Point, Rhode
Island. Following a 1978 civilian employment transfer to Chicago,
Illinois, he served in several 4th Marine Aircraft Wing units at NAS
Glenview, Illinois (HML-776, flying the UH-1; VMGR-234, flying the KC-
130; and Mobilization Training Unit IL-1). He was selected to stand up
the second KC-130 squadron in 4th MAW and, in 1988, became the first
Commanding Officer, VMGR-452, Stewart ANGB, Newburgh, New York, 1992-
1994 he commanded Mobilization Station, Chicago, Illinois, the largest
of the 47 Marine Corps Mobilization Stations.
During 1995 he served as a Special Staff Officer at Marine Corps
Reserve Support Command, Overland Park, Kansas. In 1996, he became
Chief of Staff/Deputy Commander, I Marine Expeditionary Force
Augmentation Command Element, Camp Pendleton, California. Late 1997, he
transferred to 4th Marine Aircraft Wing Headquarters, New Orleans,
Louisiana to serve as Assistant Chief of Staff/G-1. Promoted to
Brigadier General, he became Deputy Commander, 4th Marine Aircraft
Wing.
Transferred in June 1998 to Headquarters, Marine Forces Europe,
Stuttgart, Germany he served as Deputy Commander. Recalled to active
duty from April to July 1999, he was dual-hatted as EUCOM, Deputy J-3A.
He then commanded II Marine Expeditionary Force Augmentation Command
Element, Camp Lejeune, North Carolina until assuming command of 4th
Marine Aircraft Wing, New Orleans, Louisiana in August 2000. In
September 2002 he assumed command of the 4th Force Service Support
Group, New Orleans, Louisiana. He, also, served as Chairman, Secretary
of the Navy' Marine Corps Reserve Policy Board, 2001-2003.
Returning to active duty in October 2003, he served as Director,
Reserve Affairs, Quantico, Virginia. He assumed command of Marine
Forces Reserve/Marine Forces North on June 10, 2005.
Lieutenant General Bergman's personal decorations include the
Defense Meritorious Service Medal, Single Mission Air Medal with Combat
``V'' and Air Medal with numeral ``1''.
Senator Stevens. General Bradley.
STATEMENT OF LIEUTENANT GENERAL JOHN A. BRADLEY, CHIEF,
AIR FORCE RESERVE, DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR
FORCE
General Bradley. Senator Stevens, it is a pleasure to be
here with you today, sir. I am very proud of our Air Force
Reserve airmen who are serving this Nation. Many have served,
thousands have served in Iraq and Afghanistan. Hundreds of them
helped with Hurricane Katrina relief saving over 1,000 lives.
Many have been responsible for what Senator Mikulski
mentioned earlier about evacuating severely wounded soldiers
and marines. In fact, most of the aeromedical evaculation
capability of the United States Air Force is in the Air Force
Reserve, and it was only in the last month that we lost the
first soldier in flight. So for over 4 years we have kept all
of those soldiers alive in flight, and that is a challenge, but
the great medical progress we have made has allowed that, and
it is the dedication of our wonderful aeromedical crews that
has helped bring that about.
I want to thank you and Senator Inouye and the other
members of the subcommittee for the great support that we get
for our Air Force Reserve. The National Guard and Reserve
equipment account has allowed us to bring great combat
capability to the skies of Iraq and Afghanistan to support
soldiers and marines on the ground with great systems that
provide for close air support. I want to thank you for that
great support. It has been key, as General Ickes said earlier,
to modernizing and enhancing our aircraft to keep us relevant
and useful to our Nation.
Thank you, sir.
Senator Stevens. Thank you. I see you were deputy chief at
Bergstrom. That is the last place I served in the continental
limits before I went to China.
General Bradley. Yes, sir.
[The statement follows:]
Prepared Statement of Lieutenant General John A. Bradley
Mr. Chairman, and distinguished Members of the committee, I
appreciate the opportunity to appear before you today. I want to thank
you for the support you have continued to show us these past few years
and I am happy to report it's making a difference for our forces and
our Nation. Recently, at a Reserve Chiefs' hearing, we were asked how
Guard and Reserve members compare to active duty when they are
mobilized. Because of your committee's continued legislative support,
we unanimously replied that when a Guard or Reserve member is activated
they are indistinguishable from the Regular Air Force.
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 (BAH) 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 2005
Air Force Reserve accomplishments since September 11, 2001, and
more specifically in the last fiscal year, clearly demonstrate 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 (GWOT) with more than 80,000 sorties (360,000
flying hours) flown in support of Operations Noble Eagle, Enduring
Freedom and Iraqi Freedom. The Air Force Reserve has flown almost
52,000 sorties in support of Operation Iraqi Freedom 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
Operation Enduring Freedom 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 Noble
Eagle mission since 2002; 150 sorties (906 flying hours) in fiscal year
2005. These contingency support missions include 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 AOR. As you may know, 61
percent of the Air Force's C-130 aircraft are assigned to the Air
Reserve Components. On a recent trip, Senator Lindsey Graham witnessed
the preponderance of Reserve Component airlift first hand and mentioned
it at the Guard and Reserve Commission hearing on March 8, 2006.
Senator Graham stated of the 20 sorties he flew in the OEF and OIF area
of responsibility, only one sortie was flown by an active duty crew!
HOMELAND CONTINGENCY SUPPORT
Our humanitarian efforts are equally as impressive as our wartime
operations. 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, and 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, including members
from the 926th Fighter Wing at NAS New Orleans, Louisiana and the 403rd
Wing at Keesler Air Force Base, Mississippi who were 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 Air Force Base and the 920th Rescue Wing
based at Patrick Air Force Base 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 Air Reserve Base, Georgia. The 920th Rescue Wing, the
first unit on the scene, flew more than 100 sorties in their HH-60G
helicopters, recovering 1,044 people who were threatened by the rising
water.
At 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 ARS, Ohio utilized their C-130's to
spray 10,746 gallons of insecticide across 2.9 million acres. This
equates to an area roughly the size 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
As these tremendous efforts clearly demonstrate, the backbone of
the Air Force Reserve is our people because they enable our mission
accomplishment. These patriots, comprised of traditional unit
reservists, Individual Mobilization Augmentees (IMAs), Air Reserve
Technicians (ARTs), Active Guard and Reserve (AGRs), and civilians,
continue to dedicate themselves to protecting the freedoms and security
of the American people. The operations tempo to meet the combatant
commanders' requirements since September 11, 2001 remains high, and is
not expected to decline 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 GWOT, and more than double the minimum
number of participation days required.
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 to meet the
continuing Air Force requirements since September 11, 2001. There are
several critical operational units and military functional areas that
must have volunteers to meet ongoing mission requirements because they
are near the 24-month mobilization authority. These include C-130, MC-
130, B-52, HH-60, HC-130, E-3 AWACS, and Security Forces. During
CY2005, the Air Force Reserve had 6,453 members mobilized and another
3,296 volunteers who served in lieu of mobilization to support GWOT. As
the 2005 calendar year closed, the Air Force Reserve had 2,770
volunteers serving full-time to meet GWOT requirements and 2,553
Reservists mobilized for contingency operations. We expect this mix to
become increasingly volunteer-based as this ``Long War'' continues.
The key to increasing volunteerism, and enabling us to bring more
to the fight, is flexibility. To eliminate barriers to volunteerism,
the Air Force Reserve has several on-going initiatives to better match
volunteers' desires and skill sets to the combatant commanders' mission
requirements. For example, the Integrated 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 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 volunteerism will be positively affected as
a result of the National Defense Authorization Act of 2005. This act
fosters more continuity in volunteerism because it adds flexibility to
end-strength accounting rules and provides equal benefits for activated
personnel. Facilitating the reservists' ability to volunteer provides
more control for the military member, their family, employer and
commander. In turn, this predictability allows more advanced planning,
lessens disruptions, and ultimately, enables 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 to 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 create a more
capable force of military, civilians, and contractors while freeing up
resources for Total Force recapitalization. No personnel reductions
exist as a result of the 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 a reduction from 74,900 authorized
personnel in fiscal year 2006 to an end strength of 67,800 personnel at
the end of fiscal year 2011.
RECRUITING AND RETENTION
The Air Force Reserve has experienced satisfactory retention, while
simultaneously meeting our recruiting goals for a fifth consecutive
year. I am proud of the fact that our Reservists contribute directly 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 BRAC initiatives, presents
significant future recruiting and retention challenges for the Air
Force Reserve. With the personnel reductions beginning in fiscal year
2008 and the realignment and closure of Reserve installations due to
BRAC, approximately 20 percent of our force will be directly impacted
by the planned changes through new and emerging missions, and mission
adjustments to satisfy Air Force requirements. In light of all these
changes, we expect the recruiting and retention environment will be
turbulent, dynamic and challenging.
Unlike the Regular Air Force, the Air Force Reserve does not have
an assignment capability with command-leveling mechanisms that 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. To accomplish
this, we need to employ force management initiatives that 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. It's important 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 may prove beneficial to our recruiting efforts
but will not be the complete answer since the Regular Air Force
critical skills closely match those in the Reserve. ``Other prior
service'' individuals accessed by the Reserve will inevitably require
extensive retraining which is 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. It is
imperative legislation does not include any language that would provide
a disincentive to Reserve Component affiliation. 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.
BASE REALIGNMENT AND CLOSURE
Recruiting and retention are particularly important when
considering the significant impact of the 2005 BRAC recommendations.
The Air Force Reserve 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 ANGB, Michigan and
directed the manpower be moved to MacDill AFB, Florida to associate
with the Regular Air Force. New Orleans, Louisiana to Denver, Colorado
and Selfridge, Michigan to Tampa, Florida are challenging commutes for
even the most dedicated reservist. These are just a few examples of the
impact base realignments have on our reservists. In the majority of
realignments, ability to serve is hindered due to the distances they
must travel to participate. In the post-BRAC environment, we continue
to strive to retain the experience of our highly trained personnel. We
are working closely with the Air Force and the Office of the Secretary
of Defense, on initiatives that will encourage those who were impacted
by BRAC decisions to continue to serve.
FAMILY SUPPORT
The military commitment that reservists make has a profound effect
on their families. The stresses of the military lifestyle; the
possibility of unexpected deployments, often into areas of 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
--Video telephones available at deployed site and unit site
--FAMNET (Family Support Global Communication Network) available at
63 countries (Internet access not required)
--Joint inter-service family assistance services
--Crisis intervention assistance
--Volunteer opportunities
--Reunion activities
--Information and referral services to appropriate support agencies
--Assistance with financial questions and concerns
--Telephone tree roster for communication to the families from the
unit
--Family support groups
--Morale calls
--Letter writing kits for children
--E-mail
Amazingly, there are only 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
and 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 families from Hurricane Katrina.
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 One Source. In 2005 there was a 12 percent increase
in usage of Air Force Reserve Family Readiness support. The top issues
follow:
AFRC Top Issues
--Emotional well-being
--Stress from repeated deployments and length.
One Source 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 6 sessions offered per
issue at no cost. A provider is found within 30 miles of residence
rather than 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 strengthening connections
with the family, helping them be better prepared, and having a
proactive outreach program to ensure unit, 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. Although we
now have demobilization training, it is more difficult to
institutionalize because members want to get home. When they finally
recognize they need help, we are left scrambling to provide assistance.
This is even more difficult at units like Peterson Air Force Base,
Colorado and Maxwell Air Force Base, Alabama where Family Readiness is
an additional duty. The command is working on how to best 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 terror.
ONE TIER OF READINESS
We in the Air Force Reserve pride ourselves on 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.
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 Regular Component. Bringing Air
Force front line 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 supporting 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 Components mix
must keep pace with emerging missions to allow the Air Force to
continue operating seamlessly as a Total Force. This concurrent
development will provide greater efficiency in peacetime and increased
capability in wartime.
Transforming and Modernizing the AFR
Equipment modernization is our lifeline to readiness. As the Air
Force transitions to a capabilities-based force structure, the
combination of aging and heavily used equipment requires across-the-
board recapitalization. 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 vital 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 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 NGREA
The National Guard and Reserve Equipment Account (NGREA) resolves
some of these AFR equipment deficiencies. We appreciate the support
provided in the 2006 NGREA. The money you provide is making a
difference; increasing the capability and safety of our airmen, and the
security of our Nation. The fact is AFR NGREA procurement strategy
fulfills shortfall equipment requirements. The items we purchase with
NGREA are prioritized from the airmen in the field up to the Air Force
Reserve Command Headquarters and vetted through the Air Staff. The
cornerstone is innovation and the foundation is capabilities-based and
has been for many years. 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. 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 (JHMCS)
with $1.3 million. We continue to purchase Litening AT Pods; this year
we have added $9.688 million of NGREA to the conference line item
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-52's we are installing Smart Multi-Function Color Display
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 Multi-Function Color Display 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, 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.
FISCAL YEAR 2007 FUNDING
The President's Budget as forwarded to Congress is vital to our
relevance and participation in the long war. It is balanced and what we
need to remain relevant in the future and fulfill the immediate needs
of the Combatant Commander.
We support the President's Budget decision to retire our aging
equipment. Divesting force structure is an essential piece in enabling
the Air Force Reserve to recapitalize our fleet, modernize our force
and increase associations. Depot maintenance costs affect us across the
board--training, readiness and operations, sapping resources and
preventing us from transforming to the force we need. We simply can't
afford to defer these retirements any longer. In an age of competing
priorities and scarce resources, accepting retirement of our oldest
legacy aircraft will reduce depot maintenance costs and free resources
to properly shape the force and increase combat capability to the
warfighter.
RECONSTITUTION
With a much higher operations tempo over the past 4 years, our
equipment is aging and wearing out at much higher than projected rates.
Reconstitution is a planning process with the purpose of restoring
``units back to their full combat capability in a short period of
time.'' The Long War 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 precludes shipping equipment and
vehicles back and forth due to cost and time constraints, therefore,
equipment is left in the AOR to allow quick transition of personnel and
mission effectiveness. However, the additional impacts are potential
AFR equipment disconnects and decreased readiness. The number one
contributing factor to poor readiness is equipment shortfalls. After
September 11, 2001 and during Operations Iraqi Freedom and Enduring
Freedom, units returning back to CONUS returned without the same level
of equipment as when they deployed. While leaving equipment and
vehicles in the AOR supports rotations and mission requirements, it 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 of the $5.4 million in GWOT
equipment that is unavailable due to being transferred, withdrawn, or
diverted in support of OIF/OEF. Equipment left behind includes
generators, test sets, fork lifts, cargo trucks, HMMWVs, M-16 rifles,
9MM pistols, night vision scopes, laptops, body armor, etc.
Reconstituting our equipment is critical for our airmen to train,
perform their mission and maintain readiness.
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. Thank you for keeping the National
Guard and Reserve Equipment Account (NGREA) alive and vibrant. Money
contributed by your committee through NGREA, has been essential to
keeping the Reserve relevant to the fight and at the leading edge of
employed technology in the field. While we maintain our heritage of
providing a strategic reserve capability, today and into the future, we
are your operational warfighting Reserve, bringing a lethal, agile,
combat hardened and ready force to the Combatant Commander in the daily
execution of the long war. Our vision is to provide the world's best
mutual support to the Air Force and our joint partners. We gratefully
appreciate your continued support in helping us defend this Nation in
our role as an Unrivaled Wingman.
Senator Stevens. Let me do this, and we do appreciate the
brevity that you have all expressed. The time is a problem this
morning because of the votes that are coming. But we do have
real concerns about the Reserve. We have currently, as I
understand it, 109,000 of the Guard and Reserve are on active
duty now, I am informed. And the Guard and Reserve comprise
more than 81 percent of the total of the mobilized Guard and
reservists. There are more than 40,000 of your people on active
duty now in the Army and 5,300 marines and the Navy has more
than 500 soldiers as I understand, plus 1,500 Reserve sailors
that provide support for the fleet, and the Air Force Reserve
flew 20,000 sorties in the last fiscal year alone.
Now, that is an increasing tempo that we really have got to
learn more about and what it means in terms of costs and the
impact on your structure. This operational tempo really brings
about the question of readiness. We would like to have you each
describe what you are doing to change your processes so that it
takes into account this readiness requirement now that is
involved in the Reserve.
Ms. Ashworth tells me that we have people in uniform now in
146 different countries of the world. As you listen to the
daily news, we all know this is a continuing struggle now
against terrorism that is going to go on. Are we going to see
any reformation in the Reserve structures in each one of your
services now to take into account this? How are you going to
prepare people for the fact that they are going to be the next
to be called up in the Reserve, and how are we going to deal
with them when they come out of the Reserve and go back into
their daily lives?
Will there be a guarantee, as mentioned here by Senator
Leahy, of how long before you can be recalled up, except for a
real world calamity? I think we would like to have you tell us
if there is anything we can do to help you in terms of these
changes, or at least reviews that have to be made to see what
changes should be made.
General Helmly.
General Helmly. Senator, I will lead off and I will be
brief to leave adequate time for my peers. First of all, I
would point to this chart which you see in front of you, which
is called and addresses the issue of readiness. Regardless of
the size of the force, in the past, on the left--and I will
point to it here--we have had a force structure----
Senator Stevens. This is the Army alone, right?
General Helmly. This is the Army Reserve, yes, sir.
We have had a force structure allowance above our end
strength. That force structure allowance is the cumulative
number of people that it would take to fill if we filled all of
our units, regardless of where they are, to 100 percent. So we
overstructured the force. That was an industrial age model for
a strategic reserve that we planned to fill over time from the
Individual Ready Reserve (IRR) or from new recruits.
What we are doing to address that, frankly, is very painful
and what it in some people's minds is counterintuitive, because
we are inactivating units in the midst of a war. But the units
that we are inactivating are nondeploying formations, first.
They are headquarters formations, they are garrison support
units, they are units that were not structured or built to
deploy.
So our intent, on the right, is to over the program
objective management (POM) years lower our structure allowance
to about 180,000 soldiers, using about 10 percent of our end
strength to man a trainees, transient, holdies and student
(TTHS) account. That is where we account for soldiers who are
in the training base or who are otherwise unready for temporary
periods of time, profiles, going through board actions, et
cetera. Then we have already implemented a delayed entry
program, a 21st century modern manpower tool used by the
regular Army, that accounts for recruits who have not yet
shipped to basic training.
So that is how we are addressing the readiness issue. The
second point I will address is the rotational. I would avoid
the word ``certainty.'' Certainly I know you will agree there
is no certainty in a very dangerous, uncertain world today.
That is why this readiness challenge is so important, because
none of us can predict when our forces will be required with
certainty.
But we are now implementing in the Army, and I am proud to
say we in the Army Reserve pioneered, an Army Reserve
expeditionary force, which has now morphed into the Army force
generation model. Frankly, we went to school on how Navy and
marine forces, both Reserve and Active, had operated in the
past and the Air Force, Air Reserve air expeditionary force
model. In fact, we visited Air Force Reserve Command
headquarters, General Bradley's headquarters, and asked their
staff--they were very cooperative--to explain to us how they
managed that in the Air Force Reserve.
So we are implementing that in rotational force pools, not
to provide certainty, but to provide greater predictability
over a 5-year pool period when my force is more apt to be
called, when I am expected to be in a higher state of
readiness, if you will.
I would add one last thing. These measures are in my
professional judgment very necessary. We must change ourselves
from within to meet the demands of this century. But similarly,
it is my judgment that the policies, practices, and procedures
by which we are governed, that relate to personnel management,
recruiting, retention, training, mobilization, and in fact
funding, are in similar need of deep change.
Thank you very much for your time.
Senator Stevens. Senator Inouye, do you have any comments
along that line?
Senator Inouye. According to the most recent QDR, a policy
decision was made that the Pacific area may be the area of
concern, much greater than the Atlantic area. As such, for
example, they are going to have five carriers in the Pacific
and five in the Atlantic. It used to be six in the Atlantic and
four in the Pacific.
With that in mind, why did the Quadrennial Defense Review
come out and transform your Army Reserve 9th Regional Readiness
Command to the 9th Regional Support Group, downgraded it,
reduced the strength? Do you not think it would have an impact
upon command and control in the Pacific area?
General Helmly. Senator, we do not intend to reduce our
Army Reserve strength numbers in the Pacific region. We will
change the headquarters of the 9th Regional Readiness Command,
that is accurate, to a Regional Support Group. We will retain
there a brigadier general. We are moving the 311th Signal
Command, Network Operations Command, a two-star command, over
time from CONUS to Hawaii. It will be the daily, 24/7/365
network operations for Army and joint forces in the Pacific,
the combatant commander.
In addition, as the Army establishes a regular Army-
commanded 8th Theater Sustainment Command headquartered in
Hawaii to provide logistics support throughout the region, the
deputy commander of that organization will be an Army Reserve
brigadier general.
Our forces in the Pacific have sustained us very well,
valiantly. The most recent example is the 1442d ``Go for
Broke'' Battalion, but throughout that region from Hawaii and
the territories in the Pacific we have recruited very well. The
soldiers and their families are courageous, strong. We have no
intention of reducing whatsoever our strength. We are simply
restructuring to make the headquarters of the 9th Reserve
Readiness Command (RRC) a deployable formation.
Senator Inouye. Thank you very much. It is reassuring.
EQUIPMENT
General Bergman, there is a tremendous amount of wear and
tear, we have been told, on Army equipment, and I presume it
must be the same with yours. How do you feel that this will
impact upon readiness of your units?
General Bergman. Well, sir, the increased use of the
equipment is by no means a secret to anyone. The cyclic rate is
in some cases 5 to 10 times what it was programmed for original
usage. Across the total force Marine Corps, we have cross-
leveled through a strategic ground equipment working group all
of those equipment pieces that are in, whether they be in the
prepositioned force, the caves, Albany storage, wherever it
happens to be, and actually over the last year increased the
supply readiness by about 5 percent.
However, at the same time, because of that increased cyclic
rate usage, we see that we will continue to need more equipment
just in the Reserve component to maintain the 80 percent
training allowance that we use.
RECRUITING AND RETENTION
Senator Inouye. I have been told that the Marine Reserves
have longer deployment to the Middle East than other units. If
that is so, how does it affect recruiting and retention?
General Bergman. Well, sir, if you will, the Marine Corps
business model for rotations, whether it is Active or Reserve,
is basically a 6- to 7-month rotation, whether it be deployed
as part of a marine expeditionary unit or deployed to Iraq or
Afghanistan. With that model applied across the total force, it
has allowed us to plan for activation, let us say, of
battalions, reserve battalions, that within a 1-year business
activation, 1-year business model activation, ample
predeployment training, 7-month deployment, and ample time for
demobilization.
Retention is above normal about 3 percent. So I guess what
that says in the long term is that the people are voting with
their feet and they are staying. So it is a good news story.
Recruiting, we are right on track to make our 39,600 for this
year, sir.
Senator Inouye. General Bradley, many of your units were
realigned by BRAC and as a result many of your personnel would
have to make up their minds, do they travel long distances or
quit. How are you addressing this problem?
General Bradley. Sir, what we are doing is we are working
very hard to try to place every single person who wants to stay
with us in a new unit. That will not work for everyone. Not
everyone can pick up and move their families. As you know, we
are not allowed to pay for moves of reservists or guardsmen
when their base or unit is closed.
There is a huge amount of realignment going on. We are
affecting about 13,000 people. We have a lot of innovative
programs that we are using to assist them in finding jobs. We
want to keep them in the Air Force Reserve if we can. If we can
assist them in getting in the Air National Guard or the Marine
Corps Reserve or the Army Reserve, we will do that as well,
because we want them to continue serving our Nation if
possible.
We also, though, would ask for and have been working on
Capitol Hill to try to get authorities that we had in the 1990s
during the base closure rounds for Reserve transition
assistance programs for those people who have served our Nation
for 15 years or more, to allow them to have some reduced type
of retirement. And they would receive that retirement pay at
age 60, but it would be reduced from what someone who had a 20-
or 25-year retirement would be. The Reserve transition
assistance program has been pretty well received by the members
with whom we have talked.
We are trying hard to keep those people in our units. We
are getting more efficient through this base closure process.
It up-ends lives, but ultimately we will save a lot of money by
having the right numbers of airplanes on our bases and the
right numbers of bases.
RECRUITING
Senator Inouye. Admiral Cotton, I gather that the Navy,
like all other components, must rely on bonuses and incentives
to address recruiting challenges. How have you carried out this
program? Because I have been told that you are a little
different from the rest of them.
Admiral Cotton. Yes, sir, we are. Two and one-half years
ago we integrated Navy and Navy Reserve recruiting. We have
changed expectations of a sailor so that we no longer leave the
Navy, end an obligation, quit the Navy. You transition to the
Reserve component once you complete your initial obligation,
either full-time selected reservist or Individual Ready
Reserve. So everyone will go to the Reserve component. We will
keep track of you.
So this is a continuum of service, a culture of a sailor
for life, and then transitions or on-ramps and off-ramps
throughout service back to active duty, according to skill sets
and capabilities. Age does not really matter right now,
particularly in a global war on terror, with the skill sets
that we are sending ashore in Central Command in particular.
One thing I would like to ask your consideration for is I
personally think the Army Guard has got it. If you look at
their numbers increasing right now, they have a finder's fee.
They pay $1,000 for someone to recommend a friend to join and
another $1,000 when they complete training, and this has proven
to be extremely effective for the title 32 guardsmen.
I think we should look at the authority for us to do the
same thing, where every sailor, every soldier, every airman,
every marine is also a recruiter. This would give us an ability
to go out into the community and recruit our friends. I also
think you can pay for it in the top line by reducing full-time
recruiters, because every single person in uniform who has ever
served could turn into a recruiter.
RECRUITING AND RETENTION
Senator Inouye. I know that recruiting and retention go up
and down, but one thing seems certain, that the present
situation in the world is not going to be changing drastically
in the next 10 years. We will be at war, at least for the next
decade. What are the best methods of recruiting and retaining?
Are we doing the right thing?
General Helmly. Senator, in my own judgment, I believe
Admiral Cotton's point to the National Guard's success in the
way that it has been done. The Army received an authorization
to use $1,000 bonus in the 2006 authorization act, but the
language which went with it reduces our flexibility. It is my
judgment we are proposing that we be allowed to expand the pool
so that retirees could also, by virtue of referring someone--
that is a tremendous tool of very talented, rich people out
there--and then similarly when you referred someone you would
get the $1,000 bonus, similar to the National Guard, for the
referral, not the way we have tied it today, which is to my
completion of initial military training.
The second part I will note is that I agree completely with
the Navy's move toward a continuum of service. I have proposed
to the Army that we abolish the word ``discharge,'' that we do
away with that, that one is not discharged until one has
completed their mandatory service obligation.
Third, I place a premium on retention. In our case, in
business terms, it costs us an average of $117,000 burden of
cost to recruit an 18- to 22-year-old man or woman off the
street, and out of that certainly there is an attrition rate
that accrues as you go through physicals and initial military
training.
The retained soldier is experienced, they are mature. That
is the kind of skill set we need in today's armed forces, a
more mature, a more language, culturally aware soldier, a more
technically competent soldier. Thus I believe that we should
look harder at retention bonuses for longer periods of time.
Last, that is why I have favored in the past for Reserve
component members and continue to favor an age 55 receipt of
nonregular retired pay, but tying that to the completion of 30
years service, not 20 years service. It is my judgment that if
we costed that out we would see in fact a possible savings,
rather than what everyone expects, which is a huge bill. That
is because I favor tying it to the completion of 30 years
service, to keep people longer, and then draw retired pay at
age 55, as opposed to encourage them to leave at 20 and then
wait until age 60 to draw it.
That is my answer.
Admiral Cotton. Senator, I would agree with you, we are
increasingly challenged to recruit, particularly because we are
resistant to change the way we do it. We still go to the 18-
and 19-year-old high school graduate. If you look at a major
publication last week, the cover of the magazine talked about
30 percent dropouts in our high schools. We have done research
to determine that 70 percent of our Nation's youth today is
ineligible for military service. So we are all going after the
same 30 percent segment, trying to bring them in the front
door, and I think ignoring at our own peril those that have
served before, particularly individual ready reserve.
If we went after them, bonused their behavior, treasured
them for a whole career, with an on-ramp back to service, I
think we could go after the skill sets in a better way than we
are doing right now.
Senator Inouye. General Bergman.
General Bergman. Sir, up until about 4 years ago the
average number of hours that a marine recruiter spent with a
potential new marine was about 4 hours. Over the past 4 years,
that has increased to about 12 hours of recruiting time,
largely due to the expanded hours spent with the influencers--
parents, coaches, uncles, aunts, et cetera.
The best thing that we can do when we look these young men
and women in the eye or their influencers in the eye is to be
honest about what it really means to go into the military, the
challenges that await them, but back that honesty up with the
absolute best training and preparation possible to prepare them
to succeed, because deep down we all want to succeed and can be
successful somewhere. We just need to have the confidence that
our institution provides that preparation.
Senator Inouye. General.
General Bradley. Senator, I agree with what all of my
colleagues have said. I will tell you, the people that we are
recruiting today are better than those that we recruited when I
joined the Air Force many, many years ago. I have seen a great
qualitative improvement in our force, and I think one of the
reasons is in our Air Force we have given our Air Force
reservists and our Air National guardsmen real day to day
operational missions. The morale is better, our retention is
better than it used to be in the 1970s and 1980s. It is a great
improvement.
Now, we are using our people at a great rate. We are going
to keep doing that because, as you say, this war will go on for
a long time. But our retention is better than it has ever been,
and I am proud of that. What our people tell us is they are
proud to be part of our units, they like doing real work for
America, and they believe it is very important work.
The incentives and bonuses and authorities that the
Congress has provided us over the last few years has helped us
immensely. But I think, as General Bergman says, we have to
look every one of these new people we are recruiting in the eye
and tell them exactly what they are getting into.
They are continuing to join us. We are not having any
trouble in the Air Force Reserve recruiting people, and I would
not equate our recruiting challenges with the Army or the
Marine Corps. I think they have a tougher job. But we are
working hard at it. We get good recruits because we have good
programs to incentivize people to join. But once they get in,
they are proud to be part of it and they think they are
contributing something important and they are. I think that
keeps them.
Thank you, sir.
Senator Inouye. Thank you, gentlemen.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
EQUIPMENT SHORTFALLS
Senator Stevens. Gentlemen, we provided $30 million to each
of you to address ongoing equipment shortfalls. Could each of
you tell us, have you gotten that money and have you used it
well? General Helmly.
General Helmly. Senator, we have.
Senator Stevens. It has been released to you, right?
General Helmly. Yes, sir, that is correct.
Senator Stevens. Do you see a need for further money now?
General Helmly. Senator, certainly there is a need for
money. I sort of echo the comments of my colleague General Blum
on the first panel that the Army's equipping challenges are
deep. Army equipment is purchased by Army dollars and we input
to that. The Army POM addresses that. I would urge this
subcommittee and its colleagues in the other subcommittee to
sustain the requested level of funding in the Army POM and
equipping. The Army equipping--and we have addressed that for
the Army and its colleagues in the Marine Corps. We are wearing
that heart.
Senator Stevens. Well, we specifically gave you, General
Helmly, the $100 million for title 9 in the 2006 act. Did you
receive that money?
General Helmly. Yes, sir, we did.
Senator Stevens. And is it committed?
General Helmly. Sir, I cannot say that we have committed it
in financial management terms today. I owe you an answer on
that. There is a ``committed'' and an ``obligation'' terms that
have a formal definition.
[The information follows:]
The Army Reserve has obligated or committed the $150.3
million of Title IX funding received from Congress.
The Army Reserve received $138.8 million in Title IX for
the Reserve Personnel, Army appropriation. As of April 26, we
have obligated $68.8 million, and we have also committed $33.5
million. These funds are being used to recruit, retain and
train soldiers in support of the global war on terror. The
remaining funds will be used for pre-mobilization training for
units deploying in the third and fourth quarter.
The Army Reserve received $48.2 million in Title IX for the
Operation and Maintenance, Army Reserve appropriation. As of
April 26, we have committed and obligated over $48 million in
support of the global war on terror. This funding was used for
family support, recruiting and advertising, and medical
readiness.
The Army Reserve greatly appreciates the support of
Congress, and we are using these resources in the most
efficient manner to execute GWOT.
Senator Stevens. Admiral Cotton.
Admiral Cotton. Yes, sir, we received the $30 million. It
was most appreciated. Thank you for your support, and we are
taking the taxpayer dollar and giving it straight to where it
can do the most good for the global war on terror and that is
to the units. We are using most in theater combat service
support. So we are using the money very well.
I can also say that the Navy Reserve is a full participant
in all Navy supplementals. So throughout the year our needs are
looked at by the Navy for funding.
Senator Stevens. General Bergman, did you get your money?
General Bergman. Yes, sir, we did get our money, and we
have put it right where the rubber meets the road, with those
marines and the equipment, especially in the personal
protective equipment. When you think about people as we look at
manning, literally dressing a marine for combat, we think about
kevlar, we think about small arms protective inserts (SAPI)
plates. Now we are adding everything from Nomex gloves to
Wiley-X glasses to balaclavas to combat those challenges that
we have with the explosive fire nature, if you will, of the
improvised explosive devices. So the need is changing.
Senator Stevens. General Bradley.
General Bradley. Yes, sir, we received our $30 million. I
want to thank you very much. It was much needed. The funds have
been released and we have spent the funds. We have bought
targeting pods for our fighter planes and our bombers, A-10's,
F-16's, and B-52's, so that we can drop laser-guided bombs to
do close air support for marines and soldiers on the ground in
Iraq and Afghanistan. We have bought multifunction displays for
cockpits to improve the capabilities of pilots in those
airplanes to know what they are looking at for targets, where
the friendlies are, and where the enemy is. We have bought
datalink systems for the fighters with this funding this year,
to improve our A-10's close air support capability, so that
they can talk without using voice radios, datalink information
between a forward air controller on the ground and a fighter
pilot in a cockpit. These datalink systems are critical to
providing quick close air support in that very important
environment.
So all of the funding that you have given us has gone to
combat capability for our airplanes, mostly to support those
soldiers and marines on the ground. Thank you very much for the
continued support, sir.
Senator Stevens. Thank you.
We have got the supplemental on the floor now and it has a
sizable amount for defense. Some of it is allocated to each of
your organizations, I believe. We will be going into the
regular bill for 2007 and we hope you will let us know if there
are any special needs that you have, because I think we are in
a period of transition. There is no question about this. This
current war on terror is an ongoing war, a global war. I think
soon they will call it the world war on terror. I hope people
understand it is a world war.
But we have got to react to your needs and make certain
that you have the capability to bring your people into these
engagements and have them be well equipped. It particularly is
the equipment need that we tried to address last year, and we
would like to work with you to make sure we address this year.
General Bradley. Thank you, sir, for that offer. I will
tell you, we have provided Ms. Farrell with our list of things
that we could use equipment wise for the coming year. So thank
you for your offer.
Senator Stevens. Senator Inouye, do you have any further
comment?
Senator Inouye. I want to thank you all for your service.
Senator Stevens. Yes. We are particularly concerned that on
our watch this transition is taking place and we do not want it
to lag. We want to be sure that we stay with you and we are
able to assist you to make the transition as smooth as
possible.
Senator Inouye. As you can note, our support is bipartisan.
ADDITIONAL COMMITTEE QUESTIONS
Senator Stevens. One or the other of us has been chairman
now since 1981 and I cannot remember a partisan word between
us.
[The following questions were not asked at the hearing, but
were submitted to the Department for response subsequent to the
hearing:]
Question Submitted to General Jack W. Bergman
Question Submitted by Senator Thad Cochran
ACTIVATION TIME LIMITS
Question. General Bergman, as I understand it, you have efficiently
managed the Reserve Marines' activation time limit in the face of
growing demands in support of the Global War on Terrorism. Can you
please explain how you've minimized the impact of increased activations
and your thoughts on the way ahead.
Answer. Post 9/11, Marine Forces Reserve planned to minimize the
impact of increased activations by activating units for 12 months
(seven months actual ``boots on the ground'' and five months for
mobilization, advanced training and demobilization) followed by a set
period of dwell time, followed by a second 12 month activation cycle if
required. This plan provided our Marines and Sailors with a predictable
activation cycle for which they could plan with less time away from
their civilian jobs for any given activation cycle while still
maximizing the 24 months of cumulative activation time available under
the current mobilization authority. This plan was instituted assuming
every available Marine or unit could be activated a full 24 cumulative
months in support of the Global War on Terrorism.
Because current policy does not allow us to involuntarily activate
Marines for the second 12 month cycle described above, Marine Forces
Reserve has had to meet requirements in support of the Global War on
Terrorism through the one-time activation of Selected Marine Corps
Reservists and the Individual Ready Reserve pool of Marines. As our
units continue to be replenished with first-term junior Marines who are
ready, willing, and able to support the Global War on Terrorism, we
have been able to use that new pool of first time activation personnel
and cross level seasoned Marine volunteers from one unit to another to
meet mobilization demands. Ideally, we would like to be able to
involuntarily activate our Marines for the second 12 month cycle as was
originally planned which would reduce our dependency on cross leveling
from one unit to another and thereby enhance unit cohesion. This would
also address the leadership issue we currently face. The inability to
involuntarily re-activate previously activated Marines or extend
Individual Ready Reservists on Active duty under 10 U.S.C. 12302 and
utilize the full 24 cumulative months of activation authority as
granted, has created somewhat of a deployable leadership vacuum in
Marine Forces Reserve. Marine Forces Reserve does not currently have a
large cadre of leaders who have not been activated at least once. As a
result Marine Forces Reserve has aggressively implemented sourcing
solutions that require the solicitation of volunteers from throughout
Marine Forces Reserve. In addition, we have gone to the active
component (to staff Company Grade Officer billets) to staff deploying
units to 90 percent of their Table of Organization. The fact that the
Active Component continues to come to Marine Forces Reserve to provide
sourcing solutions for their shortfalls should be a compelling argument
in itself for reconsidering the current policy. Without the ability to
extend Ready Reservists on Active Duty under 10 U.S.C. 12302, or
involuntarily activate them for a second 12 month cycle, Marine Forces
Reserve will continue to face the challenge of sourcing deploying units
through first-time activation and voluntary re-activation. This policy
increases our dependence on cross leveling between units. We feel that
the current policy provides a short term solution to sourcing the next
force rotation but does not allow Marine Forces Reserve to set the
conditions to reconstitute the Force for the long war in support of
GWOT.
______
Question Submitted to Lieutenant General John A. Bradley
Question Submitted by Senator Richard C. Shelby
PERSONNEL REDUCTIONS
Question. General Bradley, the Air Force Chief of Staff recently
announced that the Air Force Reserve and Air Guard should consider
force reductions. Specifically, he cited the elimination of some layers
of command and staffing similar to what the Active Air Force is doing.
Taking into account that the cost to run an Air Force Reserve or Air
Guard unit is one-half to one-third of the cost to run an Active Duty
unit, do you believe that the Reserves need to take this type of
personnel reduction?
And if so, how large of a personnel cut do you foresee?
Answer. As our part in the recapitalization and modernization of
the Air Force, the Air Force Reserve has already planned to take the
manpower reduction you refer to in your question. Our Citizen Airmen do
indeed offer cost-effective combat power to the American taxpayer
through the use of our predominantly part-time force. Perhaps more
important than cutting and becoming more cost effective, we have worked
with the Active Component to divest a significant number of legacy
mission areas and re-role those manpower authorizations to the current
priority missions that will help us remain relevant as both an
operational and strategic reserve as we fight the Global War on
Terrorism. While there will be some elimination of layers of command as
General Moseley stated, our overall reduction plan is even more
comprehensive.
For example, in shifting strategy we will invest less in Individual
Mobilization Augmentees (IMAs) as a strategic reserve and devote more
resource to the operational reserve or traditional reservists. This
means we will re-role many IMAs to the Individual Ready Reserve.
Additionally, our Air Force Reserve Component Surgeon General is
coordinating with the Air Force Surgeon General to refocus the Air
Force Reserve on our core specialty of Aeromedical Evacuation as
opposed to expeditionary medical support, leaving this mission to the
Active Component. This will then allow the Air Force Reserve to take
reductions across units that would provide the expeditionary medical
mission.
We will continue to work in concert with the Regular Air Force to
exploit process and organizational efficiencies through Air Force Smart
Operations 21. This will also allow us to restructure headquarters
organizations, which have a larger proportion of full-time personnel
than operational units. We will provide deployable support to the
combatant commanders while still handling their ``organize, train and
equip'' roles. This is an important step in designing a smaller, more
capable Air Force.
Acting as partners with the Active Component in this effort will
allow our command structures to seamlessly work together, in both peace
and war, and ensure the resources of the Total Force are utilized to
preserve critically needed skills. The size of the cut we are taking as
an Air Force Reserve is 7,744 positions or about 10.5 percent of
today's end-strength.
______
Question Submitted to Lieutenant General James R. Helmly
Question Submitted by Senator Thad Cochran
MODULAR SUPPORT BRIGADES
Question. Can you explain to the committee how the Reserves will
transform to modular support brigades?
Answer. At the completion of the Army's transformation in 2009, the
Army Reserve will have 58 deployable combat support and combat service
support brigades. This restructuring will transition the Army Reserve
to a Joint and federal modular force capable of providing increased
combat power to complement the active component with skill rich units
and Soldiers. The Army Reserve, with its unique Title 10 mission, has
the maximum of flexibility, agility, and adaptability to meet
transformational requirements.
For the first time, all of the Army Reserve operational, deployable
forces will be commanded by an operational, deployable command
headquarters. The transformation enhances the ability of the Army
Reserve to provide the capabilities and units that demand technical
skills more easily maintained at acceptable cost in the Army Reserve
than in active military service.
Some of the modular support brigades are currently within the Army
Reserve. The Army Reserve will transform other existing commands to the
modular support brigades according to the schedule outlined below:
--Expeditionary Sustainment Commands--September 2007
--Combat Support Brigades (Maneuver Enhancement)--September 2008
--Sustainment Brigades--September 2008
--Military Police Command--September 2007
--Regional Readiness Sustainment Commands--September 2008
--Aviation Command--September 2008
The result of the reshaping of the Army Reserve forces will be a
more streamlined command and control structure and will provide an
increase in ready, deployable assets to support the Global War on
Terror. The goal for this larger pool of available forces is to enable
the Army to generate forces in a rotational manner.
SUBCOMMITTEE RECESS
Senator Stevens. We thank you for your testimony today and
we look forward to another hearing on May 3, when we will hear
testimony on military health programs. Until then, we will
stand in recess. Thank you very much, gentlemen.
[Whereupon, at 12:08 p.m., Wednesday, April 26, the
subcommittee was recessed, to reconvene at 10 a.m., Wednesday,
May 3.]