[Senate Hearing 110-394]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
S. Hrg. 110-394 Pt. 6
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION FOR APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR
2009
=======================================================================
HEARINGS
before the
COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES
UNITED STATES SENATE
ONE HUNDRED TENTH CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
ON
S. 3001
TO AUTHORIZE APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2009 FOR MILITARY
ACTIVITIES OF THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE, FOR MILITARY CONSTRUCTION, AND
FOR DEFENSE ACTIVITIES OF THE DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY, TO PRESCRIBE
PERSONNEL STRENGTHS FOR SUCH FISCAL YEAR, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES
__________
PART 6
PERSONNEL
__________
FEBRUARY 27 AND APRIL 16, 2008
Printed for the use of the Committee on Armed Services
----------
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
42-634 PDF WASHINGTON : 2008
For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing
Office Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512-1800;
DC area (202) 512-1800 Fax: (202) 512-2104 Mail: Stop IDCC,
Washington, DC 20402-0001
COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES
CARL LEVIN, Michigan, Chairman
EDWARD M. KENNEDY, Massachusetts JOHN McCAIN, Arizona
ROBERT C. BYRD, West Virginia JOHN WARNER, Virginia,
JOSEPH I. LIEBERMAN, Connecticut JAMES M. INHOFE, Oklahoma
JACK REED, Rhode Island JEFF SESSIONS, Alabama
DANIEL K. AKAKA, Hawaii SUSAN M. COLLINS, Maine
BILL NELSON, Florida SAXBY CHAMBLISS, Georgia
E. BENJAMIN NELSON, Nebraska LINDSEY O. GRAHAM, South Carolina
EVAN BAYH, Indiana ELIZABETH DOLE, North Carolina
HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON, New York JOHN CORNYN, Texas
MARK L. PRYOR, Arkansas JOHN THUNE, South Dakota
JIM WEBB, Virginia MEL MARTINEZ, Florida
CLAIRE McCASKILL, Missouri ROGER F. WICKER, Mississippi
Richard D. DeBobes, Staff Director
Michael V. Kostiw, Republican Staff Director
______
Subcommittee on Personnel
E. BENJAMIN NELSON, Nebraska, Chairman
EDWARD M. KENNEDY, Massachusetts LINDSEY O. GRAHAM, South Carolina
JOSEPH I. LIEBERMAN, Connecticut SUSAN M. COLLINS, Maine
JIM WEBB, Virginia SAXBY CHAMBLISS, Georgia
CLAIRE McCASKILL, Missouri ELIZABETH DOLE, North Carolina
(ii)
C O N T E N T S
----------
CHRONOLOGICAL LIST OF WITNESSES
Active Component, Reserve Component, and Civilian Personnel Programs
february 27, 2008
Page
Chu, Hon. David S., Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and
Readiness...................................................... 39
Rochelle, LTG Michael D., USA, Deputy Chief of Staff, G1, United
States Army.................................................... 82
Harvey, VADM John C., Jr., USN, Deputy Chief of Naval Operations
(Manpower, Personnel, Training, and Education), United States
Navy........................................................... 88
Coleman, Lt. Gen. Ronald S., USMC, Deputy Commandant for Manpower
and Reserve Affairs, United States Marine Corps................ 106
Newton, Lt. Gen. Richard Y., III, USAF, Deputy Chief of Staff,
Manpower and Personnel, United States Air Force................ 115
Testimony of Military Beneficiary Organizations Regarding the Quality
of Life of Active, Reserve, and Retired Military Personnel and Their
Family Members
april 16, 2008
Beck, Meredith M., National Policy Director, Wounded Warrior
Project........................................................ 161
Barnes, Master Chief Petty Officer Joseph L., USN (Ret.),
National Executive Director, Fleet Reserve Association......... 166
Moakler, Kathleen B., Director of Government Relations, National
Military Family Association.................................... 172
Cline, Master Sergeant Michael P., USA (Ret.), Executive
Director, Enlisted Association of the National Guard of the
United States.................................................. 196
Strobridge, Col. Steven P., USAF (Ret.), Director of Government
Relations, Military Officers Association of America............ 202
(iii)
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION FOR APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR
2009
----------
WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 27, 2008
U.S. Senate,
Subcommittee on Personnel,
Committee on Armed Services,
Washington, DC.
ACTIVE COMPONENT, RESERVE COMPONENT, AND CIVILIAN PERSONNEL PROGRAMS
The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 3 p.m. in room
SR-232A, Russell Senate Office Building, Senator E. Benjamin
Nelson (chairman of the subcommittee) presiding.
Committee members present: Senators Ben Nelson, Webb, and
Graham.
Committee staff member present: Leah C. Brewer, nominations
and hearings clerk.
Majority staff members present: Gabriella Eisen, counsel;
Gerald J. Leeling, counsel; and Peter K. Levine, general
counsel.
Minority staff members present: Lucian L. Niemeyer,
professional staff member; Diana G. Tabler, professional staff
member; and Richard F. Walsh, minority counsel.
Staff assistants present: Ali Z. Pasha and Brian F. Sebold.
Committee members' assistants present: Jon Davey, assistant
to Senator Bayh; Gordon I. Peterson, assistant to Senator Webb;
Sandra Luff, assistant to Senator Warner; Clyde A. Taylor IV,
assistant to Senator Chambliss; and Andrew King, assistant to
Senator Graham.
OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR E. BENJAMIN NELSON, CHAIRMAN
Senator Ben Nelson. Good afternoon. This Personnel
Subcommittee hearing will now come to order.
The subcommittee meets today to receive testimony on the
Active, Guard, Reserve, and civilian personnel programs in
review of the National Defense Authorization Request for Fiscal
Year 2009 and the Future Years Defense Program.
I'm honored to continue to serve as chairman of this
subcommittee, the subcommittee that's focused on the care and
well-being of our servicemembers, their families, retirees, and
Department of Defense (DOD) civilians. No aspect of our
military programs is more important than taking care of our
people.
I'm privileged once again to be joined in this effort by my
ranking member, Senator Graham. He and I have worked together
for several years now to do what's right for our servicemembers
and their families, and will continue in this never-ending
effort.
I welcome our witnesses here today. Secretary Chu, staff
tell me this will be your 10th appearance before this
subcommittee. Is that right? Or, who's counting?
Dr. Chu. Right, sir.
Senator Ben Nelson. Okay. [Laughter.]
We appreciate your service and dedication to our
servicemembers and their families, and thank you for what you
have done to provide continuity and steady leadership during
your time as the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and
Readiness.
We also welcome here today the military personnel chiefs of
each of the military branches: Lieutenant General Michael D.
Rochelle, United States Army; Vice Admiral John C. Harvey, Jr.,
United States Navy; Lieutenant General Ronald S. Coleman,
United States Marine Corps; and Lieutenant General Richard
Newton III, United States Air Force.
Admiral Harvey, this committee has already favorably acted
on your nomination for another position, and your nomination is
now before the full Senate, so I congratulate you on your very
successful service as the Chief of Naval Personnel and your
nomination to yet another position of trust and importance.
Congratulations.
Admiral Harvey. Thank you very much, sir.
Senator Ben Nelson. General Newton, this is your first
appearance before this subcommittee. You follow a long
tradition of successful Air Force chiefs of personnel. I'm
confident that General Brady gave you very wise counsel as he
moved on to--[laughter]
----a four-star position. General Rochelle and General
Coleman, we welcome you back and thank you for your continued
service.
The current stress on the All-Volunteer Force, Active and
Reserve, is overwhelming and unprecedented. As we meet here
today, we're entering our 7th year of combat.
We continue the effort to increase the size of the Army and
Marine Corps. Growing the force raises obvious questions about
recruiting and retention, as well as the right mix of pay,
bonuses, and benefits to attract and retain America's best
young men and women.
Congress fully appreciates the sacrifices that our
servicemembers and their families are making. In recognition of
this, Congress continues to improve military pay and benefits.
The stress of military operations is not limited to our
servicemembers, as we know. We must never lose sight of their
families as we consider what measures to take to enhance the
safety and well-being of our servicemembers. Their family is
our family.
To help our military families, Congress passed a law last
year requiring the establishment of a Military Family Readiness
Council to assess the adequacy and effectiveness of military
family readiness programs and to recommend improvements.
Congress also passed the Wounded Warrior Act. This
comprehensive, bipartisan legislation advances the care,
management, and transition of wounded and ill servicemembers,
enhances healthcare and benefits for their families, and begins
the process of fundamental reform for the disability evaluation
systems of the DOD and the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA).
All of this reflects the reality that we face today. Our
servicemembers shoulder more responsibility and are
increasingly asked to do more. With the increased requirements
comes a cost that is difficult to bear. We absolutely must take
care of our servicemembers, especially those who are wounded,
and their families. We must ensure that our servicemembers are
properly trained and equipped to perform the tasks we ask them
to perform. On these issues, there can be no compromise. The
issues we face, going forward, are difficult, but not
insurmountable.
So, I look forward to hearing from our witnesses today on
the programs and priorities the Department has identified to
overcome these challenges.
With that, thank you. Senator Graham, do you have an
opening statement?
STATEMENT OF SENATOR LINDSEY O. GRAHAM
Senator Graham. Very briefly, Mr. Chairman, and it will
begin the way all of them have, and that's thanking you. We've
swapped roles a couple of times here, but nothing has really
changed. I've thoroughly, thoroughly enjoyed working with you
and your staff on this subcommittee, as sort of a respite from
partisanship. We seem to figure it out, how to get along for
the common good here, and nothing could bring us together more
quickly than the needs of the men and women in uniform and
their families. So, I look forward to another year of trying to
help those who are making us all safe.
Dr. Chu, thank you very much for your service. You have a
very demanding job, and you have been here many times, and I
appreciate the knowledge and expertise you bring to the table
in serving your country. I'm sure you could go other places and
make more money. I just really appreciate your staying around
and helping us figure out the challenges that we face.
Admiral Harvey, good job. [Laughter.]
The proof's in the pudding. People recognized your work and
your accomplishments, and well done. We look forward to dealing
with you in another capacity, down the road, and definitely
looking forward to hearing from you in terms of where we need
to go this year.
General Newton, you're the new guy. I know how that feels.
I can't think of a more important task right now for the Air
Force, in particular, to try to figure out the balance between
planes and people and ever-increasing health care costs, how
you all reconcile that with the missions we assign you.
We have a great staff. I look forward to working with
everybody. One of the highlights of our time together, I think,
has been the Wounded Warrior Act. I think this committee and
our staffs put together the Wounded Warrior Act in a way that
received a lot of bipartisan support, and hopefully will
continue to deliver good service to those who have been
terribly wounded, and the families who suffer alongside.
There's so much more to be done, and the question, I think,
for the country is, how much of the health care role should DOD
provide? Should we, long term, look at having retiree health
care separated and just focus on a very limited health care
function within the military? I don't know the answer to that,
but I do believe that the biggest challenge facing all of us is
how to deal with the growing personnel costs, particularly in
the area of health care, because, as you said, Senator Nelson,
no one wants to retreat from quality, availability, and access,
but when you look at the demographic changes in the pie chart,
the personnel costs, particularly the health care costs, are
growing at a dramatic rate. We're going to have to figure out
how to balance that out.
I'll look forward to listening to the testimony, in terms
of force structure, the number of people we have, the number of
people we'll need--who are we getting in, what kind of level of
education do they provide, and is the force ready for the
fight? The answer, to me, is overwhelmingly yes, because we're
winning the fight; but, as Senator Nelson said, it's been a
long, hard struggle for many years, and we're all aware of what
the strain has been.
I look forward to receiving your testimony and working with
Senator Nelson, and putting together a good package.
Senator Ben Nelson. Thank you, Senator Graham.
Dr. Chu, I hope you weren't listening too closely when he
said you could make more money elsewhere. [Laughter.]
That's not an invitation to go anywhere.
The Military Coalition has submitted a written statement
for the record, and, without objection, it will be included in
the record.
[The prepared statement of The Military Coalition follows:]
Prepared Statement by The Military Coalition
Mr. Chairman and distinguished members of the committee. On behalf
of The Military Coalition, a consortium of nationally prominent
uniformed services and veterans' organizations, we are grateful to the
committee for this opportunity to express our views concerning issues
affecting the uniformed services community. This statement provides the
collective views of the following military and veterans' organizations,
which represent approximately 5.5 million current and former members of
the 7 uniformed services, plus their families and survivors.
Air Force Association
Air Force Sergeants Association
Air Force Women Officers Associated
American Logistics Association
American Veterans (AMVETS)
Army Aviation Association of America
Association of Military Surgeons of the United States
Association of the United States Army
Chief Warrant Officer and Warrant Officer Association,
U.S. Coast Guard
Commissioned Officers Association of the U.S. Public
Health Service, Inc.
Enlisted Association of the National Guard of the
United States
Fleet Reserve Association
Gold Star Wives of America, Inc.
Jewish War Veterans of the United States of America
Marine Corps League
Marine Corps Reserve Association
Military Chaplains Association of the United States of
America
Military Officers Association of America
Military Order of the Purple Heart
National Association for Uniformed Services
National Military Family Association
National Order of Battlefield Commissions
Naval Enlisted Reserve Association
Naval Reserve Association
Noncommissioned Officers Association
Reserve Enlisted Association
Reserve Officers Association *
Society of Medical Consultants to the Armed Forces
The Retired Enlisted Association
United States Army Warrant Officers Association
United States Coast Guard Chief Petty Officers
Association
Veterans of Foreign Wars of the United States
Veterans' Widows International Network
* The Reserve Officers Association supports the non-health care
portion of the testimony.
The Military Coalition, Inc., does not receive any grants or
contracts from the Federal Government.
executive summary
Wounded Warrior Issues
Joint Transition Office
The Coalition is encouraged with the creation of a joint DOD-VA
office to oversee development of a bi-directional electronic medical
record. However, we strongly recommend that the subcommittee upgrade
the scope of responsibilities and span of authority for the new DOD-VA
Interagency Program Office to include top-down planning and execution
of all ``seamless transition'' functions, including the joint
electronic health record; joint DOD/VA physical; implementation of best
practices for Traumatic Brain Injuries (TBI), Post-Traumatic Stress
Disorder (PTSD), and special needs care; care access/coordination
issues; and joint research.
The Coalition believes authorizing 3 years of their active-duty-
level health care benefit for service-disabled members and their
families after separation or retirement is essential to align stated
``seamless transition'' intentions with the realities faced by disabled
members and families.
Disability Retirement Reform
The Coalition urges the subcommittee to ensure any legislative
changes to the military disability evaluation and retirement systems do
not reduce compensation and benefit levels for disabled servicemembers.
The Coalition does not support proposals to do away with the
military disability retirement system and shift disability compensation
responsibility to the VA.
The Coalition urges an expanded review of all administrative and
disciplinary separations since October 7, 2001, for members with recent
combat experience to assess whether the behavior that led to separation
may have been due to service-caused exposure.
Active Force Issues
End Strength and Associated Funding
The Coalition strongly urges the subcommittee to sustain projected
increases in ground forces and provide additional recruiting,
retention, and support resources as necessary to attain/sustain them.
The Coalition urges the subcommittee to reconsider the consistency
of projected reductions of Navy and Air Force forces with long-term
readiness needs.
Compensation and Special Incentive Pay
The Coalition urges the subcommittee to propose a military pay
raise of at least 3.9 percent for fiscal year 2009 (one-half percentage
point above private sector pay growth) and to continue such half-
percent annual increases over the Employment Cost Index (ECI) until the
current 3.4 percent pay comparability gap is eliminated.
The Coalition also urges the subcommittee to continue periodic
targeted pay raises as appropriate to recognize the growing education
and technical qualifications of enlisted members and warrant officers
and sustain each individual grade/longevity pay cell at the minimum
70th percentile standard.
Access to Quality Housing
The Military Coalition (TMC) urges reform of military housing
standards that inequitably depress Basic Allowance for Housing (BAH)
rates for mid- to senior-enlisted members by relegating their occupancy
to inappropriately small quarters.
Family Readiness and Support
The Coalition urges the subcommittee to support increased family
support funding and expanded education and other programs to meet
growing needs associated with increased ops tempo, extended deployments
and the more complex insurance, retirement, and savings choices faced
by over-extended military families.
Spouse Employment
The Coalition urges the subcommittee to support legislation which
would expand the Workforce Opportunity Tax Credit for employers who
hire spouses of Regular and Reserve component servicemembers.
Additionally, the Coalition supports providing tax credits to
offset military spouses' expenses in obtaining career-related licenses
or certifications when servicemembers are relocated to a different
State.
Flexible Spending Accounts
TMC urges the subcommittee to continue pressing the Defense
Department until servicemembers are provided the same eligibility to
participate in Flexible Spending Accounts that all other Federal
employees and corporate employees enjoy. Additionally, we support S.
773.
Permanent Change of Station (PCS) Allowances
TMC urges the subcommittee to upgrade permanent change-of-station
allowances to better reflect the expenses members are forced to incur
in complying with government-directed relocations, with priority on
adjusting flat-rate amounts that have been eroded by years--or
decades--of inflation, and shipment of a second vehicle at government
expense to overseas accompanied assignments.
Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC)/Rebasing/Military Construction/
Commissaries
The Coalition urges the subcommittee to closely monitor rebasing/
BRAC plans and schedules to ensure sustainment and timely development
of adequate family support/quality of life programs. At closing and
gaining installations, respectively--to include housing, education,
child care, exchanges and commissaries, health care, family centers,
unit family readiness, and other support services.
Morale, Welfare, and Recreation Programs
TMC urges the subcommittee to ensure that DOD funds MWR programs at
least to the 85 percent level for Category A programs and 65 percent
for Category B requirements.
Education Enhancements
TMC urges the subcommittee to work with the Veterans Affairs
Committee to establish the benchmark level of Montgomery GI Bill (MGIB)
education benefits at the average cost of attending a 4-year public
college, and support continuous in-State tuition eligibility for
servicemembers and their families in the State in which the member is
assigned and the member's home State of record once enrolled as a
student.
National Guard and Reserve Issues
Reserve Retirement and `Operational Reserve' Policy
TMC strongly urges further progress in revamping the Reserve
retirement system in recognition of increased service and sacrifice of
National Guard and Reserve component members, including at a minimum,
extending the new authority for a 90 day=3 month reduction to all Guard
and Reserve members who have served since September 11.
A Total Force Approach to the Montgomery GI Bill
TMC urges Congress to integrate Guard and Reserve and active duty
MGIB laws into Title 38. In addition, TMC recommends restoring basic
Reserve MGIB rates to approximately 50 percent of active duty rates and
authorizing upfront reimbursement of tuition or training coursework for
Guard and Reserve members.
Family Support Programs and Benefits
TMC urges Congress to continue and expand its emphasis on providing
consistent funding and increased outreach to connect Guard and Reserve
families with relevant support programs.
Tangible Support for Employers
The Coalition urges Congress to support needed tax relief for
employers of Selected Reserve personnel and reinforce the Employer
Support for Guard and Reserve Program.
Seamless Transition for Guard and Reserve Members
The Coalition urges the subcommittee to continue and expand its
efforts to ensure Guard and Reserve members and their families receive
needed transition services to make a successful readjustment to
civilian status.
Retirement Issues
Concurrent Receipt
The Coalition urges the subcommittee to act expeditiously on the
recommendations of the Veterans' Disability Benefits Commission and
implement a plan to eliminate the deduction of VA disability
compensation from military retired pay for all disabled military
retirees.
Uniformed Services Retiree Entitlements and Benefits
TMC urges the subcommittee to resist initiatives to ``civilianize''
the military retirement system in ways that reduce the compensation
value of the current retirement system and undermine long-term
retention.
Permanent ID Card Reform
The Coalition urges the subcommittee to direct the Secretary of
Defense to authorize issuance of permanent military identification
cards to uniformed services family members and survivors who are age 65
and older.
Survivor Issues
Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP)-Dependency and Indemnity Compensation
(DIC) Offset
The Coalition strongly urges the subcommittee to take further
action to expand eligibility for the special survivor indemnity
allowance to include all SBP-DIC survivors and continue progress toward
completely repealing the SBP-DIC offset for this most-aggrieved group
of military widows.
Final Retired Paycheck
TMC urges the subcommittee to end the insensitive practice of
recouping the final month's retired pay from the survivor of a deceased
retired member.
Health Care Issues
Full Funding for the Defense Health Program
TMC strongly urges the subcommittee to take all possible steps to
restore the reduction in TRICARE-related budget authority and ensure
continued full funding for Defense Health Program needs.
Protecting Beneficiaries Against Cost-Shifting
The Coalition urges the subcommittee to require DOD to pursue
greater efforts to improve TRICARE and find more effective and
appropriate ways to make TRICARE more cost-efficient without seeking to
``tax'' beneficiaries and make unrealistic budget assumptions.
TMC Healthcare Cost Principles
The Coalition most strongly recommends Representative Chet Edwards'
and Representative Walter Jones' H.R. 579 and Senator Frank
Lautenberg's and Senator Chuck Hagel's S. 604 as models to establish
statutory findings, a sense of Congress on the purpose and principles
of military health care benefits, and explicit guidelines for and
limitations on adjustments.
Active duty members and families should be charged no
fees except retail pharmacy co-payments, except to the extent
they make the choice to participate in TRICARE Standard or use
out-of-network providers under TRICARE Prime.
For retired and survivor beneficiaries, the percentage
increase in fees, deductibles, and co-payments that may be
considered in any year should not exceed the percentage
increase beneficiaries experience in their compensation.
The TRICARE Standard inpatient copay should not be
increased further for the foreseeable future. At $535 per day,
it already far exceeds inpatient copays for virtually any
private sector health plan.
There should be no enrollment fee for TRICARE Standard
or TRICARE For Life (TFL), since neither offers assured access
to TRICARE-participating providers. An enrollment fee implies
enrollees will receive additional services, as Prime enrollees
are guaranteed access to participating providers in return for
their fee. Congress already has required TFL beneficiaries to
pay substantial Medicare Part B fees to gain TFL coverage.
There should be one TRICARE fee schedule for all
retired beneficiaries, just as all legislators, Defense leaders
and other Federal civilian grades have the same health fee
schedule. The TRICARE schedule should be significantly lower
than the lowest tier recommended by the Defense Department,
recognizing that all retired members paid large upfront
premiums for their coverage through decades of arduous service
and sacrifice.
TRICARE Standard Enrollment
The Coalition strongly recommends against establishment of any
TRICARE Standard enrollment system; to the extent enrollment may be
required, any beneficiary filing a claim should be enrolled
automatically, without denying the claim. No enrollment fee should be
charged for TRICARE Standard until and unless the program offers
guaranteed access to a participating provider.
Private Employer Incentive Restrictions
The Coalition recommends Congress modify the law restricting
private employer TRICARE incentives to explicitly exempt employers who
offer only cafeteria plans (i.e., cash payments to all employees to
purchase care as they wish) and employers who extend specific cash
payments to any employee who uses health coverage other than the
employer plan (e.g., Federal Employees Health Benefits Program (FEHBP),
TRICARE, or commercial insurance available through a spouse or previous
employer).
Provider Participation Adequacy
The Coalition urges the subcommittee to continue monitoring DOD and
Government Accountability Office (GAO) reporting on provider
participation to ensure proper follow-on action.
Administrative Deterrents to Provider Participation
The Coalition urges the subcommittee to continue its efforts to
reduce administrative impediments that deter providers from accepting
TRICARE patients.
TRICARE Reimbursement Rates
The Coalition urges the subcommittee to exert what influence it can
to persuade the Finance Committee to reform Medicare/TRICARE statutory
payment formula. To the extent the Medicare rate freeze continues, we
urge the subcommittee to encourage the Defense Department to use its
reimbursement rate adjustment authority as needed to sustain provider
acceptance.
Additionally, The Coalition urges the subcommittee to require a
Comptroller General report on the relative propensity of physicians to
participate in Medicare vs. TRICARE, and the likely effect on such
relative participation of a further freeze in Medicare/TRICARE
physician payments along with the affect of an absence of bonus
payments.
Minimize Medicare/TRICARE Coverage Differences
The Coalition urges the subcommittee to align TRICARE coverage to
at least match that offered by Medicare in every area and provide
preventive services at no cost.
TRICARE Reserve Select (TRS) Premium
The Coalition recommends reducing TRS premiums to $48/month
(single) and $175/month (family), as envisioned by the GAO, with
retroactive refunds as appropriate. For the future, the percentage
increase in premiums in any year should not exceed the percentage
increase in basic pay.
The Coalition further recommends that the subcommittee request a
report from the Department of Defense on options to assure TRS
enrollees' access to TRICARE-participating providers.
Private Insurance Premium Option
The Coalition recommends developing a cost-effective option to have
DOD subsidize premiums for continuation of a Reserve employer's private
family health insurance during periods of deployment as an alternative
to permanent TRS coverage.
Involuntary Separatees
The Coalition recommends authorizing 1 year of post-Transitional
Assistance Management Program (TAMP) TRS coverage for every 90 days
deployed in the case of returning members of the Individual Ready
Reserve (IRR) or members who are involuntarily separated from the
Selected Reserve. The Coalition further recommends that voluntarily
separating reservists subject to disenrollment from TRS should be
eligible for participation in the Continued Health Care Benefits
Program (CHCBP).
Gray Area Reservists
The Coalition urges the subcommittee to authorize an additional
premium-based option under which members entering ``gray area'' retiree
status would be able to avoid losing health coverage.
Reserve Dental Coverage
The Coalition supports providing dental coverage to reservists for
90 days pre- and 180 days post-mobilization (during TAMP), unless the
individual's dental readiness is restored to T-2 condition before
demobilization.
Restoration of Survivors' TRICARE Coverage
The Coalition recommends restoration of TRICARE benefits to
previously eligible survivors whose second or subsequent marriage ends
in death or divorce.
TRICARE Prime Remote Exceptions
The Coalition recommends removal of the requirement for the family
members to reside with the active duty member to qualify for the
TRICARE Prime Remote Program, when the family separation is due to a
military-directed move or deployment.
BRAC, Rebasing, and Relocation
The Coalition recommends codifying the requirement to provide a
TRICARE Prime network at all areas impacted by BRAC or rebasing.
Additionally, we recommend that DOD be required to provide an annual
report to Congress on the adequacy of health resources, services,
quality, and access of care for those beneficiary populations affected
by transformation plans.
Pharmacy Co-payment Changes
The Coalition recommends deferral of any pharmacy copay increases
pending assessment of the effects of the new Federal pricing law on
usage and cost patterns for the different venues, and that the
subcommittee instead urge DOD to pursue copay reductions and ease prior
authorization requirements for medications for chronic diseases, based
on private sector experience that such initiatives reduce long-term
costs associated with such diseases.
Rapid Expansion of ``Third Tier'' Formulary
The Coalition urges the subcommittee to reassert its intent that
the Beneficiary Advisory Panel should have a substantive role in the
formulary-setting process, including access to meaningful data on
relative drug costs in each affected class, consideration of all
Beneficiary Advisory Panel (BAP) comments in the decisionmaking
process, and formal feedback concerning rationale for rejection of BAP
recommendations.
Referral and Authorization System
The Coalition recommends that Congress require a cost analysis
report, including input from each Managed Care Support Contractor,
concerning the referral process within DOD and reliance on Civilian
Network Providers within an MTF's Prime Service Area.
Deductibility of Health and Dental Premiums
The Coalition urges all Armed Services Committee members to seek
the support of the Finance Committees to approve legislation to allow
all military beneficiaries to pay TRICARE-related insurance premiums in
pre-tax dollars, to include TRICARE dental premiums, TRS premiums,
TRICARE Prime enrollment fees, premiums for TRICARE Standard
supplements, and long-term care insurance premiums.
overview
Mr. Chairman, TMC thanks you and the entire subcommittee for your
continued, steadfast support of our active duty, Guard, Reserve,
retired members, and veterans of the uniformed services and their
families and survivors. The subcommittee's work last year generated
ground-breaking, innovative improvements in military end strength,
currently serving pay, survivor benefits, disabled retiree programs,
and of most significance, improvements in wounded warrior benefits,
care, and treatment. These enhancements will definitely make a positive
difference in the lives of active, Guard and Reserve personnel,
retirees, survivors, and families.
As our men and women in uniform continue to prosecute the global
war on terror, the Coalition believes it is critical that the Nation
support our troops with the appropriate resources. The Services have
reported that they are wearing out equipment at a record pace; however,
the Coalition is concerned that we are wearing out our people in
uniform at even a faster pace. The current rate of deployments and the
accompanied stress to our troops and their families put at risk the
readiness of our servicemembers.
The men and women in uniform--Active Duty, Guard, and Reserve--are
answering the call--but not without ever-greater sacrifice. Currently,
over 615,000 National Guard and Reserve members have been called to
active Federal service for the war on terrorism. Over 150,000 have had
two or more deployments, putting particular stress on these members'
civilian careers and employers. The ``total force'', with the support
of their families, continues to endure mounting stress brought about by
repeated deployments and ever-increasing workloads. Therefore, now is
not the time to scrimp on the needs for our troops and their families.
Over the past several years, the Pentagon has repeatedly sought to
curb spending on military personnel and facilities to fund operational
requirements. In the process, the Defense Department has imposed
dramatic force reductions in the Air Force and the Navy, tried to deter
military retirees from using their earned health coverage by proposing
large TRICARE fee increases, and cut back on installation quality of
life programs.
The Coalition believes these efforts to rob personnel to fund
operations will only make the uniformed services more vulnerable to
future readiness problems. We agree with the Chairman of the Joint
Chiefs of Staff, who has stated that 4 percent of GDP should be the
``absolute floor'' for the overall military budget. If we want a strong
national defense, we have to pay for a strong military force as well as
replace and upgrade aging, war-worn weapons and equipment.
The Coalition is encouraged by Congress' strong support for
continued increases to Army and Marine Corps end strength, in
recognition that our troops and families are dangerously overburdened.
We believe the country must follow through on future planned increases,
regardless of troop withdrawals from Iraq, and that these should be
funded through permanent increases in the defense budget, not
supplemental appropriations that undermine essential, long-term
commitments. It's been proven that our military didn't have sufficient
forces to meet the requirements of the current war. It would be
inexcusable not to be better prepared for future contingencies.
In our statement today, TMC offers its collective recommendations
on what needs to be done to address important personnel-related issues
in order to sustain long-term personnel readiness.
wounded warrior issues
Last February, a series of articles in the Washington Post titled
``The Other Walter Reed'' profiled shocking cases of wounded
servicemembers who became lost in military health care and
administrative systems upon being transferred to outpatient
rehabilitative care.
Subsequently, the national media ran many stories of seriously
wounded troops warehoused in substandard quarters, waiting weeks and
months for medical appointments and evaluation board results, left
pretty much on their own to try and navigate the confusing maze of
medical system and benefit and disability rules, and low-balled into
disability separations rather than being awarded the higher benefits of
military disability retirement.
Interviews with family members--spouses, children, and parents--
revealed heartbreaking real life dramas of those who quit their jobs
and virtually lived at military hospitals to become caregivers to
seriously wounded troops. Left with diminishing resources and
unfamiliar with military benefit and disability rules, they were
severely disadvantaged in trying to represent the interests of their
wounded spouses and children who couldn't stand up for themselves.
These issues drew the attention of the President and Congress,
leading to the immediate appointment of multiple special commissions
and task forces charged with investigating the problems and identifying
needed solutions. The Coalition is very grateful for the work of the
Dole-Shalala Commission, the Marsh-West Independent Review Group, the
VA Interagency Task Force on Returning Veterans, the Mental Health Task
Force, and the previously authorized Veterans' Disability Benefits
Commission. The Coalition endorses the vast majority of these groups'
recommendations, and we're pleased that the subcommittee made a
conscientious effort to address many of them in the Wounded Warrior Act
provisions of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for Fiscal
Year 2008.
Congress and TMC agree that our Nation's service men and women have
earned first class care and assistance, both during recuperation and
following separation or retirement from the military.
We are gratified at the sincere and unprecedented leadership
efforts in the Departments of Defense and Veterans' Affairs and the
Armed Services and Veterans' Affairs Committees to transform the system
to make this long overdue goal a reality.
But years of bureaucratic and parochial barriers can't be swept
away as easily as we all would wish. The good work done in 2007 was
only a modest first step on the path to transforming military and
veterans programs to meet the pressing needs of wounded and disabled
members and their families. We're still a long, long way from achieving
the ``seamless transition'' goal.
Joint Transition Office
The Coalition believes one critical problem is bureaucratic stove-
piping in each department. While both DOD and VA are making great
efforts to cooperate, there is no permanent joint activity or office
whose primary mission is to jointly plan and execute the seamless
transition strategy and then exercise productive oversight over the
longer-term process. There's no doubt about the good intentions of
leadership, but to sustain the effort for the long term requires a
change in organizational structure. Periodic meetings, after which the
DOD and VA participants return to their separate offices on opposite
sides of the Potomac, won't sustain the effort after the horror stories
fade from the headlines.
This simply can't be someone's part-time job. It requires a full-
time joint Federal transition office, staffed by full-time DOD, service
and VA personnel working in the same office with a common joint
mission: developing, implementing and overseeing the Joint Executive
Council's strategic plan. This office's responsibilities should
include:
Joint In-Patient Electronic Health Record--The NDAA
for Fiscal Year 2008 took the first step in authorizing a DOD/
VA Interagency Program Office to oversee this specific
initiative, which TMC has been seeking for years. But we
believe the 2012 objective for implementing this system is too
long to wait. Congress must press DOD and VA to speed delivery
as soon as humanly possible, with concrete timelines and
milestones for action. TMC also believes that the same logic
that necessitates a joint office's oversight of this specific
initiative is equally applicable in other areas, and that the
interagency office's area of responsibility should be expanded
accordingly.
Special Needs Health Care--Polytrauma Rehabilitation
Centers were established to meet the specialized clinical care
needs of patients with multiple trauma conditions. They provide
comprehensive inpatient rehabilitation services for individuals
with complex cognitive, physical and mental health sequelae of
severe disabling trauma. These centers require special
oversight in order to ensure the required resources are
available to include specialized staff, technical equipment and
adequate bed space. This oversight must be a joint effort since
it provides a significant piece of the health care continuum
for severely injured personnel.
PTSD, TBI, and Mental Health/Counseling--The Coalition
strongly supports the provisions in the NDAA for Fiscal Year
2008 establishing Centers of Excellence for these programs. We
simply must have some central monitoring, evaluation, and
crossfeed to take best advantage of the wide variety of current
and planned DOD, service, and VA programs and pilot projects
aimed at destigmatizing, identifying, and treating TBI and
PTSD. The Coalition believes it also is important to ensure
that TBI and PTSD are identified and treated as combat injuries
rather than mental health problems. The Coalition is doubtful
whether these centers, by themselves, will be in a position to
ensure coordination and implementation of best practices across
all departments and Services.
Caregiver Initiatives--Several wounded warrior
provisions in the recently enacted NDAA provide additional
support for the caregiver of the wounded warrior, typically a
family member. However, we believe more needs to be done to
strengthen support for families, to include the authorization
of compensation for family member caregivers of severely
injured who must leave their employment to care for the
servicemember.
Access to Care--A significant impediment to the
``seamless transition'' goal is that there are significant
differences between health coverage and some other entitlements
when a member transitions from active military service to
separated or retired status. TRICARE benefits for disability
retirees and families are not the same as they were on active
duty, and there are significant differences between coverage
and availability of programs between TRICARE and the VA. When a
member dies on active duty, Congress has deemed that the
member's family should be eligible for 3 years of active-duty
level TRICARE coverage to assist in the family's transition.
TMC believes strongly that members who are disabled
significantly by military service deserve equal treatment. The
NDAA for Fiscal Year 2008 authorized continued active-duty
level coverage, but only for the servicemember, and then only
in cases where VA coverage is not available. TMC believes this
limitation significantly undermines the seamless transition
goal for wounded/disabled members whose rehabilitation and
recovery may continue long after the time they leave active
duty. Their needs--and those of their families--should not be
inhibited by higher copays, deductibles, and coverage decreases
the moment they are separated or retired from active duty.
Allowing disabled members and their families to retain their
active duty military health care benefit for 3 years after
separation or retirement is essential to align our stated
intentions with the realities faced by disabled members and
families.
Joint Research--Combined Research Initiatives would
further enhance the partnership between VA and DOD. Since many
of the concerns and issues of care are shared, joint
collaboration of effort in the area of research should enable
dollars to go much further and provide a more standardized
system of health care in the military and veteran communities.
Furthermore, research must also be performed jointly and across
all military departments and with other practicing health care
agencies to ensure timely integration of these findings in the
diagnosis and treatment of wounded and disabled patients.
The Coalition is encouraged with the creation of a joint DOD-
VA office to oversee development of a bi-directional electronic
medical record. However, we strongly recommend that the
subcommittee upgrade the scope of responsibilities and span of
authority for the new DOD-VA Interagency Program Office to
include top-down planning and execution of all ``seamless
transition'' functions, including the joint electronic health
record; joint DOD/VA physical; implementation of best practices
for TBI, PTSD, and special needs care; care access/coordination
issues; and joint research.
The Coalition believes authorizing 3 years of their active-
duty level health care benefit for service-disabled members and
their families after separation or retirement is essential to
align stated ``seamless transition'' intentions with the
realities faced by disabled members and families.
Disability Retirement Reform
Several of the Walter Reed task forces and commissions recommended
significant changes to the DOD Disability Evaluation System (DES), and
the NDAA for Fiscal Year 2008 includes several initiatives requiring
joint DOD/VA DES pilot programs; use of the VA Schedule for Rating
Disabilities; review of medical separations with disability ratings of
20 percent or less; and enhanced disability severance pay. These
changes will hopefully improve the overall DES and correct the reported
``low-ball'' ratings awarded some wounded warriors.
The Coalition is very supportive of the current DOD/VA disability
rating pilot, which has the potential to help streamline transition
from active duty into veteran/retired status. However, we believe
further legislative efforts are required to curb service differences in
determining whether a condition existed prior to service. To this end,
language in the NDAA for Fiscal Year 2008 aimed at addressing this
problem may actually have exacerbated it by amending only a part of the
relevant provisions of law.
The Coalition does not support proposals to simply do away with the
military disability retirement system and shift disability compensation
responsibility to the VA. While this proposal seems administratively
simple, and supports our longstanding ``concurrent receipt'' goal of
ensuring proper vesting of service-based retirement for members who
suffer from service-caused disabilities, it poses two significant risks
that TMC deems unacceptable. First, it would cause significant
compensation reductions for some severely disabled personnel--up to
$1,000 a month or more in some cases, and even more for some Guard and
Reserve members who suffer severe disabilities. Second, it would
eliminate the 30 percent-disability retirement threshold that now
establishes eligibility for retiree TRICARE coverage for disabled
members and their families. TMC believes there must continue to be a
statutory military disability threshold above which the member is
considered a military retiree (not simply a separatee and veteran) and
eligible for all the privileges of military retirement, including
TRICARE coverage. The Coalition objects strongly to establishing
disability ratings, compensation, or health care eligibility based
whether the disability was incurred in combat vice non-combat.
The Coalition strongly supports the recent NDAA requirement for a
case review of members separated with 20 percent or lower ratings since
October 7, 2001. There is evidence that many received ``low-ball''
ratings that did not adequately reflect the degree of their
disabilities and unfairly denied them eligibility for military
disability retired pay and health coverage.
But we believe the subcommittee did not go far enough to correct
past inequities. The Coalition is aware of many cases of ``model
troops'' who fell into depression, drug use, and disciplinary
situations after one or more combat tours, and who subsequently
received administrative or disciplinary discharges.
The Coalition urges the subcommittee to ensure any legislative
changes to the military disability evaluation and retirement systems do
not reduce compensation and benefit levels for disabled servicemembers.
The Coalition does not support proposals to do away with the
military disability retirement system and shift disability compensation
responsibility to the VA.
The Coalition urges an expanded review of all administrative and
disciplinary separations since October 7, 2001, for members with recent
combat experience to assess whether the behavior that led to separation
may have been due to service-caused exposure.
active force issues
The subcommittee's key challenges will be to fend off those who
wish to cut needed personnel and quality of life programs while working
with DOD and the administration to reduce the stress on the force and
their families already subjected to repeated, long-term deployments.
Rising day-to-day workloads for non-deployed members and repeated
extensions of combat tours creates a breeding ground for retention
problems. Meeting these challenges will require a commitment of
personnel and resources on several fronts.
End Strength and Associated Funding
The Coalition was encouraged whenthe subcommittee ensured that the
Army and Marine Corps authorized end strengths continued to grow in
fiscal year 2008, and we are further encouraged that the DOD has asked
for additional manpower increases for the Army and Marine Corps over
the next 4 years.
Congress must ensure these increases are sufficient to ease force
rotation burdens and the Services are fully funded in order to achieve
the new end strength. Increasing end strength is not a quick fix that
will ease the stressors on currently serving servicemembers and their
families.
Some already speculate that the planned increases may not be needed
if we can reduce the number of troops deployed to Iraq. The Coalition
believes strongly that the increases are essential to future readiness,
regardless of force levels in Iraq. We know we didn't have enough
troops to fight the current war without imposing terrible penalties on
military members and families, and we must build our force management
plans to avoid having to do so when the Nation is faced with another
major unexpected contingency requirement.
For too long, we have planned only for the best-case scenario,
which ignores our responsibility to the Nation to be prepared for
unexpected and less-favorable scenarios, which could well arise
anywhere around the globe, including the Far East.
A full range of funding is required to support this necessary end
strength, including housing, health care, family programs, and child
care. Having the Services absorb these costs out of pocket is self-
defeating.
Furthermore, as the Army and Marine Corps increase over the next 4
years, the Coalition remains concerned that ongoing Navy and Air Force
Active and Reserve personnel cuts are driven by budget considerations
rather than operational requirements. We believe it is increasingly
likely that future experience will prove these cutbacks ill-advised,
and urge the subcommittee to reconsider their consistency with long-
term readiness needs.
The Coalition strongly urges the subcommittee to sustain projected
increases in ground forces and provide additional recruiting,
retention, and support resources as necessary to attain/sustain them.
The Coalition urges the subcommittee to reconsider the consistency
of projected reductions of Navy and Air Force forces with long-term
readiness needs.
Compensation and Special Incentive Pays
The Coalition is committed to ensuring that pay and allowance
programs are equitably applied to the seven uniformed Services. In that
regard, the Coalition urges the subcommittee to be mindful that
personnel and compensation program adjustments for Department of
Defense forces should also apply to uniformed members of the Coast
Guard, NOAA Corps, and Public Health Service.
Since the turn of the century, Congress and DOD have made
significant progress to improve the lives of men and women in uniform
and their families. Since 1999, when military pay raises had lagged a
cumulative 13.5 percent behind the private sector pay comparability
standard, the subcommittee has narrowed that gap to 3.4 percent. Each
year during that span, the subcommittee has ensured at least some
progress in shrinking that disparity further. TMC is grateful for that
progress, and believes strongly that it should continue until full pay
comparability is restored.
DOD uses the 70th percentile of earnings of private workers of
comparable age, experience and education as a standard to help
rebalance the military pay table through special targeted pay increases
depending on grade and longevity status. The Coalition believes this
measure is useful as one tool in the process of establishing the proper
progression of the pay table, and needs to be monitored and applied as
necessary in the future. But it does not, by itself, supplant overall
growth in the ECI as the measure of pay comparability, nor does it
erase the remaining 3.4 percent gap between military pay raises and
private sector pay growth.
The Coalition believes Congress will never find a better
opportunity to phase out the remaining gap than today's conditions when
private sector pay growth is relatively low. In assessing the proper
amount to reduce the pay gap, Congress also should consider that
today's troops are working much harder--and their families sacrificing
much more--for their modest raises.
This year, we expect the Defense budget will propose a 3.4 percent
raise for military personnel in 2009--a percentage equal to the growth
in private sector pay 2 years earlier in 2007. The Coalition believes
strongly that this is not the time to end Congress' steady path of
progress in reducing the military pay comparability gap.
The Coalition urges the subcommittee to propose a military pay
raise of at least 3.9 percent for fiscal year 2009 (one-half percentage
point above private sector pay growth) and to continue such half-
percent annual increases over the ECI until the current 3.4 percent pay
comparability gap is eliminated.
The Coalition also urges the subcommittee to continue periodic
targeted pay raises as appropriate to recognize the growing education
and technical qualifications of enlisted members and warrant officers
and sustain each individual grade/longevity pay cell at the minimum
70th percentile standard.
Access to Quality Housing
Today's housing allowances come much closer to meeting military
members' and families' housing needs than in the past, thanks to the
conscientious efforts of the subcommittee in recent years.
But the Coalition believes it's important to understand that some
fundamental flaws in the standards used to set those allowances remain
to be corrected, especially for enlisted members.
The Coalition supports revised housing standards that are more
realistic and appropriate for each pay grade. Many enlisted personnel
are unaware of the standards for their respective pay grade and assume
that their BAH level is determined by a higher standard or by the type
of housing for which they would qualify if they live on a military
installation. For example, only 1.25 percent of the enlisted force (E-
9) is eligible for BAH sufficient to pay for a 3-bedroom single-family
detached house, even though thousands of more junior enlisted members
do, in fact, reside in detached homes. The Coalition believes that as a
minimum, this BAH standard (single-family detached house) should be
extended gradually to qualifying servicemembers beginning in grade E-8
and subsequently to grade E-7 and below over several years as resources
allow.
TMC urges reform of military housing standards that inequitably
depress BAH rates for mid to senior enlisted members by relegating
their occupancy to inappropriately small quarters.
Family Readiness and Support
A fully funded, robust family readiness program continues to be
crucial to overall readiness of our military, especially with the
demands of frequent and extended deployments.
Resource issues continue to plague basic installation support
programs. At a time when families are dealing with increased
deployments, they are being asked to do without. Often family centers
are not staffed for outreach. Library and sports facilities hours are
being abbreviated or cut altogether. Manpower for installation security
is being reduced. These are additional sacrifices that we are imposing
on our families left behind while their servicemembers are deployed.
In a similar vein, the Coalition believes additional authority and
funding is needed to offer respite and extended child care for military
families. These initiatives should be accompanied by a more aggressive
outreach and education effort to improve members' and families'
financial literacy. We should ensure members are aware of and
encouraged to use child care, mental health support, spousal
employment, and other quality-of-life programs that have seen recent
growth. However, this education effort should also include expanded
financial education initiatives to inform and counsel members and
families on life insurance options, Thrift Savings Plan, IRAs, flexible
spending accounts, savings options for children's education, and other
quality of life needs.
In particular servicemembers must be educated on the long-term
financial consequences of electing to accept the much lower-value
$30,000 REDUX retention bonus after 15 years of service vice sustaining
their full High-3 retirement benefit.
The Coalition urges the subcommittee to support increased family
support funding and expanded education and other programs to meet
growing needs associated with increased operations tempo (OPTEMPO),
extended deployments and the more complex insurance, retirement, and
savings choices faced by over-extended military families.
Spouse Employment
The Coalition is pleased that movement is being made to enhance the
total force spouse employment opportunities through a test program and
strong partnerships between DOD, Department of Labor, service
organizations, employers, and others; however, more needs to be done.
More and more military spouses are in the workforce than in the
past, but challenges in finding jobs after relocation adversely impact
the military families' financial stability and satisfaction with
military life. Spouse employment helps contribute to a strong military
and helps in retention of our high quality, All-Volunteer Force.
Defense leaders repeatedly acknowledge, ``We recruit servicemembers,
but we retain families.''
One of the greatest frustrations for working spouses is the career
and financial disruption associated with military-directed relocations.
If we're serious about retaining more military families, we must get
serious about easing this significant career and military life
dissatisfier.
The Coalition urges the subcommittee to support legislation which
would expand the Workforce Opportunity Tax Credit for employers who
hire spouses of Regular and Reserve component servicemembers.
Additionally, the Coalition supports providing tax credits to
offset military spouses' expenses in obtaining career-related licenses
or certifications when servicemembers are relocated to a different
State.
Flexible Spending Accounts
The Coalition cannot comprehend the Defense Department's continuing
failure to implement existing statutory authority for active duty and
Selected Reserve members to participate in Flexible Spending Accounts
(FSAs), despite both Armed Services Committees' prodding on this
subject.
All other Federal employees and corporate civilian employees are
able to use this authority to save thousands of dollars a year by
paying out-of-pocket health care and dependent care expenses with pre-
tax dollars. It is unconscionable that the Department has failed to
implement this money-saving program for the military members who are
bearing the entire burden of national sacrifice in the global war on
terrorism.
TMC urges the subcommittee to continue pressing the Defense
Department until servicemembers are provided the same eligibility to
participate in Flexible Spending Accounts that all other Federal
employees and corporate employees enjoy. Additionally, we support S.
773.
Permanent Change of Station Allowances
PCS allowances have continually failed to keep pace with the
significant out-of-pocket expenses servicemembers and their families
incur in complying with government-directed moves.
For example, PCS mileage rates still have not been adjusted since
1985. The current rates range from 15 to 20 cents per mile--an ever-
shrinking fraction of the 50.5 cents per mile rate authorized for
temporary duty travel. Also, military members must make any advance
house-hunting trips at personal expense, without any government
reimbursements such as Federal civilians receive.
Additionally, the overwhelming majority of service families consist
of two working spouses, making two privately owned vehicles a
necessity. Yet the military pays for shipment of only one vehicle on
overseas moves, including moves to Hawaii and Alaska. This forces
relocating families into large out-of-pocket expenses, either by
shipping a second vehicle at their own expense or selling one car
before leaving the States and buying another upon arrival. The
Coalition is greatly disappointed that, for 2 consecutive years, a
subcommittee proposal to authorize shipping two vehicles to non-foreign
duty locations outside of the continental United States has been
dropped in conference.
The Coalition is grateful that the senior enlisted PCS weight
allowance tables were increased slightly in the NDAA for Fiscal Year
2006; however, we believe that these modification need to go further
for personnel in pay grades E-7, E-8, and E-9 to coincide with
allowances for officers in grades O-4, O-5, and O-6 respectively. The
personnel property weight for a senior E-9 leader without dependents
remains the same as for a single O-3 despite the normal accumulation of
household goods over the course of a career.
Four years ago, the subcommittee authorized the Families First
initiative. Among its provisions was full replacement value (FRV)
reimbursement for household goods damaged during PCS moves. We are
grateful that this first FRV phase has begun but will continue to
monitor its implementation. The next phase, focusing on survey results
and real time access to the progress of household goods in the moving
process has yet to be fully implemented. We will continue to monitor
the progress and hope that Congress will be doing the same.
Aside from that long-delayed initiative the last real adjustment in
PCS expenses was 7 years ago in 2001, when this subcommittee upgraded
PCS per diem (but not mileage) rates and raised the maximum daily
Temporary Lodging Expense (TLE) allowance from $110 to $180 a day for a
PCSing family, among certain other adjustments, including the increase
in the junior enlisted weight allowances. That TLE amount is supposed
to cover a family's food and lodging expenses while in temporary
quarters at the gaining or losing installation. Today, after 7 years of
inflation, it's hardly adequate to cover the daily expenses of a family
of four or five anywhere in America, let alone a family ordered to
relocate to San Diego or Washington, DC.
The Coalition also supports authorization of a dislocation
allowance for servicemembers making their final ``change of station''
upon retirement from the uniformed services and a 500-pound
professional goods weight allowance for military spouses.
We cannot avoid requiring members to make regular relocations, with
all the attendant disruptions in their children's education and their
spouses' careers. The Coalition believes strongly that the Nation that
requires military families to incur these disruptions should not be
making them bear the attendant high expenses out of their own pockets.
TMC urges the subcommittee to upgrade permanent change-of-station
allowances to better reflect the expenses members are forced to incur
in complying with government-directed relocations, with priority on
adjusting flat-rate amounts that have been eroded by years--or
decades--of inflation, and shipment of a second vehicle at government
expense to overseas accompanied assignments.
BRAC/Rebasing/Military Construction/Commissaries
TMC remains concerned about inadequacy of service implementation
plans for DOD transformation, global repositioning, Army modularity,
and BRAC initiatives. Given the current wartime fiscal environment, TMC
is greatly worried about sustaining support services and quality of
life programs for members and families. These programs are clearly at
risk--not a week goes by that the Coalition doesn't hear reports of
cutbacks in base operation accounts and base services because of
funding shortfalls.
Feedback from the installation level is that local military and
community officials often are not brought ``into the loop'' or provided
sufficient details on changing program timetables to plan, seek, and
fund support programs (housing, schools, child care, roads, and other
infrastructure) for the numbers of personnel and families expected to
relocate to the installation area by a specific date.
We believe it is important to note that the commissary is a key
element of the total compensation package for servicemembers and
retirees. In addition to providing average savings of 30 percent over
local supermarkets, commissaries provide an important tie to the
military community. Shoppers get more than groceries at the commissary.
It is also an opportunity to connect with other military family members
and to get information on installation programs and activities through
bulletin boards and installation publications. Finally, shoppers
receive nutrition information and education through commissary
promotions and educational campaigns contributing to the overall health
of the entire beneficiary population.
The Coalition urges the subcommittee to closely monitor rebasing/
BRAC plans and schedules to ensure sustainment and timely development
of adequate family support/quality of life programs. At closing and
gaining installations, respectively--to include housing, education,
child care, exchanges and commissaries, health care, family centers,
unit family readiness, and other support services.
Morale, Welfare, and Recreation Programs
The availability of appropriated funds to support MWR activities is
an area of continuing concern. TMC strongly opposes any DOD initiative
that withholds or reduces MWR appropriated support for Category A and
Category B programs or that reduces the MWR dividend derived from
military base exchange programs.
Servicemembers and their families are reaching the breaking point
as a result of the war and the constant changes going on in the force.
It is unacceptable to have troops and families continue to take on more
responsibilities and sacrifices and not give them the support and
resources to do the job and to take care of the needs of their
families.
TMC urges the subcommittee to ensure that DOD funds MWR programs at
least to the 85 percent level for Category A programs and 65 percent
for Category B requirements.
Education Enhancements
Providing quality education for all military children is a key
recruiting and retention standard that has been historically supported
by the subcommittee.
The Coalition is concerned that there was no increase in the amount
of the DOD Supplement to Impact Aid. The need for supplemental funding
as school districts receive more military children as rebasing is
implemented is increasing. We believe that the funding should reflect
this greater impact.
Servicemembers have seen the value of their MGIB dramatically
diminish due to double digit education inflation. The Coalition
recommends tying the MGIB education benefit level to the average cost
of a 4-year public college.
Furthermore, service families facing several duty location changes
during a career often encounter problems establishing State residency
for the purpose of obtaining in-State tuition rates for military
children and spouses. The Coalition supports authorizing in-State
college tuition rates for servicemembers and their families in the
State in which the member is assigned and the member's home State of
record. The in-State tuition should remain continuous once the military
member or family member is established as a student.
TMC urges the subcommittee to work with the Veterans' Affairs
Committee to establish the benchmark level of MGIB education benefits
at the average cost of attending a 4-year public college, and support
continuous in-State tuition eligibility for servicemembers and their
families in the State in which the member is assigned and the member's
home State of record once enrolled as a student.
national guard and reserve force issues
Every day somewhere in the world, our National Guard and Reserves
are answering the call to service. Although there is no end in sight to
their participation in homeland security, overseas deployment and
future contingency operations, Guard and Reserve members have
volunteered for these duties and accept them as a way of life in the
21st century.
Since September 11, 2001, more than 615,000 National Guard and
Reserve service men and women have been called to active Federal
service for the war on terrorism and more than 150,000 have served
multiple deployments. They are experiencing similar sacrifices as the
Active-Duty Forces. However, readjusting to home life, returning to
work and the communities and families they left behind puts added
stress on Guard and Reserve members. Unlike active duty members, whose
combat experience enhances their careers, many Guard Reserve members
return to employers who are unhappy about their active duty service and
find that their civilian careers have been inhibited by their prolonged
absences. Further, despite the continuing efforts of the subcommittee,
most Guard and Reserve families do not have the same level of
counseling and support services that the active duty members have.
All Guard and Reserve components are facing increasing challenges
involving major equipment shortages, end strength requirements,
wounded-warrior health care, assistance and counseling for Guard and
Reserve members for pre-deployment and post-deployment contingency
operations.
Congress and the Department of Defense must provide adequate
benefits and personnel policy changes to support our troops who go in
harm's way.
Reserve Retirement and `Operational Reserve' Policy
The assumption behind the 1948-vintage G-R retirement system--
retired pay eligibility at age 60--was that these servicemembers would
be called up only infrequently for short tours of duty, allowing the
member to pursue a full-time civilian career with a full civilian
retirement. Under the ``Operational Reserve'' policy, reservists will
be required to serve 1-year active duty tours every 5 or 6 years.
Repeated, extended activations devalue full civilian careers and
impede reservists' ability to build a full civilian retirement, 401(k),
etc. Regardless of statutory reemployment protections, periodic long-
term absences from the civilian workplace can only limit Guard and
Reserve members' upward mobility, employability and financial security.
Further, strengthening the Reserve retirement system is needed as an
incentive to retain critical mid-career officers and NCOs for a full
Reserve career to meet long-term readiness needs.
The Coalition is grateful for the NDAA for Fiscal Year 2008
provision that would lower the Reserve retirement age by 3 months for
each cumulative 90 days of active duty on contingency operation orders.
TMC appreciates the importance of this small first step, but is very
concerned that the new authority authorizes such credit only for
service in 2008 and beyond--ignoring the extreme sacrifices of those
who have borne the greatest burden of sacrifice in the war on terror
for one, two, three or more combat tours in the past 6 years.
TMC strongly urges further progress in revamping the Reserve
retirement system in recognition of increased service and sacrifice of
National Guard and Reserve component members, including at a minimum,
extending the new authority for a 90-day=3-month reduction to all Guard
and Reserve members who have served since September 11.
A Total Force Approach to the MGIB
The Nation's Active-Duty, National Guard and Reserve Forces are
operationally integrated under the Total Force policy. But educational
benefits under the MGIB do not reflect the policy nor match benefits to
service commitment.
TMC is grateful that the NDAA for Fiscal Year 2008 addressed a
major inequity for operational reservists by authorizing 10 years of
post-service use for benefits earned under chapter 1607, 10 U.S.C.
But this change will require the DOD, not the VA to pay the costs
of readjustments for reservists. At a hearing on January 17, 2008, a
senior DOD official acknowledged that the DOD no longer should control
chapter 1607.
In addition, basic Reserve MGIB benefits for initial service entry
have lost proportional parity with active duty rates since September
11. These relative benefits have spiraled down from a historic ratio of
47-50 percent of active duty MGIB levels to less than 29 percent--at a
time when Guard and Reserve recruitment continues to be very
challenging.
TMC urges Congress to integrate Guard and Reserve and active duty
MGIB laws into title 38. In addition, TMC recommends restoring basic
Reserve MGIB rates to approximately 50 percent of active duty rates and
authorizing upfront reimbursement of tuition or training coursework for
Guard and Reserve members.
Family Support Programs and Benefits
The Coalition supports providing adequate funding for a core set of
family support programs and benefits that meet the unique needs of
Guard and Reserve families with uniform access for all servicemembers
and families. These programs would promote better communication with
servicemembers, specialized support for geographically separated Guard
and Reserve families and training and back up for family readiness
volunteers. This access would include:
Web-based programs and employee assistance programs
such as Military OneSource and Guardfamily.org.
Enforcement of command responsibility for ensuring
that programs are in place to meet the special needs of
families of individual augmentees or the geographically
dispersed.
Expanded programs between military and community
religious leaders to support servicemembers and families during
all phases of deployments.
Availability of robust preventive counseling services
for servicemembers and families and training so they know when
to seek professional help related to their circumstances.
Enhanced education for Guard and Reserve family
members about their rights and benefits.
Innovative and effective ways to meet the Guard and
Reserve community's needs for occasional child care,
particularly for preventive respite care, volunteering, and
family readiness group meetings and drill time.
A joint family readiness program to facilitate
understanding and sharing of information between all family
members, no matter what the service.
The Coalition recognizes the subcommittee's longstanding interest
and efforts on this topic, including several provisions in the NDAA for
Fiscal Year 2008. The Coalition will monitor the results of the surveys
and increased oversight called for in the provisions and looks forward
to working closely with the Family Readiness Council.
TMC urges Congress to continue and expand its emphasis on providing
consistent funding and increased outreach to connect Guard and Reserve
families with relevant support programs.
Tangible Support for Employers
Employers of Guard and Reserve servicemembers shoulder an extra
burden in support of the national defense. The new ``Operational
Reserve'' policy places even greater strain on employers. For their
sacrifice, they get plaques to hang on the wall.
For Guard and Reserve members, employer `pushback' is listed as one
of the top reasons for reservists to discontinue Guard and Reserve
service. If we are to sustain a viable Guard and Reserve Force for the
long-term, the Nation must do more to tangibly support employers of the
Guard and Reserve and address their substantive concerns, including
initiatives such as:
Tax credits for employers who make up any pay
differential for activated employees.
Tax credits to help small business owners hire
temporary workers to fill in for activated employees.
Tax credits for small manufacturers to hire temporary
workers.
The Coalition urges Congress to support needed tax relief for
employers of Selected Reserve personnel and reinforce the Employer
Support for Guard and Reserve Program.
Seamless Transition for Guard and Reserve Members
Over 615,000 members of the Guard and Reserve have been activated
since September 11. Congressional hearings and media reports have
documented the fact that at separation, many of these servicemembers do
not receive the transition services they and their families need to
make a successful readjustment to civilian status. Needed improvements
include but are not limited to:
Funding to develop tailored Transition Assistance
Program (TAP) services in the hometown area following release
from active duty.
Expansion of VA outreach to provide ``benefits
delivery at discharge'' services in the hometown setting.
Authority for mobilized Guard and Reserve members to
file ``Flexible Spending Account'' claims for a prior reporting
year after return from active duty.
Authority for employers and employees to contribute to
401k and 403b accounts during mobilization.
Enactment of academic protections for mobilized Guard
and Reserve students including: academic standing and refund
guarantees; and, exemption of Federal student loan payments
during activation.
Automatic waivers on scheduled licensing/
certification/promotion exams scheduled during a mobilization.
Authority for reemployment rights for Guard and
Reserve spouses who must suspend employment to care for
children during mobilization.
The Coalition appreciates the work of this subcommittee in seeking
to address some of these needs in the NDAA for Fiscal Year 2008, but
more remains to be done.
The Coalition urges the subcommittee to continue and expand its
efforts to ensure Guard and Reserve members and their families receive
needed transition services to make a successful readjustment to
civilian status.
retirement issues
TMC is extremely grateful to the subcommittee for its support of
maintaining a strong military retirement system to help offset the
extraordinary demands and sacrifices inherent in a career of uniformed
service.
Concurrent Receipt
In the NDAA for Fiscal Year 2004, Congress acknowledged the
inequity of the disability offset to earned retired pay and established
a process to end or phase out the offset for all members with at least
20 years of service and at least a 50 percent disability rating. That
legislation also established the Veterans' Disability Benefits
Commission and tasked the Commission to review the disability system
and recommend any further adjustments to the disability offset law.
Now the Commission has provided its report to Congress, in which it
recommended an end to the VA compensation offset for all disabled
military retirees, regardless of years of service, percentage of
disability, or source of the service-connected disability (combat vs.
non-combat).
In the interim, congressional thinking has evolved along similar
lines. The Coalition is thankful for the subcommittee's efforts in the
NDAA for Fiscal Year 2008 to extend Combat-Related Special Compensation
to disabled retirees who had their careers forced into retirement
before attaining 20 years of service, as well as ending the offset for
retirees rated unemployable by the VA.
Despite this important progress, major inequities still remain that
require the subcommittee's immediate attention. Many retirees are still
excluded from the same principle that eliminates the disability offset
for those with 50 percent or higher disabilities. The Coalition agrees
strongly with the Veterans' Disability Benefits Commission that
principle is the same for all disabled retirees, including those not
covered by concurrent receipt relief enacted so far.
The one key question is, ``Did the retired member fully earn his or
her service-based retired pay, or not, independent of any disability
caused by military service in the process?'' The Coalition and the
Disability Commission agree that the answer has to be ``Yes.'' Any
disability compensation award should be over and above service-earned
retired pay.
If a service-caused disability is severe enough to bar the member's
continuation on active duty, and the member is forced into medical
retirement short of 20 years of service, the member should be
``vested'' in service-earned retired pay at 2.5 percent times pay times
years of service.
To the extent that a member's military disability retired pay
exceeds the amount of retired pay earned purely by service, that
additional amount is for disability and therefore is appropriately
subject to offset by VA disability compensation.
The principle behind eliminating the disability offset for Chapter
61 retirees with less than 20 years of service with combat-related
disabilities is no less applicable to those who had their careers cut
short by other service-caused conditions. It is simply inappropriate to
make such members fund their own VA disability compensation from their
service-earned military retired pay, and it is unconscionable that
current law forces thousands of severely injured members with as much
as 19 years and 11 months of service to forfeit most or all of their
earned retired pay.
The Coalition urges the subcommittee to act expeditiously on the
recommendations of the Veterans' Disability Benefits Commission and
implement a plan to eliminate the deduction of VA disability
compensation from military retired pay for all disabled military
retirees.
Uniformed Services Retiree Entitlements and Benefits
The Coalition awaits the results of the 10th Quadrennial Review of
Military Compensation, which was tasked with reviewing the
recommendations of the Defense Advisory Committee on Military
Compensation (DACMC). The Coalition does not support the DACMC (nor the
Commission on the National Guard and Reserve) recommendations to modify
the military retirement system to more closely reflect civilian
practices, including vesting for members who leave service short of a
career and delaying retired pay eligibility for those who serve a
career.
Many such proposals have been offered in the past, and have been
discarded for good reasons. The only initiative to substantially
curtail/delay military retired pay that was enacted--the 1986 REDUX
plan--had to be repealed 13 years later after it began inhibiting
retention.
The Coalition believes such initiatives to ``civilianize'' the
military retirement system in ways that reduce the value of the current
retirement system and undermine long-term retention are based on a
seriously flawed premise. The reality is that unique military service
conditions demand a unique retirement system. Surveys consistently show
that the military retirement system is the single most powerful
incentive to serve a full career under conditions few civilians would
be willing to endure for even 1 year, much less 20 or 30. A civilian-
style retirement plan would be appropriate for the military only if
military service conditions were similar to civilian working
conditions--which they most decidedly are not. The Coalition believes
strongly that, if such a system as recommended by the DACMC existed for
today's force under today's service conditions, the military Services
would already be mired in a much deeper and more traumatic retention
crisis than they have experience for many of the past several years.
TMC urges the subcommittee to resist initiatives to ``civilianize''
the military retirement system in ways that reduce the compensation
value of the current retirement system and undermine long-term
retention.
Permanent ID Card Eligibility
The advent of TFL, expiration of TFL-eligible spouses' and
survivors' military identification cards--and the threatened denial of
health care claims--have caused many frail and elderly members and
their caregivers significant administrative and financial distress.
Previously, those who lived miles from a military installation or
who resided in nursing homes and assisted living facilities simply did
not bother to renew their identification (ID) cards upon the 4 year
expiration date. Before enactment of TFL, they had little to lose by
not doing so. But now, ID card expiration cuts off their new and all-
important health care coverage.
Congress has agreed with the Coalition's concerns that a 4-year
expiration date is reasonable for younger family members and survivors
who have a higher incidence of divorce and remarriage, but it imposes
significant hardship and inequity upon elderly dependents and
survivors.
In the NDAA for Fiscal Year 2005, Congress authorized permanent ID
cards for spouses and survivors who have attained age 75 (vs. the
Coalition-recommended age 65), recognizing that many elderly spouses
and survivors with limited mobility or who live in residential care
facilities find it difficult or impossible to renew their military ID
cards. Subsequently, Congress expanded that eligibility to permanently
disabled dependents of retired members, regardless of age.
Coalition associations continue to hear from a number of
beneficiaries below the age of 75 who are disabled, living in
residential facilities, are unable to drive, or do not live within a
reasonable distance of a military facility. The threat of loss of
coverage is forcing many others to try to drive long distances--
sometimes in adverse weather and at some risk to themselves and
others--to get their cards renewed.
For administrative simplicity, the Coalition believes the age for
the permanent ID card for spouses and survivors should coincide with
the advent of TFL. To the extent an interim step may be necessary, the
eligibility age could be reduced to 70.
The Coalition urges the subcommittee to direct the Secretary of
Defense to authorize issuance of permanent military identification
cards to uniformed services family members and survivors who are age 65
and older.
survivor issues
The Coalition is grateful to the subcommittee for its significant
efforts in recent years to improve the SBP. We particularly note that,
as of April 1, thanks to this subcommittee's efforts, the minimum
annuity for all SBP beneficiaries, regardless of age will be 55 percent
of covered retired pay.
We also appreciate Congress' initiative in last year's defense bill
that establishes a special survivor indemnity allowance that is the
first step in a longer-term effort to phase out the DIC offset to SBP
when the member died of a service-caused condition.
SBP-DIC Offset
The Coalition believes strongly that current law is unfair in
reducing military SBP annuities by the amount of any survivor benefits
payable from the VA DIC program.
If the surviving spouse of a retiree who dies of a service-
connected cause is entitled to DIC from the Department of Veterans
Affairs and if the retiree was also enrolled in SBP, the surviving
spouse's SBP benefits are reduced by the amount of DIC. A pro-rata
share of SBP premiums is refunded to the widow upon the member's death
in a lump sum, but with no interest. This offset also affects all
survivors of members who are killed on active duty.
The Coalition believes SBP and DIC payments are paid for different
reasons. SBP is purchased by the retiree and is intended to provide a
portion of retired pay to the survivor. DIC is a special indemnity
compensation paid to the survivor when a member's service causes his or
her premature death. In such cases, the VA indemnity compensation
should be added to the SBP the retiree paid for, not substituted for
it. It should be noted as a matter of equity that surviving spouses of
Federal civilian retirees who are disabled veterans and die of
military-service-connected causes can receive DIC without losing any of
their Federal civilian SBP benefits.
The Coalition is concerned that, in authorizing the special
survivor indemnity allowance in last year's NDAA, the conferees did not
use the precise language proposed by this subcommittee, but adopted a
technical language change that had the effect of limiting eligibility
for the new allowance to survivors of members who were either retired
or in the ``gray area'' reserve at the time of death. That is, it
excluded survivors of members who died while serving on active duty.
The Coalition believes strongly that the latter group of survivors
is equally deserving of the new allowance. Some have argued that relief
should be allowed only for those who paid a cash premium in retirement.
The Coalition strongly disagrees, noting that a severely injured member
who dies 1 month after his military disability retirement and who paid
1 month of SBP premiums is little different than the case of a member
who is more severely injured and expires more rapidly. Further, the new
law authorizes coverage for ``gray area'' retirees who have paid no
premiums, since their retired pay and SBP premiums don't begin until
age 60.
But the Coalition believes the issue goes beyond any such hair-
splitting. The reality is that, in every SBP/DIC case, active duty or
retired, the true premium extracted by the service from both the member
and the survivor was the ultimate one--the very life of the member--and
that the service was what caused his or her death.
The Coalition knows that the subcommittee is aware that the
military community (and especially the survivors concerned) view the
amount of the new allowance--$50 per month initially, and growing to
$100 over the course of several years--as grossly inadequate. We
appreciate that the subcommittee could have elected to do nothing
rather than incur the expected negative feedback about the small
amount. In that regard, we applaud you for having the courage to
acknowledge the inequity and take this first step, however small, to
begin trying to address it.
But we also urge the subcommittee to work hard to accelerate
increases in the amount of the allowance, to send the much-needed
message to these survivors who have given so much to their country that
Congress fully intends to find a way to address their loss more
appropriately.
The Coalition strongly urges the subcommittee to take further
action to expand eligibility for the special survivor indemnity
allowance to include all SBP-DIC survivors and continue progress toward
completely repealing the SBP-DIC offset for this most-aggrieved group
of military widows.
Final Retired Paycheck
TMC believes the policy requiring recovery of a deceased member's
final retired paycheck from his or her survivor should be changed to
allow the survivor to keep the final month's retired pay.
Current regulations require the survivor to surrender the final
month of retired pay, either by returning the outstanding paycheck or
having a direct withdrawal recoupment from her or his bank account.
The Coalition believes this is an extremely insensitive policy
imposed by the government at a most traumatic time for a deceased
member's next of kin. Unlike his or her active duty counterpart, a
retiree's survivor receives no death gratuity. Many older retirees do
not have adequate insurance to provide even a moderate financial
cushion for surviving spouses. Very often, the surviving spouse already
has had to spend the final month's retired pay before being notified by
the military finance center that it must be returned. Then, to receive
the partial month's pay of the deceased retiree up to the date of
death, the spouse must file a claim for settlement--an arduous and
frustrating task, at best--and wait for the military's finance center
to disburse the payment. Far too often, this strains the surviving
spouse's ability to meet the immediate financial obligations
commensurate with the death of the average family's ``bread winner.''
TMC urges the subcommittee to end the insensitive practice of
recouping the final month's retired pay from the survivor of a deceased
retired member.
health care issues
The Coalition very much appreciates the subcommittee's strong and
continuing interest in keeping health care commitments to military
beneficiaries. We are particularly grateful for your support for the
last 2 years in refusing to allow the Department of Defense to
implement disproportional beneficiary health fee increases.
The Coalition is more than willing to engage substantively in
TRICARE fee and copay discussions with DOD. In past years, the
Coalition and the Defense Department have had regular and substantive
dialogues that proved very productive in facilitating reasonably smooth
implementation of such major program changes as TRICARE Prime and TFL.
The objective during those good-faith dialogues has been finding a
balance between the needs of the Department and the needs of
beneficiaries.
It is a great source of regret to the Coalition that there has been
substantively less dialogue on the more recent fee increase
initiatives. From its actions, it is hard to draw any other conclusion
than the Department's sole concern is to extract a specified amount of
budget savings from beneficiaries. The savings are intended to come
from increased revenues from higher fees and less utilization by
military retirees. The Coalition and Congressional Budget Office
believe that DOD's approach will not achieve the projected savings.
The unique package of military retirement benefits--of which a key
component is a top-of-the-line health benefit--is the primary offset
afforded uniformed servicemembers for enduring a career of unique and
extraordinary sacrifices that few Americans are willing to accept for 1
year, let alone 20 or 30. It is an unusual--and essential--compensation
package that a grateful Nation provides for the relatively few who
agree to subordinate their personal and family lives to protecting our
national interests for so many years.
Full Funding for the Defense Health Program
The Coalition very much appreciates the subcommittee's support for
maintaining--and expanding where needed--the healthcare benefit for all
military beneficiaries, consistent with the demands imposed upon them.
The Defense Department, Congress, and TMC all have reason to be
concerned about the rising cost of military health care. But it is
important to recognize that the bulk of the problem is a national one,
not a military-specific one. To a large extent, military health cost
growth is a direct reflection of health care trends in the private
sector.
It is true that many private sector employers are choosing to shift
an ever-greater share of health costs to their employees and retirees.
In the bottom-line-oriented corporate world, many firms see their
employees as another form of capital, from which maximum utility is to
be extracted at minimum cost, and those who quit are replaceable by
similarly experienced new hires. But that can't be the culture in the
military's closed personnel, all volunteer model, whose long-term
effectiveness is utterly dependent on establishing a sense of mutual,
long-term commitment between the servicemember and his/her country.
Some assert active duty personnel costs have increased 60 percent
since 2001, of which a significant element is for compensation and
health costs. But much of that cost increase is due to conscious
decisions by Congress to correct previous shortfalls--including easing
the double-digit military ``pay gap'' of that era and correcting the
unconscionable situation before 2001 when military beneficiaries were
summarily dropped from TRICARE coverage at age 65. Additionally, much
of the increase is due to the cost of war and increased OPTEMPO.
Meanwhile, the cost of basic equipment soldiers carry into battle
(helmets, rifles, body armor) has increased 257 percent (more than
tripled) from $7,000 to $25,000 since 1999. The cost of a Humvee has
increased seven-fold (600 percent) since 2001 (from $32,000 to
$225,000).
While we have an obligation to do our best to intelligently
allocate these funds, the bottom line is that maintaining the most
powerful military force in the world is expensive--and doubly so in
wartime.
The Coalition assumes that DOD will again propose a reduction to
the defense health budget based on the assumption that Congress will
approve beneficiary fee increases for fiscal year 2009 at least as
large as those as outlined last year. The Coalition objects strongly to
the Administration's arbitrary reduction of the TRICARE budget
submission. DOD has typically overestimated its healthcare costs as
evidenced by a recent GAO report on the TRS premiums. The Coalition
deplores this inappropriate budget ``brinksmanship'', which risks
leaving TRICARE significantly underfunded, especially in view of
statements made for the last 2 years by leaders of both Armed Services
Committees that the Department's proposed fee increases were excessive.
The Coalition understands only too well the very significant
challenge such a large and arbitrary budget reduction would pose for
this subcommittee if allowed to stand. If the reduction is not made up,
the Department almost certainly will experience a substantial budget
shortfall before the end of the year. This would then generate
supplemental funding needs, further program cutbacks, and likely
efforts to shift even more costs to beneficiaries in future years--all
to the detriment of retention and readiness.
The Coalition particularly objects to DOD's past imposition of
``efficiency wedges'' in the health care budget, which have nothing to
do with efficiency and everything to do with imposing arbitrary budget
cuts that impede delivery of needed care. We are grateful for the
subcommittee's strong action on this topic, and trust in your vigilance
to ensure that such initiatives will not be part of this year's budget
process.
TMC strongly urges the subcommittee to take all possible steps to
restore the reduction in TRICARE-related budget authority and ensure
continued full funding for Defense Health Program needs.
Protecting Beneficiaries Against Cost-Shifting
The Task Force on the Future of Military Health Care had a great
opportunity for objective evaluation of the larger health care issues.
Unfortunately, the Coalition believes the Task Force missed that mark
by a substantial margin.
The bulk of its report cites statistics provided by the Defense
Department and focuses discussions of cost-sharing almost solely on
government costs, while devoting hardly a sentence to what the
Coalition views as an equally fundamental issue--the level of health
coverage that members earn by their arduous career service, the value
of that service as an in-kind, upfront premium prepayment, and the role
of lifetime health coverage as an important offset to the unique
conditions of military service. The Task Force focused on what was
``fair to the taxpayer'' and felt the benefit should be ``generous but
not free.''
The Task Force gave short shrift to what the Coalition sees as a
fundamental point--that generations of military people have been told
by their leaders that their service earned them their health care
benefit, and the Defense Department and Congress reinforced that
perception by sustaining flat, modest TRICARE fees over long periods of
time. But now the Department and the Task Force assert that the
military retirement health benefit is no longer earned by service. They
now say beneficiary costs should be ``restored'' to some fixed share of
Defense Department costs, even though no such relationship was ever
stated or intended in the past. The Task Force report acknowledges that
DOD cost increases over the intervening years have been inflated by
military/wartime requirements, inefficiency, lack of effective
oversight, structural dysfunction, or conscious political decisions by
the administration and Congress. Yet they assert that the government
should foist a fixed share of those costs on beneficiaries anyway.
The Coalition believes the Task Force's fee recommendations (see
charts below)--which actually propose larger fee increases than DOD
had--would be highly inequitable to beneficiaries and would pose a
significant potential deterrent to long-term career retention.
CURRENT VS. PROPOSED TRICARE FEES (Recommended by DOD Task Force on
Future of Military Health Care)
Retiree Under Age 65, Family of Three
------------------------------------------------------------------------
TRICARE Prime1 Current Proposed
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Enrollment Fee........................... $460 $1,090-$2,0903
Doctor Visit Copays...................... $60 $125
Rx Cost Shares2.......................... $288 $960
Yearly Cost.............................. $808 $2,175-$3,175
------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------
TRICARE Standard 1 Current Proposed
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Enrollment Fee........................... $0 $120
Deductible............................... $300 $600-$1,1503
Rx Cost Shares2.......................... $288 $960
Yearly Cost.............................. $588 $1,680-$2,230
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Fully phased-in proposal; assumes five doctor visits per year.
\2\ Assumes two generic and two brand name prescriptions per month in
retail pharmacy
\3\ Includes annual medical inflation adjustment recommended by the Task
Force.
Retiree Over Age 65 and Spouse
------------------------------------------------------------------------
TRICARE for Life \2\ Current Proposed
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Medicare Part B.......................... $2,314 $2,314
Enrollment Fee........................... $0 $240
Rx Cost Shares \2\....................... $396 $1,260
Yearly Cost.............................. $2,710 $3,814
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Assumes lowest tier Medicare Part B premium for 2008.
\2\ Two generic and three brand name prescriptions per month purchased
at a network retail pharmacy
Currently Serving Family of Four
------------------------------------------------------------------------
TRICARE Standard \1\ Current Proposed
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Enrollment Fee........................... $0 $120 (??)
Deductible............................... $300 $600-$1,150 \3\
Rx Cost Shares \2\....................... $180 $660
Yearly Cost.............................. $480 $1,260-$1,930
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Fully phased in proposals. Spouse and two children use Standard.
(??) Task Force report unclear whether enrollment fee would apply to
currently serving families who elect TRICARE Standard
\2\ Assumes two generic and one brand name prescription per month
purchased at retail pharmacy.
\3\ Includes annual military medical inflation adjustment as recommended
by the Task Force.
The Task Force cited GAO and other government reports to the effect
that DOD financial statements and cost accounting systems are not
auditable because of system problems and inadequate business processes
and internal controls. Despite those statements, the Task Force
accepted DOD data as the basis for assessing and proposing beneficiary
cost-sharing percentages. The Coalition has requested information
concerning the 1996 calculation and has never received an adequate
accounting as to what was included in the calculation.
The Task Force refers to its fee increases as ``modest'' and
suggests the changes would be more generous than those offered by 75
percent to 80 percent of all organizations in the private sector that
offer health care benefits. The Coalition finds it telling that the
Task Force would be content that 20 percent to 25 percent of U.S. firms
offer their employees--most of whom never served 1 day for their
country--a better benefit than the Defense Department provides in
return for two or three decades of service and sacrifice in uniform.
The Coalition is very grateful that Congress has expressed a much
greater recognition of beneficiary perspectives, and has sought a more
comprehensive examination of military health care issues. In that
regard, the Coalition testimony will outline several specific concerns
and address some principles that the Coalition believes need to be
addressed in statute, just as there are statutory standards and
guidelines for other major compensation elements--pay raises, housing
and subsistence allowances, retired pay cost-of-living adjustments
(COLAs), et cetera.
People vs. Weapons
Defense officials have provided briefs to Congress indicating that
the rising military health care costs are ``impinging on other service
programs.'' Other reports indicate that DOD leadership is seeking more
funding for weapons programs by reducing the amount it spends on
military health care and other personnel needs.
TMC continues to assert that such budget-driven trade-offs are
misguided and inappropriate. Cutting people programs to fund weapons
ignores the much larger funding problem, and only makes it worse.
The Coalition believes strongly that the proposed defense budget is
too small to meet national defense needs. Today's defense budget (in
wartime) is only about 4 percent of GDP, well short of the average for
the peacetime years since World War II.
The Coalition believes strongly that America can afford to and must
pay for both weapons and military health care.
Military vs. Civilian Cost-Sharing Measurement
Defense leaders assert that substantial military fee increases are
needed to bring military beneficiary costs more in line with civilian
practices. But merely contrasting military vs. civilian cash cost-
shares is a grossly misleading, ``apple-to-orange'' comparison.
For all practical purposes, those who wear the uniform of their
country are enrolled in a 20- to 30-year prepayment plan that they must
complete to earn lifetime health coverage. In this regard, military
retirees and their families paid enormous ``upfront'' premiums for that
coverage through their decades of service and sacrifice. Once that
prepayment is already rendered, the government cannot simply pretend it
was never paid, and focus only on post-service cash payments.
The Department of Defense and the Nation--as good-faith employers
of the trusting members from whom they demand such extraordinary
commitment and sacrifice--have a reciprocal health care obligation to
retired servicemembers and their families and survivors that far
exceeds any civilian employer's to its workers and retirees.
The Task Force on the Future of Military Health Care acknowledges
that its recommendations for beneficiary fee increases, if enacted,
would leave military beneficiaries with a lesser benefit than 20-25
percent of America's corporate employees. The pharmacy copayment
schedule they propose for military beneficiaries is almost the same--
and not quite as good in some cases--as the better civilian programs
they reviewed.
The Coalition believes that military beneficiaries from whom
America has demanded decades of extraordinary service and sacrifice
have earned coverage that is the best America has to offer--not just
coverage that is at the 75th percentile of corporate plans.
Large Retiree Fee Increases Can Only Hurt Retention
The reciprocal obligation of the government to maintain an
extraordinary benefit package to offset the extraordinary sacrifices of
career military members is a practical as well as moral obligation.
Mid-career military losses can't be replaced like civilians can.
Eroding benefits for career service can only undermine long-term
retention/readiness. Today's troops are very conscious of Congress'
actions toward those who preceded them in service. One reason Congress
enacted TFL is that the Joint Chiefs of Staff at that time said that
inadequate retiree health care was affecting attitudes among active
duty troops.
The current Joint Chiefs have endorsed increasing TRICARE fees only
because their political leaders have convinced them that this is the
only way they can secure funding for weapons and other needs. TMC
believes it is inappropriate to put the Joint Chiefs in the untenable
position of being denied sufficient funding for current readiness needs
if they don't agree to beneficiary benefit cuts.
Those who think retiree health care isn't a retention issue should
recall a quote by then Chief of Naval Operations and now Chairman of
Joint Chiefs of Staff, Admiral Mike Mullen, in a 2006 Navy Times:
``More and more sailors are coming in married. They talk to
me more about medical benefits than I ever thought to when I
was in my mid-20s. I believe we have the gold standard . . .
for medical care right now, and that's a recruiting issue, a
recruiting strength, and it's a retention strength.''
That's more than backed up by two independent Coalition surveys. A
2006 Military Officers Association of America survey drew 40,000
responses, including more than 6,500 from active duty members. Over 92
percent in all categories of respondents opposed the DOD-proposed plan.
There was virtually no difference between the responses of active duty
members (96 percent opposed) and retirees under 65 (97 percent
opposed). A Fleet Reserve Association survey showed similar results.
Reducing military retirement benefits would be particularly ill-
advised when recruiting is already a problem and an overstressed force
is at increasing retention risk.
Proposed Increases Far Exceed Inflation Increases
The increases proposed by the Administration and the Task Force are
grossly out of line with TRICARE benefit levels originally enacted by
Congress, even allowing for interim inflation since current fees were
established.
If the $460 family Prime enrollment fee had been increased by the
same Consumer Price Index (CPI) percentage increase as retired pay, it
would be $642 for fiscal year 2009--far less than either the $1,512
envisioned in the fiscal year 2008 budget request or the $900-$1,700
cited by the Task Force as its ultimate target fees.
If the $300 deductible for TRICARE Standard were CPI-adjusted for
the same period, it would be $419 by 2009--far short of the $1,210 in
annual deductible and new fees proposed by DOD in 2007, or the $610-
$1,080 Task Force target.
Further, both the administration and the Task Force propose
adjusting beneficiary fees by medical cost growth, which has been two
to three times the inflation-based increase in members' retired pay.
The Task Force estimates the annual increase would be 7.5 percent.
Both methodologies would ensure that medical costs would consume an
ever-larger share of beneficiaries' income with each passing year. The
Coalition realizes that this has been happening to many private sector
employees, but believes strongly that the government has a greater
obligation to protect the interests of its military beneficiaries than
private corporations feel for their employees.
Pharmacy copay increases proposed by the Task Force are even more
disproportional. They would increase retail copays from $3 (generic),
$9 (brand), and $22 (nonformulary) to $15, $25, and $45, respectively.
Those represent increases of 400 percent, 178 percent, and 100 percent,
respectively. Despite citing experience in civilian firms that
beneficiary use of preferred drugs increased when their copays were
reduced or eliminated, the Task Force actually proposes the highest
percentage copay increases for the medications TRICARE most wants
beneficiaries to use. That huge increase for retail generics flies in
the face of recent commercial initiatives such as Wal-Mart's offering
of many generics to the general public for a $4 copay. If the purpose
is to push military beneficiaries to use Wal-Mart instead of TRICARE,
it might indeed save the government some money on those medications,
but it won't make military beneficiaries feel very good about their
military pharmacy benefit. It shouldn't make Congress feel good about
it, either.
The Coalition particularly questions the need for pharmacy copay
increases now that Congress has approved Federal pricing for the
TRICARE retail pharmacy system.
Retirees Under 65 ``Already Gave'' 10 percent of Retired Pay
The large proposed health fee increases would impose a financial
``double whammy'' on retirees and survivors under age 65.
Any assertion that military retirees have been getting some kind of
``free ride'' because TRICARE fees have not been increased in recent
years conveniently overlooks past government actions that have
inflicted far larger financial penalties on every retiree and survivor
under 65--penalties that will grow every year for the rest of their
lives.
That's because decades of past budget caps already depressed
lifetime retired pay by an average of 10 percent for military members
who retired between 1984 and 2006. For most of the 1980s and 1990s,
military pay raises were capped below private sector pay growth,
accumulating a 13.5 percent ``pay gap'' by 1998-99--a gap which has
been moderated since then but persists at 3.4 percent today.
Every member who has retired since 1984--exactly the same under-65
retiree population targeted by the proposed TRICARE fee increases--has
had his or her retired pay depressed by a percentage equal to the pay
gap at the time of retirement. That depressed pay will persist for the
rest of their lives, with a proportional depression of SBP annuities
for their survivors.
As a practical example, a member who retired in 1993--when the pay
gap was 11.5 percent--continues to suffer an 11.5 percent retired pay
loss today. For an E-7 who retired in 1993 with 20 years of service,
that means a loss of $2,000 this year and every year because the
government chose to cap his military pay below the average American's.
An O-5 with 20 years of service loses more than $4,300 a year.
The government has spent almost a decade making incremental
reductions in the pay gap for currently serving members, but it still
hasn't made up the whole gap--and it certainly hasn't offered to make
up those huge losses for members already retired. Under such
circumstances, it strikes the Coalition as ironic that defense
officials now propose, in effect, billing those same retirees for
``back TRICARE fee increases''.
Fee-Tiering Scheme Is Inappropriate
Both the administration and the Task Force have proposed multi-
tiered schemes for proposed beneficiary fee increases, with the
Administration's based on retired pay grade and the Task Force's based
on retired pay amount. The intent of the plan is to ease opposition to
the fee increases by introducing a means-testing initiative that
penalizes some groups less than others.
The Coalition rejects such efforts to mask a fundamental inequity
by trying to convince some groups that the inequity being imposed on
them is somehow more acceptable because even greater penalties would be
imposed on other groups.
Any such argument is fundamentally deceptive, since the Task Force
plan envisions adjusting fee levels by medical inflation (7-8 percent a
year), while retired pay thresholds would be adjusted by retiree COLAs
(2 percent-3 percent a year). That would guarantee ``tier creep''--
shifting ever greater numbers of beneficiaries into the top tier every
year.
Surveys of public and private sector health coverage indicate that
less than 1 percent of plans differentiate by salary. No other Federal
plan does so. The Secretary of Defense has the same coverage as any GS
employee, and the Majority Leader of the Senate has the same coverage
as the Senate's lowest-paid staff member.
The Coalition believes strongly that all military retirees earned
equal health benefits by virtue of their career service, and that the
lowest fee tier proposed by either the administration or the Task Force
would be an excessive increase for any military beneficiary (see chart
at appendix A).
TRICARE for Life Trust Fund Accrual Deposit Is Dubious Excuse
According to DOD, most of the growth in defense health spending (48
percent) was attributable to the establishment of the accrual
accounting methodology for the TFL trust fund (which doesn't affect
current outlays). The next largest contributor is medical care cost
inflation (24 percent). Increase in usage by retirees and their
dependents under age 65 accounted for 7 percent of the increase. Other
benefit enhancements weigh in at 5 percent while global war on terror
and other factors account for the remaining 15 percent. However, the
affect of shifting beneficiaries from military treatment facilities to
the civilian network was not discussed.
When the Defense Department began arguing 3 years ago that the
trust fund deposit was impinging on other defense programs, the
Coalition and the subcommittee agreed that that should not be allowed
to happen. When the Administration refused to increase the budget top
line to accommodate the statutorily mandated trust fund deposit,
Congress changed the law to specify that the entire responsibility for
TFL trust fund deposits should be transferred to the Treasury.
Subsequently, Administration budget officials chose to find a way to
continue charging that deposit against the defense budget anyway.
In the Coalition's view, this represents a conscious and
inappropriate Administration decision to cap defense spending below the
level needed to meet national security needs. If the administration
chooses to claim to Congress that its defense budget can't meet those
other needs, then Congress (which directed implementation of TFL and
the trust fund deposit) has an obligation to increase the budget as
necessary to meet them.
TRICARE For Life Enrollment Fee is Inappropriate
The Coalition disagrees strongly with the Task Force's
recommendation to impose a new $120 annual enrollment fee for each TFL
beneficiary. The Task Force report acknowledged that this would be
little more than a ``nuisance fee'' and would be contrary to Congress'
intent in authorizing TFL.
The Task Force report cites data highlighting that costs are higher
for beneficiaries age 65 and older, as if neither the administration
nor Congress envisioned in 2001 that older beneficiaries might need
more medications and more care.
Congress authorized TFL in 2001 in recognition that, prior to that
date, most older beneficiaries had to pay for all of their care out of
their own pockets after age 65, since most had been summarily ejected
from any military health or pharmacy coverage. Congress also required
that, to be eligible for TFL, beneficiaries must enroll in Medicare
Part B, which already entails a substantial and rapidly growing annual
premium. Therefore, TRICARE only pays the portion of costs not covered
by Medicare.
When the current administration came to office in 2001, military
and civilian Defense leaders praised TFL, as enacted, as an appropriate
benefit that retirees had earned and deserved for their career service.
The Coalition asks, ``What has changed in the 6 intervening years of
war that has somehow made that service less meritorious?''
Alternative Options to Make TRICARE More Cost-Efficient
The Coalition continues to believe strongly that the Defense
Department has not sufficiently investigated other options to make
TRICARE more cost-efficient without shifting costs to beneficiaries.
The Coalition has offered a long list of alternative cost-saving
possibilities, including:
Promote retaining other health insurance by making
TRICARE a true second-payer to other insurance (far cheaper to
pay another insurance's copay than have the beneficiary migrate
to TRICARE).
Reduce or eliminate all mail-order co-payments to
boost use of this lowest-cost venue.
Change electronic claim system to kick back errors in
real time to help providers submit ``clean'' claims, reduce
delays/multiple submissions.
Size and staff military treatment facilities (least
costly care option) in order to reduce reliance on non-MTF
civilian providers.
Promote programs to offer special care management
services and zero copays or deductibles to incentivize
beneficiaries to take medications and seek preventive care for
chronic or unusually expensive conditions.
Promote improved health by offering preventive and
immunization services (e.g., shingles vaccine, flu shots) with
no copay or deductible.
Authorize TRICARE coverage for smoking cessation
products and services (it's the height of irony that TRICARE
currently doesn't cover these programs that have been long and
widely acknowledged as highly effective in reducing long-term
health costs).
Reduce long-term TRS costs by allowing members the
option of a government subsidy (at a cost capped below TRS
cost) of civilian employer premiums during periods of
mobilization.
Promote use of mail-order pharmacy system via mailings
to users of maintenance medications, highlighting the
convenience and individual expected cost savings.
Encourage retirees to use lowest-cost-venue military
pharmacies at no charge, rather than discouraging such use by
limiting formularies, curtailing courier initiatives, etc.
The Coalition is pleased that the Defense Department has begun to
implement at least some of our past suggestions, and stands ready to
partner with DOD to investigate and jointly pursue these or other
options that offer potential for reducing costs.
TRICARE Still Has Significant Shortcomings
While DOD chooses to focus its attention on the cost of the TRICARE
program to the government, the Coalition believes there is insufficient
acknowledgement that thousands of providers and beneficiaries continue
to experience significant problems with TRICARE. Beneficiaries at many
locations, particularly those lacking large military populations,
report difficulty in finding providers willing to participate in the
program. Doctors complain about the program's low payments and
administrative hassles. Withdrawal of providers from TRICARE networks
at several locations has generated national publicity.
Of particular note is a 2007 GAO survey of Guard and Reserve
personnel, also cited by the DOD Task Force on the Future of Military
Health Care, in which almost one-third of respondents reported having
difficulty obtaining assistance from TRICARE, and more than one-fourth
reported difficulty in finding a TRICARE-participating provider.
That problem is getting worse rather than better. The Task Force
report stated that all military beneficiary categories report more
difficulty than civilians in accessing care, and that military
beneficiaries' reported satisfaction with access to care declined from
2004 to 2006. The problem is exacerbated in areas like Alaska where a
combination of physician shortages and an unwillingness to take TRICARE
make it very difficult to find a physician.
The Coalition urges the subcommittee to require DOD to pursue
greater efforts to improve TRICARE and find more effective and
appropriate ways to make TRICARE more cost-efficient without seeking to
``tax'' beneficiaries and make unrealistic budget assumptions.
TMC Health Care Cost Principles
TMC believes strongly that the current fee controversy is caused in
part by the lack of any statutory record of the purpose of military
health benefits and the degree to which cost adjustments are or should
be allowable. Under current law, the Secretary of Defense has broad
latitude to make administrative adjustments to fees for TRICARE Prime
and the pharmacy systems. As a practical matter, the Armed Services
Committees can threaten to change the law if they disapprove of the
Secretary's initiatives. But absent such intervention, the Secretary
can choose not to increase fees for years at a time or can choose to
quadruple fees in 1 year.
Until recently, this was not a particular matter of concern, as no
Secretary had previously proposed dramatic fee increases. Given recent
years' precedents, the Coalition believes strongly that the
subcommittee needs to establish more specific and permanent principles,
guidelines, and prohibitions to protect against dramatic administrative
fluctuations in this most vital element of servicemembers' career
compensation incentive package.
Other major elements of the military compensation package have much
more specific standards in permanent law. There is a formula for the
initial amount of retired pay and for subsequent annual adjustments.
Basic pay raises are tied to the ECI, and housing and food allowances
are tied to specific standards as well.
A 2006 survey of military retirees indicates that 65 percent of
retirees under 65 have access to private health insurance. What the
Task Force report does not measure is the percent of retirees that do
not embark on a second career and thus depend solely on their
retirement income. If fees are allowed to be tiered, up to one third of
retirees could see a large portion of their retirement eaten up by
healthcare costs.
The Coalition most strongly recommends Representative Chet Edwards'
and Representative Walter Jones' H.R. 579 and Senator Frank
Lautenberg's and Senator Chuck Hagel's S. 604 as models to establish
statutory findings, a sense of Congress on the purpose and principles
of military health care benefits, and explicit guidelines for and
limitations on adjustments.
Active duty members and families should be charged no
fees except retail pharmacy co-payments, except to the extent
they make the choice to participate in TRICARE Standard or use
out-of-network providers under TRICARE Prime.
For retired and survivor beneficiaries, the percentage
increase in fees, deductibles, and co-payments that may be
considered in any year should not exceed the percentage
increase beneficiaries experience in their compensation.
The TRICARE Standard inpatient copay should not be
increased further for the foreseeable future. At $535 per day,
it already far exceeds inpatient copays for virtually any
private sector health plan.
There should be no enrollment fee for TRICARE Standard
or TFL, since neither offers assured access to TRICARE-
participating providers. An enrollment fee implies enrollees
will receive additional services, as Prime enrollees are
guaranteed access to participating providers in return for
their fee. Congress already has required TFL beneficiaries to
pay substantial Medicare Part B fees to gain TFL coverage.
There should be one TRICARE fee schedule for all
retired beneficiaries, just as all legislators, Defense leaders
and other Federal civilian grades have the same health fee
schedule. The TRICARE schedule should be significantly lower
than the lowest tier recommended by the Defense Department,
recognizing that all retired members paid large upfront
premiums for their coverage through decades of arduous service
and sacrifice.
TRICARE Standard Enrollment
Last year, the Department of Defense proposed requiring
beneficiaries to take an additional step of signing an explicit
statement of enrollment in TRICARE Standard. The Department proposed a
one-time $25 enrollment fee. The Task Force on the Future of Military
Health Care also endorsed enrollment, and proposed an annual enrollment
fee of $120.
The proposals are based on three main arguments:
Enrollment is needed to define the population that
will actually use the program
Enrollment would allow more accurate budgeting for
program needs
The fee would help offset DOD's cost of implementing
the enrollment system (DOD rationale) and ``impose some
personal accountability for health care costs'' (Task Force
rationale).
The Coalition believes none of these arguments stands up to
scrutiny.
Department officials already know exactly which beneficiaries use
TRICARE Standard. They have exhaustive records on what doctors they've
seen and what medications they've used on what dates and for what
conditions. They already assess trends in beneficiary usage and project
the likely effect on those trends for current and future years--such as
the effect of changes in private employer changes on the likely return
of more beneficiaries to the TRICARE system.
The Defense Department does not have a good record on communicating
policy changes to Standard beneficiaries. That means large numbers of
beneficiaries won't get the word, or appreciate the full impact if they
do get it. They have always been told that their eligibility is based
on the Defense Enrollment Eligibility Reporting System. A single, bulk-
mail communication can't be expected to overwrite decades of
experience.
Hard experience is that many thousands of beneficiaries would learn
of the requirement only when their TRICARE Standard claims are rejected
for failure to enroll. Some would involve claims for cancer, auto
accidents and other situations in which it would be unacceptable to
deny claims because the beneficiary didn't understand an administrative
rule change. DOD administrators who casually dismiss this argument as
involving a relative minority of cases see the situation much
differently if they found their family in that situation--as hundreds
or thousands of military families certainly would.
Inevitably, most beneficiaries who do receive and understand the
implications of an enrollment requirement will enroll simply ``to be
safe'', even if their actual intent is to use VA or employer-provided
coverage for primary care--thus undercutting the argument that
enrollment would increase accuracy of usage projections.
The arguments for a Standard enrollment fee also don't hold water.
First, it's inequitable to make beneficiaries pay a fee to cover the
cost of an enrollment system that's established solely for the benefit
and convenience of the government, with no benefit whatsoever for the
beneficiary. Second, the Task Force acknowledges that a $120 fee is
more a ``nuisance fee'' than a behavior modifier, and existing
deductibles and copays provide a much more immediate ``accountability''
sense to the beneficiary. Third and most important, one who pays an
enrollment fee expects something extra in return for the fee. An
enrollment fee for TRICARE Prime is reasonable, because it buys the
beneficiary guaranteed access to a participating provider. TRICARE
Standard provides no such guarantee, and in some locations it's very
difficult for beneficiaries to find a TRICARE provider.
For all these reasons, establishing an enrollment requirement will
neither better define the user population nor better define budget
needs.
The Coalition believes the real intent of the enrollment proposal
is simply to reduce TRICARE costs by allowing DOD to reject payment for
any claims by beneficiaries who fail to enroll.
To the extent any enrollment requirement may still be considered
for TRICARE Standard, such enrollment should be automatic for any
beneficiary who files a TRICARE claim. Establishing an enrollment
requirement must not be allowed to become an excuse to deny claims for
members who are unaware of the enrollment requirement.
The Coalition strongly recommends against establishment of any
TRICARE Standard enrollment system; to the extent enrollment may be
required, any beneficiary filing a claim should be enrolled
automatically, without denying the claim. No enrollment fee should be
charged for TRICARE Standard until and unless the program offers
guaranteed access to a participating provider.
Private Employer Incentive Restrictions
Current law, effective January 1, 2008, bars private employers from
offering incentives to TRICARE-eligible employees to take TRICARE in
lieu of employer-sponsored plans. This law is well-intended, but
inadvertently imposes unfair penalties on many employees of companies
that are not, in fact, attempting to shift costs to TRICARE.
The Armed Services Committees have tasked the Secretary of Defense
for a report on the issue, which may not protect current beneficiaries
and, even with a favorable response, in no way restricts future
Secretaries of Defense who may impose a strict interpretation of the
law.
In the meantime, Coalition associations have heard from hundreds of
TRICARE beneficiaries whose civilian employers are using the new law to
bar equal payments to TRICARE beneficiaries that are available to other
company employees (e.g., if the company offers $100 per month to any
employee who uses insurance available through a spouse's coverage or a
previous employer).
TRICARE coverage is an extremely important career benefit that is
earned by decades of service in uniform. TMC believes it is
contradictory to the spirit of this earned benefit to impose statutory
provisions that deny access to TRICARE by those who have earned it or
that deny TRICARE beneficiaries the same options available to non-
TRICARE beneficiaries who work for the same civilian employer.
The Coalition recommends Congress modify the law restricting
private employer TRICARE incentives to explicitly exempt employers who
offer only cafeteria plans (i.e., cash payments to all employees to
purchase care as they wish) and employers who extend specific cash
payments to any employee who uses health coverage other than the
employer plan (e.g., FEHBP, TRICARE, or commercial insurance available
through a spouse or previous employer).
TRICARE Standard Improvements
The Coalition very much appreciates the subcommittee's continuing
interest in the specific problems unique to TRICARE Standard
beneficiaries. In particular, we applaud your efforts to expand TRICARE
Standard provider and beneficiary surveys and establish Standard
support responsibilities for TRICARE Regional Offices. These are needed
initiatives that should help make it a more effective program. We
remain concerned, however, that more remains to be done. TRICARE
Standard beneficiaries need assistance in finding participating
providers within a reasonable time and distance from their home. This
will become increasingly important with the expansion of TRS, as these
individuals are most likely not living within a Prime Service Area.
Provider Participation Adequacy
We are pleased that Congress added the requirement to survey
beneficiaries in addition to providers. The Coalition believes this
will help correlate beneficiary inputs with provider inputs for a more
accurate view of participation by geographic location.
The Coalition is concerned that DOD has not yet established any
standard for the adequacy of provider participation. Participation by
half of the providers in a locality may suffice if there is not a large
Standard beneficiary population. The Coalition hopes to see an
objective participation standard (perhaps number of beneficiaries per
provider) that would help shed more light on which locations have
participation shortfalls of Primary Care Managers and Specialists that
require positive action.
The Coalition is grateful to the subcommittee for provisions in the
NDAA for Fiscal Year 2008 that will require DOD to establish benchmarks
for participation adequacy and follow-up reports on actions taken.
The Coalition urges the subcommittee to continue monitoring DOD and
GAO reporting on provider participation to ensure proper follow-on
action.
Administrative Deterrents to Provider Participation
The Coalition is pleased that Congress has directed DOD to modify
current claims procedures to be identical to those of Medicare. We look
forward to implementation with the next generation of Managed Care
Support Contracts. Feedback from providers indicates TRICARE imposes
additional administrative requirements on providers that are not
required by Medicare or other insurance plans. On the average, about 50
percent of a provider's panel is Medicare patients, whereas only 2
percent are TRICARE beneficiaries. Providers are unwilling to incur
additional administrative expenses that affect only a small number of
patients. Thus, providers are far more prone to non-participation in
TRICARE than in Medicare.
TRICARE still requires submission of a paper claim to determine
medical necessity on a wide variety of claims for Standard
beneficiaries. This thwarts efforts to encourage electronic claim
submission and increases provider administrative expenses and delays
receipt of payments. Examples include speech therapy, occupational/
physical therapy, land or air ambulance service, use of an assistant
surgeon, nutritional therapy, transplants, durable medical equipment,
and pastoral counseling.
Another source of claims hassles and payment delays involve cases
of third party liability (e.g., auto insurance health coverage for
injuries incurred in auto accidents). Currently, TRICARE requires
claims to be delayed pending receipt of a third-party-liability form
from the beneficiary. This often delays payments for weeks and can
result in denial of the claim (and non-payment to the provider) if the
beneficiary doesn't get the form in on time. Recently, a major TRICARE
claims processing contractor recommended that these claims should be
processed regardless of diagnosis and that the third-party-liability
questionnaire should be sent out after the claim is processed to
eliminate protracted inconvenience to the provider of service.
Additionally, changes to the TRICARE pharmacy formulary are
becoming increasingly burdensome for providers. The number of
medications added to non-formulary status ($22 copay) has increased
tremendously, and changing prescriptions has added to the providers'
workload, as have increases in prior-authorization (Step Therapy)
requirements. The increase in the number of third tier drugs and DOD's
reliance on pharmacy medical necessity requests has increased provider
workload to the extent that many now charge beneficiaries extra to
complete this form. For others, it's yet another TRICARE-unique
administrative hassle that makes them less likely to agree to see
TRICARE beneficiaries.
The Coalition urges the subcommittee to continue its efforts to
reduce administrative impediments that deter providers from accepting
TRICARE patients.
TRICARE Reimbursement Rates
Physicians consistently report that TRICARE is virtually the
lowest-paying insurance plan in America. Other national plans typically
pay providers 25-33 percent more. In some cases the difference is even
higher.
While TRICARE rates are tied to Medicare rates, TRICARE Managed
Care Support Contractors make concerted efforts to persuade providers
to participate in TRICARE Prime networks at a further discounted rate.
Since this is the only information providers receive about TRICARE,
they see TRICARE as even lower-paying than Medicare.
This is exacerbated by annual threats of further reductions in
TRICARE rates due to the statutory Medicare rate-setting formula.
Doctors are unhappy enough about reductions in Medicare rates, and many
already are reducing the number of Medicare patients they see.
But the problem is even more severe with TRICARE, because TRICARE
patients typically comprise a small minority of their beneficiary
caseload. Physicians may not be able to afford turning away large
numbers of Medicare patients, but they're more than willing to turn
away a small number of patients who have low-paying, high-
administrative-hassle TRICARE coverage.
Congress has acted to avoid Medicare physician reimbursement cuts
for the last 4 years, but the failure to provide a payment increase for
2006 and 2007 was another step in the wrong direction, according to
physicians. Further, Congress still has a long way to go in order to
fix the underlying reimbursement determination formula.
Correcting the statutory formula for Medicare and TRICARE physician
payments to more closely link adjustments to changes in actual practice
costs and resist payment reductions is a primary and essential step. We
fully understand that is not within the purview of this subcommittee,
but we urge your assistance in pressing the Finance Committee for
action.
In the meantime, the rate freeze for 2006 and 2007 along with a
small increase for the first part of 2008 makes it even more urgent to
consider some locality-based relief in TRICARE payment rates, given
that doctors see TRICARE as even less attractive than Medicare.
Additionally, the Medicare pay package that was enacted in Public Law
109-432 included a provision for doctors to receive a 1.5 percent bonus
next year if they report a basic set of quality-of-care measures. The
TFL beneficiaries should not be affected as their claims are submitted
directly to Medicare and should be included in the physicians' quality
data. But there's been no indication that TRICARE will implement the
extra increases for treating beneficiaries under 65, and this could
present a major problem. If no such bonus payment is made for TRICARE
Standard patients, then TRICARE will definitely be the lowest payer in
the country and access could be severely decreased.
The TRICARE Management Activity has the authority to increase the
reimbursement rates when there is a provider shortage or extremely low
reimbursement rate for a specialty in a certain area and providers are
not willing to accept the low rates. In some cases a State Medicaid
reimbursement for a similar service is higher than that of TRICARE. As
mentioned previously, the Department has been reluctant to establish a
standard for adequacy of participation and should use survey data to
apply adjustments nationally.
The Coalition urges the subcommittee to exert what influence it can
to persuade the Finance Committee to reform Medicare/TRICARE statutory
payment formula. To the extent the Medicare rate freeze continues, we
urge the subcommittee to encourage the Defense Department to use its
reimbursement rate adjustment authority as needed to sustain provider
acceptance.
The Coalition urges the subcommittee to require a Comptroller
General report on the relative propensity of physicians to participate
in Medicare vs. TRICARE, and the likely effect on such relative
participation of a further freeze in Medicare/TRICARE physician
payments along with the affect of an absence of bonus payments.
Minimize Medicare/TRICARE Coverage Differences
A 2006 DOD report to Congress contained the coverage differences
between Medicare and TRICARE. The report showed that there are at least
a few services covered by Medicare that are not covered by TRICARE.
These include an initial physical at age 65, chiropractic coverage,
respite care, and certain hearing tests. We believe TRICARE coverage
should at least equal Medicare's in every area and include recommended
preventive services at no cost. As an example, the Army Medical
department has implemented the ``Adult Pneumovax'' program and projects
savings of $500 per vaccine given.
Our military retirees deserve no less coverage than is provided to
other Federal beneficiaries.
The Coalition urges the subcommittee to align TRICARE coverage to
at least match that offered by Medicare in every area and provide
preventive services at no cost.
National Guard and Reserve Health Care
The Coalition is grateful to the subcommittee for its leadership in
extending lower-cost TRICARE eligibility to all drilling National Guard
and Reserve members. This was a major step in acknowledging that the
vastly increased demands being placed on Selected Reserve members and
families needs to be addressed with adjustments to their military
compensation package.
While the subcommittee has worked hard to address the primary
health care hurdle, there are still some areas that warrant attention.
TRICARE Reserve Select Premium
The Coalition believes the premium-setting process for this
important benefit needs to be improved and was incorrectly based upon
the basic Blue Cross Blue Shield option of the FEHBP. This adjustment
mechanism has no relationship either to the Department's military
health care costs or to increases in eligible members' compensation.
When the program was first implemented, the Coalition urged DOD to
base premiums (which were meant to cover 28 percent of program costs)
on past TRICARE Standard claims data to more accurately reflect costs.
Now a GAO study has confirmed that DOD's use of Blue Cross Blue Shield
data and erroneous projections of participation resulted in
substantially overcharging beneficiaries.
GAO found that DOD projected costs of $70 million for fiscal year
2005 and $442 million for fiscal year 2006, whereas actual costs proved
to be $5 million in fiscal year 2005 and about $40 million in fiscal
year 2006. GAO found that DOD estimates were 72 percent higher than the
average single member cost and 45 percent higher than average family
cost. If DOD were to have used actual fiscal year 2006 costs, the
annual individual premium would have been $48/month instead of $81/
month. The corresponding family premium would have been $175/month
instead of $253/month.
GAO recommended that DOD stop basing TRS premiums on Blue Cross
Blue Shield adjustments and use the actual costs of providing the
benefit. DOD concurred with the recommendations and says, ``it remains
committed to improving the accuracy of TRS premium projections.''
However, GAO observed that DOD has made no commitment to any timetable
for change.
The Coalition believes our obligation to restrain health cost
increases for Selected Reserve members who are periodically being asked
to leave their families and lay their lives on the line for their
country is should be even greater than our obligation to restrain
government cost increases. These members deserve better than having
their health premiums raised arbitrarily by a formula that has no real
relationship to them.
The Coalition believes strongly that TRS premiums should be reduced
immediately to $48/month (single) and $175/month (family), with
retroactive refunds to those who were overcharged in the past.
For the future, as a matter of principle, the Coalition believes
that TRS premiums should not be increased in any year by a percentage
that exceeds the percentage increase in basic pay.
The Coalition also is concerned that members and families enrolled
in TRS are not guaranteed access to TRICARE-participating providers and
are finding it difficult to locate providers willing to take TRICARE.
As indicated earlier in this testimony, the Coalition believes that
members who are charged a fee for their health coverage should be able
to expect assured access, and hopes the subcommittee will explore
options for assuring such access for TRS enrollees.
The Coalition recommends reducing TRS premiums to $48/month
(single) and $175/month (family), as envisioned by the GAO, with
retroactive refunds as appropriate. For the future, the percentage
increase in premiums in any year should not exceed the percentage
increase in basic pay.
The Coalition further recommends that the subcommittee request a
report from the Department of Defense on options to assure TRS
enrollees' access to TRICARE-participating providers.
Private Insurance Premium Option
The Coalition thanks Congress for authorizing subsidy of private
insurance premiums for reservists called to active duty in cases where
a dependent possesses a special health care need that would be best met
by remaining in the member's civilian health plan.
The Coalition believes Congress is missing an opportunity to reduce
long-term health care costs by failing to authorize eligible members
the option of electing a partial subsidy of their civilian insurance
premiums during periods of mobilization. Current law already authorizes
payment of up to 24 months of FEHBP premiums for mobilized members who
are civilian employees of the Defense Department.
Congress directed GAO to review this issue and submit a report in
April 2007--a report that, to our knowledge, has not been completed. We
hope that report will address not only the current wartime situation,
but the longer-term peacetime scenario. Over the long term, when Guard
and Reserve mobilizations can be expected at a considerably lower pace,
the Coalition believes subsidizing continuation of employer coverage
during mobilizations periods offers considerable savings opportunity
relative to funding year-round family TRICARE coverage while the member
is not deployed.
In fact, the Department could calculate a maximum monthly subsidy
level that would represent a cost savings to the government, so that
each member who elected that option would reduce TRICARE costs.
The Coalition recommends developing a cost-effective option to have
DOD subsidize premiums for continuation of a Reserve employer's private
family health insurance during periods of deployment as an alternative
to permanent TRS coverage.
Involuntary Separatees
The Coalition believes it is unfair to deny TRS coverage for IRR
members who have returned from deployment or terminate coverage for
returning members who are involuntarily separated from the Selected
Reserve (other than for cause).
The Coalition recommends authorizing 1 year of post-TAMP TRS
coverage for every 90 days deployed in the case of returning members of
the IRR or members who are involuntarily separated from the Selected
Reserve. The Coalition further recommends that voluntarily separating
reservists subject to disenrollment from TRS should be eligible for
participation in the CHCBP.
Gray Area reservists
The Coalition is sensitive that Selected Reserve members and
families have one remaining ``hole'' in their military health coverage.
They are eligible for TRS while currently serving in the Selected
Reserve, then lose coverage while in ``Gray area'' retiree status, then
regain full TRICARE eligibility at age 60.
The Coalition believes some provisions should be made to allow such
members to continue their TRICARE coverage in gray area status.
Otherwise, we place some members at risk of losing family health
coverage entirely when they retire from the Selected Reserve. We
understand that such coverage likely would have to come with a higher
premium.
The Coalition urges the subcommittee to authorize an additional
premium-based option under which members entering ``gray area'' retiree
status would be able to avoid losing health coverage.
Reserve Dental Coverage
The Coalition remains concerned about the dental readiness of the
Reserve Forces. Once these members leave active duty, the challenge
increases substantially, so the Coalition believes the services should
at least facilitate correction of dental readiness issues identified
while on active duty. DOD should be fiscally responsible for dental
care to reservists to ensure servicemembers meet dental readiness
standards when DOD facilities are not available within a 50 mile radius
of the members' home for at least 90 days prior and 180 days post
mobilization.
The Coalition supports providing dental coverage to reservists for
90 days pre- and 180 days post-mobilization (during TAMP), unless the
individual's dental readiness is restored to T-2 condition before
demobilization.
Consistent Benefit
As time progresses and external changes occur, we are made aware of
pockets of individuals who for one reason or another are denied the
benefits that they should be eligible for. DOD and its health
contractors were leaders in modifying policy and procedures to assist
Katrina victims. Additionally, Congress' action to extend eligibility
for TRICARE Prime coverage to children of deceased active duty members
was truly the right thing to do.
Restoration of Survivors' TRICARE Coverage
When a TRICARE-eligible widow/widower remarries, he/she loses
TRICARE benefits. When that individual's second marriage ends in death
or divorce, the individual has eligibility restored for military ID
card benefits, including SBP coverage, commissary/exchange privileges,
et cetera--with the sole exception that TRICARE eligibility is not
restored.
This is out of line with other Federal health program practices,
such as the restoration of CHAMPVA eligibility for survivors of
veterans who died of service-connected causes. In those cases, VA
survivor benefits and health care are restored upon termination of the
remarriage.
Remarried surviving spouses deserve equal treatment.
The Coalition recommends restoration of TRICARE benefits to
previously eligible survivors whose second or subsequent marriage ends
in death or divorce.
TRICARE Prime Remote Exceptions
Longer deployments and sea/shore and overseas assignment patterns
leave many military families faced with tough decisions. A spouse and
children may find a greater level of support by residing with or near
relatives during extended separations from the active duty spouse. DOD
has the authority to waive the requirement for the spouse to reside
with the servicemember for purposes of TRICARE Prime Remote eligibility
if the service determines special circumstances warrant such coverage.
We remain concerned about the potential for inconsistent application of
eligibility. The special authority is a step in the right direction,
but there is a wide variety of circumstances that could dictate a
family separation of some duration, and the Coalition believes each
family is in the best situation to make its own decision.
The Coalition recommends removal of the requirement for the family
members to reside with the active duty member to qualify for the
TRICARE Prime Remote Program, when the family separation is due to a
military-directed move or deployment.
BRAC, Rebasing, and Relocation
Relocation from one geographic region to another and base closures
brings multiple problems. A smooth health care transition is crucial to
the success of DOD and Service plans to transform the force. That means
ensuring a robust provider network and capacity is available to all
beneficiary populations, to include active and Reserve component and
retirees and their family members, and survivors at both closing and
gaining installations. It is incumbent upon the Department and its
Managed Care Support Contractors to ensure smooth beneficiary
transition from one geographic area to another. We stress the
importance of coordination of construction and funding in order to
maintain access and operations while the process takes place.
The Coalition recommends codifying the requirement to provide a
TRICARE Prime network at all areas impacted by BRAC or rebasing.
Additionally, we recommend that DOD be required to provide an annual
report to Congress on the adequacy of health resources, services,
quality and access of care for those beneficiary populations affected
by transformation plans.
Pharmacy
The TRICARE Pharmacy benefit must remain strong to meet the
pharmaceutical needs of millions of military beneficiaries. While we
are pleased at the overall operation of the program, the Coalition has
significant concerns about certain recent trends.
Beneficiary Migration
One issue highlighted by the Task Force report is that a large
share of the growth in retail pharmacy use has been the result of
beneficiaries migrating from military treatment facilities to local
retail pharmacies. In that regard, the number of beneficiaries using
only military pharmacies declined by 900,000 between fiscal year 2002
and fiscal year 2007, whereas the number of beneficiaries using only
retail pharmacies increased by about 1,000,000 in the same period.
Some of the shift is because enactment of TFL and TSRx meant that
Medicare beneficiaries who live some distance from military
installations no longer have to make long treks to the military
pharmacy.
But the change also coincides with the onset of increased wartime
deployments and installation security measures. The deployment of large
numbers of military medical professionals has forced shifting more
beneficiaries of all kinds to see civilian providers, which reduces
proximity access to the military pharmacy and ease the convenience of
using retail stores. Increased installation security measures also
increase the ``hassle factor'' for retirees to use on-base facilities.
Finally, local budget pressures and DOD ``core formulary'' guidance
removes many medications from the installation formulary that retirees
use, leaving many no choice but to use alternative venues.
Coalition associations have heard anecdotal reports that some local
commanders have actively discouraged retirees from using the military
pharmacies, primarily for budget savings purposes. What's worse is that
MTFs have failed to educate beneficiaries of the next most cost-
effective venue--the TRICARE Mail Order Pharmacy (TMOP).
The point is that it is inappropriate to punish beneficiaries
(through higher retail copayments) for migration that may be dictated
more by military operational and budget requirements than by retiree
preferences.
Pharmacy Co-payment Changes
The Coalition thanks the subcommittee for freezing pharmacy co-
payments for fiscal year 2008. The Coalition believes strongly that
uniformed services beneficiaries deserve more stability in their
benefit levels, and that DOD has not performed due diligence in
exploring other ways to reduce pharmacy costs without shifting such
increased expense burdens to beneficiaries. The DOD Health Care Task
Force would dramatically raise most military pharmacy copays. For
example, they'd raise the copay for generic drugs purchased in retail
pharmacies from the current $3 to $15. But Wal-Mart is now dispensing
generic drugs to the general public for $4. Shouldn't the military
pharmacy benefit be better than what civilians can get through Wal-
Mart?
One important consideration in the mail-order vs. retail discussion
is that some medications are simply not appropriate or available for
delivery through the TMOP. If the purpose of imposing higher retail
copays is to incentivize beneficiaries to use military or mail-order
pharmacies, application of this philosophy is inappropriate when the
beneficiary has no access to those lower-cost venues.
The Coalition believes any further discussion of pharmacy copayment
increases should be deferred pending review of the implications of
requiring Federal pricing in the retail system. We believe that this
action by Congress in the fiscal year 2008 has shifted the dynamic of
pharmacy costs, and that the primary cost differential may no longer be
the venue of dispensing.
Rather, the Coalition urges the subcommittee to consider the
findings of RAND, Pharma, and others cited by the Task Force that
considerable cost savings can be gained by establishing positive
motivations for beneficiaries with chronic diseases to take any of the
medications--regardless of generic, brand, or nonformulary--that reduce
the adverse effects of their conditions over the long term. Those steps
included eliminating copays for the lowest-cost and most effective
medications, reducing copays for some effective nonformulary
medications, and reducing prior authorization requirements that impede
beneficiaries from using the medications they and their doctors believe
are best for them.
We note with regret that the Department has declined to comply with
Congress' urging to eliminate copayments for generic medications in the
mail-order system--a recommendation echoed by the Task Force. In this
case, the administrative cost of processing the co-pay actually wipes
out a large percentage of the co-pay revenue.
The Coalition believes pharmacy cost growth concerns have missed
the mark by focusing on current-year dollars rather than long-term
effects. For example, the Task Force report highlights as part of the
cost ``problem'' that some drugs, including medications to treat
diabetes, grew more than 15 percent in a single year. Viewed in terms
of long-term effects, it's a good thing to identify patients who have
diabetes and a good thing for diabetes patients to take their
medications. So growing use (and cost) of medications for such chronic
diseases is a positive, not a negative, and the copay structure should
be remodeled to incentivize beneficiaries and make it as easy as
possible for them to take whatever medication will mitigate the effects
of their condition through whatever venue they are most likely to be
satisfied with and therefore will be most likely to take their
medications.
The Coalition recommends deferral of any pharmacy copay increases
pending assessment of the effects of the new Federal pricing law on
usage and cost patterns for the different venues, and that the
subcommittee instead urge DOD to pursue copay reductions and ease prior
authorization requirements for medications for chronic diseases, based
on private sector experience that such initiatives reduce long-term
costs associated with such diseases.
Rapid Expansion of ``Third Tier'' Formulary
The Coalition very much appreciated the efforts of Congress to
protect beneficiary interests by establishing a statutory requirement
for a BAP to give beneficiary representatives an opportunity in a
public forum to voice our concerns about any medications DOD proposes
moving to the third tier ($22 co-pay). We were further reassured when,
during implementation planning, Defense officials advised the BAP that
they did not plan on moving many medications to the third tier.
Unfortunately, this has not been the case. To date, DOD has moved
over 90 medications to the third tier. While the BAP did not object to
most of these, the BAP input has been universally ignored in the small
number of cases when it recommended against a proposed
reclassification. The Coalition is also concerned that the BAP has been
denied access to information on relative costs of the drugs proposed
for reclassification and the Defense Department has established no
mechanism to provide feedback to the BAP on why its recommendations are
being ignored.
The Coalition believes Congress envisioned that the BAP would be
allowed substantive input in the Uniform Formulary decision process,
but that has not happened. In fact, BAP discussion issues and
recommendations (other than the final vote tallies) are routinely
excluded from information provided to the Assistant Secretary of
Defense (Health Affairs) for decisionmaking purposes, and there has
been no formal feedback to the BAP on the reasons why their
recommendations were not accepted.
Although Congress has tasked GAO for a report on the effectiveness
of the BAP process, that report has not been issued to date.
The Coalition urges the subcommittee to reassert its intent that
the BAP should have a substantive role in the formulary-setting
process, including access to meaningful data on relative drug costs in
each affected class, consideration of all BAP comments in the
decisionmaking process, and formal feedback concerning rationale for
rejection of BAP recommendations.
TRICARE Prime and MCSC Issues
DOD and its health contractors are continually trying to improve
the level of TRICARE Prime service. We appreciate their inclusion of
Coalition associations in their process improvement activities and will
continue to partner with them to ensure the program remains
beneficiary-focused and services are enhanced, to include: beneficiary
education, network stability, service level quality, uniformity of
benefit between regions (as contractors implement best business
practices), and access to care.
Referral and Authorization System
There has been much discussion and consternation concerning the
Enterprise Wide Referral and Authorization System. Much time, effort
and money have been invested in a program that has not come to
fruition. Is adding to the administrative paperwork requirements and
forcing the civilian network providers into a referral system really
accomplishing what DOD set out to do? Rather than forcing unique
referral requirements on providers, perhaps DOD should look at
expanding its Primary care base in the Prime Service Areas and capture
the workload directly.
The Coalition recommends that Congress require a cost analysis
report, including input from each Managed Care Support Contractor,
concerning the referral process within DOD and reliance on Civilian
Network Providers within an MTF's Prime Service Area.
Health-Related Tax Law Changes
The Coalition understands fully that tax law changes are not within
the subcommittee's jurisdiction. However, there are numerous military-
specific tax-related problems that are unlikely to be addressed without
the subcommittee's active advocacy and intervention with members and
leaders of the Finance Committee.
Deductibility of Health and Dental Premiums
Many uniformed services beneficiaries pay annual enrollment fees
for TRICARE Prime, TRS, and premiums for supplemental health insurance,
such as a TRICARE supplement, the TRICARE Dental and Retiree Dental
Plans, or for long-term care insurance. For most military
beneficiaries, these premiums are not tax-deductible because their
annual out-of-pocket costs for healthcare expenses do not exceed 7.5
percent of their adjusted gross taxable income.
In 2000, a Presidential directive allowed Federal employees who
participate in FEHBP to have premiums for that program deducted from
their pay on a pre-tax basis. A 2007 court case extended similar pre-
tax premium payment eligibility to certain retired public safety
officers. Similar legislation for all active, Reserve, and retired
military and Federal civilian beneficiaries would restore equity with
private sector employees and retired public safety officers.
The Coalition urges all Armed Services Committee members to seek
the support of the Finance Committee to approve legislation to allow
all military beneficiaries to pay TRICARE-related insurance premiums in
pre-tax dollars, to include TRICARE dental premiums, TRS premiums,
TRICARE Prime enrollment fees, premiums for TRICARE Standard
supplements, and long-term care insurance premiums.
conclusion
TMC reiterates its profound gratitude for the extraordinary
progress this subcommittee has made in advancing a wide range of
personnel and health care initiatives for all uniformed services
personnel and their families and survivors. The Coalition is eager to
work with the subcommittee in pursuit of the goals outlined in our
testimony. Thank you very much for the opportunity to present the
Coalition's views on these critically important topics.
Senator Ben Nelson. With that, Dr. Chu, would you like to
begin?
STATEMENT OF HON. DAVID S. CHU, UNDER SECRETARY OF DEFENSE FOR
PERSONNEL AND READINESS
Dr. Chu. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and Senator Graham. It's a
great privilege to be testifying before you again, and I thank
you for your kind words.
I am honored to be joined by my colleagues, the Deputy
Chiefs of Staff for Manpower and Personnel of the four
Services. We each have a formal statement, which we would like
to submit for the record, if we may.
Senator Ben Nelson. That will be permitted.
Dr. Chu. Thank you, sir.
As you suggested in your opening comments, Mr. Chairman,
this is a joint force. It's composed of our civilians, our
Active-Duty military, and our Reserve components. It's a force
composed entirely of volunteers, and that All-Volunteer Force,
I would argue, has served us very well. We do set high
standards for quality and entrance. We set high standards for
motivation. I think we've seen the rewards of those high
standards in the exemplary performance of American forces in
the field, as celebrated in Senator Graham's comments, and we
intend to maintain those high standards for this Department as
we go forward.
The fact that we've been successful in sustaining this All-
Volunteer Force across the last 7 years is due, I think, to the
strong partnership between the executive and legislative
branches to which you referred in your opening statements. You
have given us authority for a new National Security Personnel
System (NSPS) for civilians. That's of extraordinary value to
us as we try to reshape the civil workforce toward one that is
more deployable, willing to go forward. Just yesterday, I had
the privilege of participating in the ceremony in which the
first of the Secretary of Defense Global War on Terrorism
medals for civilians was awarded to 15 representative civilians
of the 16,000 who have served forward in the current conflict.
Across the board, for both military and civilian personnel,
you have given this Department increased flexibility. You've
enlarged the scope of our authority. You've given us greater
limits, for example, in terms of age for entrance to military
service; higher ceilings, in terms of bonuses and reenlistment
incentives; you've given us broad authority to reform the
special incentive pays that we use to direct personnel to the
high-priority and critical occupations of the Department.
If there is one single explanation that undergirds the
success, I think it is this willingness to accord a substantial
measure of flexibility to the Department. As you look at our
fiscal year 2009 proposals, I think you'll see that theme
repeated, in terms of specific areas where we think there are
remaining issues that it would be constructive to address.
You spoke about families in your opening statement. We
could not agree more about their importance to our success. As
is observed frequently, it is really the family that makes the
retention decision together. If the family is not satisfied
with the military lifestyle, the military person is going to
find it very hard to continue serving our country. We recognize
that we ask a lot of the families, and we also recognize that
it's our responsibility to, in turn, support them in the
burdens that they are asked to carry--the most important
burden, of course, being the absence of their loved one in a
risky and dangerous environment.
The President, in his State of the Union Address, as I know
you appreciate, addressed two elements that we believe are most
important to contemporary military families in terms of their
willingness to serve and see their family member don the
Nation's uniform. Those two elements are the education of their
children and the opportunity for a career for the spouse--not
just a job, but a career. Something that has growth and aspires
to more important responsibilities over time. The President
advocated for a series of changes that we hope Congress will
enact, to allow, for example, the transferability of the
individual member's GI Bill benefits to the spouse and children
if that family should so desire, to give spouses a preferred
status, in terms of Federal hiring and Federal career
opportunities; and to accelerate our already strong program of
daycare for the children of military families by accelerating
the construction of our daycare centers, which will require, we
believe, some modest adjustment of statute, and by encouraging
us to enter public/private partnerships for off-post daycare
that would meet the same high standards that we set in the
military, which again would require some changes to current
authorities the Department enjoys.
Mr. Chairman, Senator Graham, we very much appreciate the
partnership with this subcommittee, and Congress as a whole,
that has allowed us to continue to have, for this country, the
finest military the world has seen.
Thank you, sir.
[The prepared statement of Dr. Chu follows:]
Prepared Statement by Hon. David S.C. Chu
military personnel policies
Active Duty Recruiting
Never in the history of the All-Volunteer Force (AVF) have our
Armed Forces faced as challenging a recruiting environment as they have
during the past several years. First, the global war on terrorism has
placed unprecedented demands on the Services as our volunteer military
is now into its 7th year of a protracted war in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Second, youth willingness to serve, the heart of our AVF, has declined
and influencers of youth (e.g., parents, teachers) are less likely to
recommend military service today than in recent years. Third, the
economy has remained strong and labor markets tight. Unemployment
(currently at 4.9 percent) is relatively low by historical standards,
and earnings are up--providing youth with lucrative post-secondary high
school choices. Fourth, recruiting goals for the Army and Marine Corps
have increased as they grow their forces.
Despite these challenges, the Services have met, and continue to
meet, their recruiting goals--thanks to significant legislative
initiatives and new authorities granted by Congress and the hard work
of the recruiting commands and recruiters in the field. During fiscal
year 2007, the Active-Duty components recruited 166,302 first-term
enlistees and an additional 14,870 individuals with previous military
service, attaining over 100 percent of the Department of Defense (DOD)
goal of 180,377 accessions.
While meeting our quantitative goals is important, we also need to
have the right mix of recruits--recruits who will complete their term
of service and perform successfully in training and on the job. The
``quality'' of the accession cohort is critical, and we have long
reported recruit quality along two dimensions--aptitude test scores and
educational attainment. Both are important, but for different reasons.
Aptitude test scores are used to select recruits who are most
likely to perform satisfactorily in training and on the job. All
military applicants take a written enlistment test, the Armed Services
Vocational Aptitude Battery. One component of that test is the Armed
Forces Qualification Test (AFQT), which measures math and verbal
skills. Those who score above average on the AFQT are in Categories I-
IIIA. We value these higher-aptitude recruits because they do better in
training and perform better on the job than their lower-scoring peers
(Categories IIIB-IV).
We also value recruits with a high school diploma. The high school
diploma has long been the best single predictor of successful
adjustment to military life. About 80 percent of recruits with
traditional high school diplomas complete their first 3 years, while
only about 50 percent of those without a traditional diploma do so. The
first-term attrition of those holding an alternative educational
credential, such as a high school equivalency or a General Educational
Development certificate, falls between those two statistics. In short,
enlisting youth with traditional high school diplomas is a good
investment. Studies have estimated the attrition at over $50,000 for
each person who leaves service early.
In conjunction with the National Academy of Sciences, the
Department reviewed how best to balance educational attainment,
aptitude, recruiting resources, and job performance. With an optimizing
model, we established recruit quality benchmarks of 90 percent high
school diploma graduates (HSDGs) and 60 percent scoring above average
on the AFQT. Those benchmarks are based on the relationship among costs
associated with recruiting, training, attrition, and retention, using
as a standard the performance level obtained by the enlisted force
cohort of 1990--the force that served in Operations Desert Shield/
Desert Storm. Thus, the benchmarks reflect the aptitude and education
levels necessary to minimize personnel and training costs while
maintaining the required performance level of that force.
For over 20 years, the Services have met or exceeded the
Department's quality benchmarks for active duty recruits (Figure 1).
Although the Army missed its HSDG benchmark in 2007, DOD met its
overall goal: 90 percent of active duty new recruits were HSDGs. This
compares favorably to the national average in which about 70 percent to
80 percentate from high school with a diploma. In addition, DOD
exceeded its aptitude quality benchmark, with 68 percent of new Active
recruits scoring at the top half of the AFQT, well above the DOD
benchmark of 60 percent.
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Fiscal year 2008 active duty recruiting efforts are positive to
date. Through January, all Services met or exceeded numerical
recruiting objectives for the Active Force, and the Army achieved
18,829 of its 18,600 recruiting goal, for a 101 percent year-to-date
accomplishment (Table 1). However, the active Army fell short of the
HSDG goal, accessing 82 percent recruits with a high school diploma
versus the standard of 90 percent. Although the Army accessed 58
percent of new recruits who scored at or above the 50th percentile on
the AFQT--slightly below the DOD benchmark of 60 percent--we expect the
Army to achieve this DOD benchmark by the end of fiscal year 2008.
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
We should not lose sight of the fact that, although the youth
population is large, a relatively small proportion of American youth is
qualified to enlist when we consider other factors besides education
and aptitude. It is an unfortunate fact that many of the contemporary
youth population are currently ineligible to serve. About 35 percent
are medically disqualified (with obesity a large contributing factor),
18 percent abuse drugs and alcohol, 5 percent have conduct/criminal
issues, 6 percent have dependents, and 9 percent are in the lowest
aptitude category (Figure 2). Another 10 percent are qualified, but
attending college. That leaves less than 5 million--or about 15 percent
of the roughly 31 million youth ages 17-24--who are available to
recruit (25 percent including those in college).
Our recruiting success has not come easily. It has been the result
of long hours and hard work by the 15,000 dedicated and professional
military recruiters. These recruiters often stand as the sole
representative of our military forces in local communities, and they
have my most sincere respect and gratitude. Equally important has been
the unwavering support from Congress for our recruiting efforts.
Throughout my time in this office, you have assisted us with
authorities and programs that have helped the Services to expand the
recruiting market in responsible ways.
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
We appreciate your assistance expanding military recruiter access
to high schools. The No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 opened the doors
for military recruiters to provide information on military service
opportunities to juniors and seniors in over 22,600 high schools
nationwide. Through the enforcement of these laws, the Services report
that all high schools have complied with the provision of student
directory information to military recruiters, who, in turn, provide
information to young people about the opportunities and nobility of
military service.
The establishment of a National Call to Service program has been
very helpful. This shorter-than-normal, 15-month enlistment option
allows us to offer military service options to youth who, due to the
length of traditional enlistment terms, would choose not to serve. Over
9,000 young Americans have enlisted under this option.
The new $2,500 bonus for those transferring between Armed Forces
components has been a helpful incentive in getting members to transfer
from one Service to another and serve a minimum of an additional 3
years. This program has helped the Army access over 1,500 new soldiers
from other Services that otherwise may have left the military--saving
over $50,000 in recruiting and training costs per experienced
transferee.
We also thank you for helping us to increase the maximum age for
enlistment. This has expanded the recruiting market by raising the
maximum age for enlistment in a regular component from 35 to 42 years.
In addition, we appreciate the new accession bonus for Officer
Candidate School (OCS). Creating a new officer through either the
Service Academies or Reserve Officer Training Corps is a 4-year
process. The Services use OCS not only to produce a portion of their
new officers annually, but in times of growth, this valuable program
provides a surge capacity that cannot be duplicated. The accession
bonus provides the Services an incentive to attract recent college
graduates for these programs--particularly important as we grow the
force in the Army and Marine Corps.
Most important, you provided us the opportunity to conduct the Army
Recruiting Demonstration Program. This authority is permitting the Army
to test innovative marketing and incentive programs in support of
recruiting efforts not otherwise permitted in law, and we plan to work
with you to expand this initiative to the other Services for the
purpose of addressing the continuing challenges in the recruiting and
retention environment.
Active Duty Retention
Retention programs help shape the force to ensure we have the right
numbers and mix of active duty personnel with the right experience.
This is particularly challenging during this era of changing force
structures. Thus, we thank you for your substantial assistance over the
past several years in obtaining new and enhanced programs and
authorities for the military departments to encourage military
personnel to remain in Service.
Notably, the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for Fiscal
Year 2006 increased the maximum reenlistment bonus from $60,000 to
$90,000, and it expanded eligibility for the bonus from 16 to 20 years
of active duty, and 18 to 24 years of service. It also amended the
critical skills retention bonus (CSRB) authority to include Reserve
component members and members assigned to high priority units. The
amended statutory authority for the CSRB established eligibility to
Reserve component members with a designated skill or who volunteer to
serve in a designated high priority unit, not to exceed $100,000. It
also established an exception to allow members in designated Special
Operations Forces and nuclear critical skills to receive a CSRB beyond
25 years of service; and we appreciate your extending that authority to
all qualifying members in the NDAA for Fiscal Year 2008. The incentive
bonus for transfer between Armed Forces and the increase in the maximum
amount of the bonus for such transfer--from $2,500 to $10,000--all have
been very helpful. Finally, authorizing pay and benefits to facilitate
voluntary separation of targeted populations of servicemembers have
proven invaluable.
For almost 7 years--since September 11--retention has remained
relatively strong in the Active-Duty Force. The Marine Corps and Army
met or exceeded their overall reenlistment goals each year. While the
Air Force and Navy did relatively well, they did not always meet all
retention goals, which were often complicated by force shaping goals.
Both Services have adjusted their retention bonus programs to target
deficient skills better.
In fiscal year 2007, all four Active-Duty Services met or exceeded
their aggregate reenlistment targets. The Marine Corps surpassed its
overall aggregate reenlistment mission (110 percent), exceeding its
fiscal year 2007 targeted end strength by a comfortable margin. The Air
Force fell short of its Zone B (mid-career) reenlistments mission and
will use the Selective Reenlistment and CSRB programs to maximize mid-
grade retention in fiscal year 2008. The new, expanded CSRB authorities
are helping to provide the Services with additional flexibility to
better target specific critical skills for retention.
Through January 2008 (Table 2), the Army, Navy, and Marine Corps
exceeded their retention missions. The Air Force is fairing well in
Zone B and has recently adjusted its retention bonus programs in order
to counter some challenges in Zones A (initial) and C (career). Force
shaping efforts within the Air Force, along with its fiscal year 2008
funding priorities, could complicate Air Force's overall retention
effort.
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
As always, our retention efforts ultimately support the delivery of
experienced performers to higher ranks. In recent years, the grade
proportions have shifted upward slightly as we continue to field weapon
systems and units with fewer lower-grade positions, and we greatly
appreciate the new NDAA for Fiscal Year 2008 authorities--the increase
in authorized strengths for Army officers on active duty in the grade
of major; the increase in authorized strengths for Navy officers on
active duty in the grades of lieutenant commander, commander, and
captain; and the increase in authorized daily average of the number of
members in paygrade E-9--that will facilitate our adjustments to these
grade structure changes.
The Army continues to use Stop Loss; as of December 2007, the Army
Stop Loss program affected less than half of 1 percent of the total
force (7,404 Active, 1,370 Reserve, and 2,027 National Guard soldiers).
The Active Army Unit Stop Loss program takes effect 90 days prior to
unit deployment or with official deployment order notification, if
earlier, and remains in effect through the date of redeployment to
permanent duty stations, plus a maximum of 90 days. Reserve component
Unit Stop Loss begins 90 days prior to mobilization, or with the
official mobilization alert deployment order notification, if later,
and continues through mobilization, and for a period up to 90 days
following unit demobilization. The Army shares the Secretary of
Defense's goal of minimizing the use of Stop Loss.
The retention of Army company grade officers (lieutenants and
captains) must be significantly enhanced to meet new force
requirements. Although the fiscal year 2007 company grade loss rates
were 8.1 percent--below the historical average of 8.5 percent, and well
below the pre-September 11 loss rates of 9.1 percent--the Army
increased its promotion rate to captain to 98 percent in order to meet
its growth demand. Additionally, the Army implemented an innovative
incentives program that offers captains in specified year groups a
``menu'' of incentives. Officers may choose from five different
programs, which include up to a $35,000 bonus or graduate school, in
return for an additional 3-year service commitment.
Shaping the Force
We are balancing our end strength needs--increasing where we must,
decreasing where it makes sense. To that end, the permanent end
strength increases of the Army and Marine Corps focus on combat
capability, while continued planned reductions from transformation
efforts in the active Air Force and Navy manpower programs, and the
Navy Reserve, balance risk with fiscally responsible manpower program
decisions.
To support these programmed strength reductions, we developed an
integrated package of voluntary separation incentives and coupled these
with the targeted incentive authority Congress recently provided,
allowing us to offer monetary incentives to shape the Services by
offering incentives to non-retirement eligible officer and enlisted
personnel in specific grades, skills, and year-of-service cohorts. We
plan to continue the judicious use of these tools to ensure our forces
meet readiness needs and are effective, flexible, and lethal.
Force Development
Over the past year, we embarked on the second leg of a journey that
began over two decades ago with the enactment of the Goldwater-Nichols
legislation. This continuing journey, empowered with special
authorities contained in the NDAA for Fiscal Year 2007, allowed the
Department to recognize joint experience whenever and wherever it
occurs in an officer's career. Implementation of these authorities
helps build an officer corps with the critical competencies required
for counterinsurgency warfare, peace making/keeping, and nation
building.
The Department is implementing a Joint Qualification System that is
a true total force system. Reserve component officers, full partners in
this system, have the opportunity for the first time to have their
joint experiences recognized and earn the same qualifications as their
Active component counterparts.
Joint officer management is not the only area of significant
improvement for the officer corps. Mandatory retirement age
limitations, with origins dating back over 150 years, were amended to
account for increased longevity and, as a result, valuable military
experience was retained across the DOD. The Department also redoubled
efforts to develop a credible and sustainable cadre of senior military
intelligence leaders by working with the Director of National
Intelligence to create a viable National Intelligence Structure and to
provide general and flag officers to fill critical positions in each
major intelligence organization.
Now, as we look to the future, the next steps are clear; we must
capitalize on the momentum gained and deliver general and flag officer
management systems that seamlessly integrate with the changes to joint
officer management. The numerous controls put in place over the years
to address a myriad of issues must be reassessed. The statutory
framework supporting the management of our senior leaders must be at
least as flexible as that of the joint officer management system and
the Senior Executive Service. We need the flexibility to develop
general and flag officers with competencies and experience necessary to
lead and counter emerging threats. We intend to work diligently with
Congress on this subject.
Reserve Component Recruiting and Retention
With the initial mobilization of Reserve component members for the
global war on terrorism, the Department established a policy of
judicious and prudent use of the Reserve components in order to sustain
them during the war. We continue to assess the impact of mobilization
and deployments on the National Guard and Reserve, and adjust policies
as needed to sustain a strong Reserve Force. The most recent change
occurred last January, when Secretary Gates published a new utilization
for the force.
It is evident that Reserve component contributions to the war
effort are significant, with almost 600,000 Selected Reserve members
mobilized in support of global war on terrorism operations since
September 2001. This represents about 44 percent of the 1.3 million who
served in the Selected Reserve during that period. These data do not
include the 14,500 members of the Individual Ready Reserve (IRR), who
have been mobilized during the past 6\1/2\ years. The use of the IRR is
modest compared to Operation Desert Storm, when we mobilized 30,000 IRR
members.
Military Compensation
The current administration, with your support, has improved overall
compensation significantly, helping the Department sustain our highly
skilled AVF. Since 2001, as a direct result of the close cooperation
between the Department and Congress, average basic pay has increased 32
percent and housing allowances by nearly 70 percent, eliminating out-
of-pocket housing costs. Together, we have more than doubled hardship
duty pay, provided Combat-Related Injured Rehabilitation Pay,
established traumatic injury protection insurance, and increased the
maximum for Servicemember's Group Life Insurance to $400,000, as well
as increasing the Death Gratuity from $6,000 to $100,000. The increases
to Family Separation Allowance and our Hostile Fire/Imminent Danger
pays were made permanent, and our military members are now able to
participate in the Federal Thrift Savings Plan.
The Department continues its strong commitment to provide a secure
standard of living to those who serve in uniform by requesting a 3.4
percent increase in military pay for all servicemembers in the fiscal
year 2009 budget. This increase is equal to earnings increases in the
private sector as measured by the Employment Cost Index.
To better manage our force, you established CSRB and increased
enlistment and reenlistment bonuses from $12,000 maximum to $40,000,
along with establishing, and later increasing, Assignment Incentive
Pay. These tools are flexible and allow precise targeting to help us
sharply focus on specific needs, rather than casting a wide net.
To further refine our tool set, the 10th Quadrennial Review of
Military Compensation (QRMC) initially focused on consolidating special
pays, bonuses, and recruiting and retention incentives into fewer,
broader, and more flexible authorities which you have adopted in the
NDAA for Fiscal Year 2008. I will be sending the first volume of the
QRMC report to you shortly. By consolidating over 60 separate pays into
8 broad pay categories, the Department now has increased flexibility to
target specific skills, and the quantity and quality of personnel
filling those positions.
One of our remaining tasks is to rebalance compensation for our
single military personnel. Based on recommendations from the QRMC, the
Department set the ``without dependents'' Basic Allowance for Housing
rate to a minimum of 75 percent of the ``with dependents'' rate. The
Department will review the QRMC report and determine if additional
improvements are warranted.
The QRMC helped the balance of entitlements and discretionary
bonuses and incentive pays. We are convinced that the expansion of
entitlements, and the creation of new ones that do not directly and
measurably improve recruiting, retention, or readiness in a manner
commensurate with their cost, should be discouraged. Rather, the
Department requests Congress provide for more discretionary funds in
special and incentive pays. Currently, those pays account for only 4
percent of the Military Personnel account.
In a separate effort, and as follow-on to a 2001 comprehensive
report to Congress on the Uniformed Services Former Spouses Protection
Act (USFSPA), the Department is also requesting Congressional support
for a balanced package of proposed improvements for military members
and former spouses, and to streamline the efficiency of administering
accounts. Our USFSPA proposals are grouped into four major areas: 1)
retirement pay; 2) Defense Finance and Accounting Service (DFAS)
improvements; 3) procedural improvements; and 4) Survivor Benefit Plan
(SBP). Proposals include initiatives to prohibit court-ordered payment
of retired pay prior to retirement; compute divisible retired pay based
on rank and years of service at divorce; allow direct payments from
DFAS in all cases (not just cases with more than 10 years of marriage);
and allow split of SBP between former and current spouses.
Defense Travel Management Office
The Defense Travel Management Office (DTMO) was established in
February 2006, to consolidate and synchronize disparate, stove-piped
and independent commercial travel programs within the Department. The
DTMO provides oversight for commercial travel management, travel policy
and implementation, travel card program management, training,
functional oversight of the Defense Travel System (DTS) and customer
support, and has embarked on several major efforts to improve oversight
and services for Defense travelers. In March 2007, we received a report
containing recommendations resulting from a congressionally mandated,
independent study of the DTS. This study concluded that the Reservation
Refresh version of DTS, which was deployed in February 2007, provides
lowest-cost routing, improves system usability, and allows travelers to
access a more complete airline flight inventory. The study's authors,
from the Institute for Defense Analyses, concluded that there is no
basis to abandon the DTS in favor of another travel system or process.
The Department has accepted all recommendations from this important
study and we are committed to implementing them.
We established enterprise partnerships and a governance structure
for Defense Travel and are developing a Travel Enterprise performance
management program. To improve customer support, we conducted a
comprehensive review of existing travel training programs and enhanced
our training programs by establishing 23 distance learning modules we
will implement this year. We established a Travel Assistance Center to
provide help to all Defense travelers. Currently, the Navy, Marine
Corps, Defense Agencies, and the After Hours Recruit Assistance program
have transitioned to this support concept; in addition, the Army and
Air Force will begin using it this calendar year. We also conducted the
first DTS Customer Satisfaction Survey, using the Department's ``Quick
Compass'' survey vehicle, and collected feedback on various aspects of
Defense Travel via Interactive Customer Evaluation (ICE) tool .
In September, another key milestone for Defense travel was attained
when the DTMO awarded an Indefinite Delivery/Indefinite Quantity
contract for worldwide Commercial Travel Office (CTO) services. For the
first time, the Department is leveraging an integrated management
approach to standardize CTO requirements, establish consistent
standards of service, and ensure consistent levels of service for the
traveler.
The coming months will bring even greater improvements in oversight
and customer service for Defense travel. My office is partnering with
the General Services Administration (GSA) and the State Department to
conduct a comprehensive review of Federal and Department travel
policies. This comprehensive review provides an excellent opportunity
to ensure policies are modernized, simplified and understandable by
travelers and managers across the Federal Government. The Department
recently selected Citibank to provide government travel charge card
services under the SmartPay 2 master contract administered by the GSA
for implementation across the Department in November 2008. This
transition will affect more than 1.2 million Defense personnel who have
travel charge cards.
DOD Disability Evaluation System
In honor of the men and women of our Armed Forces, the citizens of
the United States have a long and proud history of compensating
servicemembers whose opportunity to complete a military career has been
cut short by injuries or illnesses incurred in the line of duty.
Congress mandated the development of a system of rating disabilities in
1917. Over time, that system has been further refined to the benefit of
servicemembers and their families. The Career Compensation Act of 1949
formalized the code the military departments utilize today.
In addition to DOD disability compensation, former servicemembers
may be eligible for disability compensation through the Department of
Veterans Affairs (VA) for service-connected disabilities and for VA
pension for veterans who are permanently and totally disabled and meet
certain income requirements. The key difference between the DOD and VA
disability compensation systems is in the nature of the disabilities
that are rated. The Military Services award disability ratings only for
medical conditions which make the individual unfit for continued
military service, with the intent of compensating for the loss of a
military career, whereas VA awards ratings for service-connected
disabilities, to compensate for the average loss of earning capacity.
Military disability ratings are fixed upon final disposition, while VA
ratings can vary over time, depending on how a person's condition
progresses.
The process of transition from servicemember to veteran has been
fraught with duplicative and sequential steps requiring time and effort
to navigate.
The Department was informed over the last year by the thorough and
thoughtful reports of the Task Force on Returning Global War on Terror
Heroes, the Independent Review Group, the President's Commission on
Care for America's Returning Wounded Warriors (Dole/Shalala
Commission), the Veterans Disability Benefits Commission (Scott
Commission), and the DOD Task Force on Mental Health. We have reviewed
these reports and, where possible, are making changes within policy and
where supported by legislative revisions.
A fundamental goal of our efforts is to improve the continuum of
care from the point-of-injury to community reintegration. To that end,
in November 2007, a DOD and VA collaborative DES Pilot was implemented
for disability cases originating at the three major military treatment
facilities in the National Capitol Region (Walter Reed Army Medical
Center, Bethesda National Naval Medical Center, and Malcolm Grow
Medical Center).
The DES Pilot is a servicemember-centric initiative designed to
eliminate the often confusing elements of the current disability
processes of our two Departments. Key features include a single medical
examination and a single-source disability rating. A primary goal is to
reduce by half the time required for a member to transition to veteran
status and receive VA benefits.
To ensure a seamless transition of our wounded, ill, or injured
from the care, benefits, and services of DOD to the VA system, the
pilot is testing enhanced case management methods, identifying
opportunities to improve the flow of information, and identifying
additional resources for servicemembers and their families. VA is
poised to provide benefits to the veterans participating in the pilot
as soon as they transition out of the military.
reserve affairs
National Guard and Reserve Forces
In recent years we have seen an unprecedented reliance on the
Reserve components--since September 11, over 623,000 Reserve component
members (including Selected Reserve and IRR) have been mobilized; of
that number 164,000 have served more than once. Looking at recent
trends, and looking to the future, it is clear that we have left behind
the old model of ``maybe once in a lifetime mobilization.'' Recognizing
that transformation, this administration has presided over the largest
set of changes in policy and statute, arguably since the inception of
the AVF, to transform the Guard and Reserve from a purely strategic
force to a sustainable Reserve Force with both operational and
strategic roles.
The Department began this transformation in 2002 with the
publication of ``Reserve Component Contributions to National Defense,''
as part of that year's Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR). That document
provided the seminal intellectual foundation for transitioning to an
Operational Reserve, proposing new ideas for building force
capabilities and creating flexibility in force management to sustain an
All-Volunteer Operational Reserve. The proposals addressed included
changes to Active/Reserve Force structure, potential roles and missions
in overseas conflicts and in homeland defense, and a new approach to
personnel management entitled ``continuum of service.''
Since that time, with the support of Congress, legislation was
enacted and we implemented numerous initiatives that facilitated the
successful transition to an Operational Reserve. Although we have
clearly accomplished much, we still have much to do. The following will
briefly summarize the considerable progress that has been made and
efforts that are continuing.
Utilization
When I started my tenure as the Under Secretary, the Department had
inherited an Active/Reserve Force structure that was not designed for
the extended conflict of the kind we now face. The military was
designed to maximize immediate combat power in the active force while
using Reserve components as a repository for capabilities needed in the
later phases of major theater war, combat augmentation and combat
support/combat service support (CS/CSS), such as military police,
engineers, and civil affairs.
In the 1990s, force downsizing, along with reduced budgets and
rising tempo of operations, spurred an increase in the use of the
Reserve components, particularly in CS/CSS. Demand for these skills has
sky-rocketed in the current conflict, to include Reserve component
combat power, and the Guard and Reserve have proven essential to
success in the conflict.
As events unfolded following the attacks of September 11, we
recognized this increasing reliance would require a different kind of
Reserve component with changed expectations and policies. Our policies
on mobilization, force structure rebalancing, personnel management,
training, readiness, equipping, and family and employer support have
changed significantly during what is now the largest mobilization of
the Guard/Reserve since the Korean War--in a war that has lasted longer
than World War II.
Mobilization Policies
We authored mobilization policies that institutionalized judicious
use as the core principle of Reserve component utilization to include
the latest mobilization policy issued by the Secretary on January 19,
2007. This document is the underpinning of predictability (1-year
mobilization, 1:5 utilization) for the Operational Reserve, and it is
widely supported by military members, families, and employers alike. In
addition, we set a standard of notifying members a minimum of 30 days
prior to mobilization. We routinely exceed this goal, now providing
alerts to units 1 year or more in advance. We now foresee notifying
units up to 2 years prior to mobilization. We have streamlined the
mobilization process. These and other changes have sustained the
Reserve components during a period of extensive mobilizations. Our
success is reflected in recruitment and retention of Reserve component
members. (The six DOD Reserve components combined achieved 108 percent
of their recruiting goals in the first 4 months of fiscal year 2008,
and attrition during the last 6 years--the global war on terrorism
years--has been lower than the previous 10 years.) Clearly, the changes
in compensation and benefits that recognized the increased operational
role of the Guard and Reserve, as well as the pride guardsmen and
reservists take in serving their country in these challenging times,
are major factors in these achievements. It is also fairly evident that
our policies needed to evolve to sustain a reasonable level of
utilization of an Operational Reserve Force. The principles established
in January 2007 that now guide this utilization appear to be serving us
well:
Involuntary mobilization for members of the Reserve
Forces will be for a maximum 1 year at any one time
Mobilization of ground combat, combat support and
combat service support resources will be managed on a unit
basis
The planning objective for involuntary mobilization of
Guard/Reserve units will remain a 1 year mobilized to 5 years
demobilized ratio and we will move to the broad application of
1:5 as soon as possible
The planning objective for the Active Force remains 1
year deployed to 2 years at home station
A new program was established to compensate or
incentivize individuals who are required to mobilize or deploy
early or often, or to extend beyond the established rotation
policy goals
All commands and units have been directed to review
how they administer the hardship waiver program to ensure they
are properly taking into account exceptional circumstances
facing military families of deployed servicemembers
Use of Stop Loss will be minimized for Active and
Reserve component forces
Our policy has set the standard for judicious and prudent use,
provides predictability, and ensures Reserve component members are
treated fairly, and allows for their individual circumstances to be
taken into consideration.
Rebalancing
Using personnel data to analyze utilization of individual
servicemembers by occupation and skill from September 11 to the
present, we have instituted policies and practices that significantly
improve how we manage people to ensure the burden is shared more
equally across the force and to alleviate stress on the force. We found
which skill sets were in much higher demand and those that were not.
Some were weighted so heavily toward Reserves that it put Reserve
component members in jeopardy of repeated, extensive mobilization. New
force management approaches were developed to achieve a better
allocation and mix of capabilities in our Active and Reserve components
to meet the demands of the global war on terrorism and sustain an
Operational Reserve.
Over the past 5 years, we developed a rebalancing effort in the
Services that initially transitioned 89,000 billets in less-stressed
career fields to more heavily used specialties--such as military
police, civil affairs, and others. As of this year, we have rebalanced
about 106,000 billets and working with the Services, they have planned
and programmed an additional 99,000 billets for rebalancing between
fiscal years 2008 and 2012. Although the amount and type of rebalancing
varies by Service, key stressed capability areas include: engineers,
intelligence, special operations, military police, infantry, aviation,
space and combat air superiority. By 2012, we expect to have rebalanced
about 205,000 billets. Rebalancing is a continuous and iterative
process. The Department will continue to work closely with the Services
as they review and refine their rebalancing plans to achieve the right
mix of capabilities and alignment of force structure. This will greatly
help reduce stress and support the Operational Reserve by providing a
deeper bench for those skills that are in high demand. However, easing
the stress on the force is more than just rebalancing the military.
Personnel Management
At the outset of the conflict, it also became clear that many of
our Reserve personnel management policies and practices were too rigid
and inflexible. We knew that we could employ better practices in
managing personnel.
One of our signature initiatives is transforming personnel
management to create a ``continuum of service.'' This approach provides
greater opportunities for reservists to volunteer for extended periods
of active duty and additional flexibility in managing Reserve
personnel. It offers innovative accession and affiliation programs to
permit individuals with specialized skills to contribute to military
mission requirements. This supports the Operational Reserve because it
considerably widens the aperture in how people can serve. Working with
the members of this committee and your staffs yielded many legislative
proposals related to the continuum of service, the cornerstone of our
efforts.
Reserve Affairs has been leading a continuum of service working
group to collaborate with the Services to make the changes necessary to
Department policy and legislation to improve the continuum of service
for all Services. The record shows that between 2002 and 2007, over 164
separate legislative changes directly affecting Reserve personnel
management were enacted, establishing the statutory basis and support
for the transition to the Operational Reserve. Together, Congress and
the Department established a new personnel strength accounting
category, ``reservists on active duty for operational support,'' which
permits Reserve component members to serve up to 3 years out of 4 on
active duty, without counting against active duty strength or grade
ceilings, and always being treated as reservists for promotion
purposes. Legislative accomplishments also include elimination of
perceived and real limits on service for reservists; (179 days before a
member counts against limits of reservists serving on active duty)
artificial eligibility thresholds (140 days on active duty) to qualify
for the same housing allowance as active duty members receive, and
TRICARE Prime; expansion of critical skill and other bonuses for
reservists; and access to a world-class medical benefit (TRICARE) for
Selected Reserve members and their families, regardless of the duty
status of the member.
We have work left to do, particularly with some of our educational
assistance programs, and in our continuing efforts to remove
impediments and barriers to transitioning Reserve component members
between Reserve and Active service. But we have made tremendous
progress in cementing the underpinnings of the Operational Reserve with
a manpower management system vastly different than the one that
supported once-in-a-lifetime mobilization. One of our final steps will
be implementation of the Defense Integrated Military Human Resources
System, which beginning this year will provide transparent, single-
system personnel management.
Training, Readiness, and Equipping
Our Reserve Forces, which now have more combat veterans than at any
time since World War II, are the best-equipped and best-trained that
our Nation has ever had. We recognized the old mobilization/training
model for a Strategic Reserve of ``mobilize, train, deploy'' would not
work in a world requiring a more agile and quick response to rapidly
developing operations. We have transformed from this old model to a new
mobilization/training model of ``train, mobilize, deploy.'' Your help
in crafting the NDAA for Fiscal Year 2005 authorizing the mobilization
of reservists for individual training, makes unit post-mobilization
training more efficient.
During pre-mobilization, units certify individual medical, dental
and administrative readiness and certify certain individual and theater
specific skills in order to minimize time at the mobilization station
to maximize ``Boots on the Ground.'' The standardization of processes,
procedures, and applications for units at home station will allow the
transfer of certification documentation to the mobilization station and
significantly reduce the need to recertify pre-mobilization processing
and training.
Training transformation is a dynamic and constantly evolving
process that will ensure all individuals, units and organizations of
the Total Force receive the education and training needed to accomplish
tasks that support the combatant commanders. The combination of web-
based technologies and distance-learning methodologies are cost-
effective alternatives to sending individuals away to resident courses
and units off to live-training events. In many cases, units can train
at their home stations and individuals can complete required courses on
their home computers. While these training technologies can never
completely replace the need for some forms of face-to-face education
and training, they do help reduce post-mobilization time spent
preparing for deployment overseas by allowing individuals and units to
complete more pre-deployment requirements before they mobilize.
Likewise, Innovative Readiness Training allows units and individuals to
carry out training that improves their mobilization readiness while at
the same time undertaking projects that serve the larger community.
We are also looking at increased Active/Reserve component
integration to improve Reserve component availability to the warfighter
as a critical step in the continuing evolution of the Operational
Reserve. Integration of the active and Reserve components support the
Department's transformation to a capabilities-based force that will
help relieve stress on the force. Integration will increase warfighter
capability, facilitate equipment utilization, and provide a method to
increase deployment predictability.
Furthermore, we have supported the development of force-generation
models by the Services, which ultimately provide predictability for an
Operational Reserve Force, accompanied by a training and equipping
strategy that will provide more first-line equipment to be positioned
in the Reserves and which will also allow more training be conducted in
the pre-mobilization phase at home station. We have achieved major
progress in programming funds and equipping our Reserve components for
an operational role. We are progressing in changing equipping
priorities to align better with Service force generation models and to
raise the importance of homeland defense in equipping considerations.
Equipping Strategy
The Reserve components of each military department need to be
properly equipped not only when deploying, but in order to stay
trained. The design of the Reserve component equipping strategy is
envisioned to procure and distribute equipment to maintain a degree of
readiness that is responsive to the combatant commanders' request while
sustaining capabilities to respond when called upon here at home. The
strategy also must take into account the Department's support to State
Homeland Defense missions, while maximizing equipment availability
throughout the force.
The Department's goal is to analyze what and where the greatest
needs lie and design and achieve the strategy that is the best fit for
today's Operational Reserve--rather than relying on an outdated
equipping strategy for a purely Strategic Reserve Force. Major changes
in current thinking as well as new concepts are needed for equipping
the Reserve component force. Focusing on availability, access, and
transparency in distribution of equipment and resources must be
paramount. The Department's ultimate goal is to fully equip units using
a transitional approach designed to provide an equipped, trained, and
ready force at various stages of a Service's rotation policies, while
factoring in our Homeland Defense mission.
Families, Healthcare, and Employers
During this time of transition to an Operational Reserve, we
recognized that support of families and employers is vital to success.
The Department has devoted substantial resources and efforts toward
expanding the support for our families. The challenge is particularly
acute for widely-dispersed Reserve families, most of who do not live
close to major military installations. Thus, we have developed and
promoted Web sites and electronic support for families, have promoted
use of the 700 military family service centers for all Active, Guard,
and Reserve families to provide personal contact, and have hosted and
attended numerous family support conferences and forums. Reintegration
training and efforts to support members and families following
mobilization, particularly for service in the combat zones, are vital.
The reintegration program in Minnesota forms a basis for the Yellow
Ribbon Reintegration Program for all Guard and Reserve members required
in the NDAA for Fiscal Year 2008 . The Department is fully committed to
implementing this program, which will provide Guard and Reserve
members, and their families, the support that will help them during the
entire deployment cycle--from preparation for active service to
successful reintegration upon return to their community and beyond. We
are moving quickly to stand up an interim Office for Reintegration
Programs, which will operate until permanent staff, facilities and
required resources are determined. We will continue to work with State
Governors, their Adjutants General, the State family program directors
as well as with the Military Services and their components to ensure an
integrated support program is delivered to all Guard and Reserve
members and their families.
The Defense Management Data Center is creating a website for
Reserve personnel to check the status of all of their benefits. This
website is in the final stages of approval and should go live in the
very near future.
The Department has fully implemented the TRICARE Reserve Select
(TRS) program, which offers an affordable healthcare program to all
Selected Reserve members and their families (unless they are covered
under the Federal Employee Health Benefit Program). This is a valuable
benefit that our members and their families appreciate. The transition
from the three-tiered TRS program to the comprehensive program
authorized in the NDAA for Fiscal Year 2007 has been very smooth and we
continue to publicize this much improved benefit.
We implemented a policy requiring Reserve component members to
complete a periodic Health Assessment annually. In addition, Guard and
Reserve members complete a predeployment health assessment to identify
nondeployable health conditions and a post-deployment health assessment
to identify deployment related conditions prior to releases from active
duty. Those members identified with health related conditions post-
deployment are provided evaluation and treatment.
Because health and adjustment concerns may not be noticed
immediately after deployment, a Post-Deployment Health Reassessment
(PDHRA) is provided within 90 to 180 days after redeployment to address
mental health and physical health concerns that may develop. The PDHRA
is designed to identify conditions that emerge later and facilitate
access to services for a broad range of post-deployment concerns.
Establishing the Yellow Ribbon Reintegration Program across all Guard
and Reserve units and commands will facilitate identifying symptoms and
conditions, and ensuring members receive the care and treatment they
need and deserve.
The support for employers over the past 6 years mirrors the
increased support for families. We doubled the budget of the National
Committee for Employer Support of the Guard and Reserve (ESGR). We
developed an employer database which identifies the employers of Guard/
Reserve members, expanded the ESGR State committees and their support
(over 4,500 volunteers are now in these committees) and are reaching
out to thousands more employers each year. The Freedom Awards program
and national ceremony to recognize employers selected for this award
has become a capstone event, in which the President has recognized in
the Oval Office in each of the past 2 years the annual Freedom Award
winners (15 recipients per year from more than 2000 nominees). Never in
the history of the Guard and Reserve have families and employers been
supported to this degree and they appreciate it, as this effort is
critical to sustaining an Operational Reserve.
Commission on the National Guard and Reserves
The Commission tendered a report in March 2007 evaluating the
``National Guard Empowerment Act'' as directed by Congress. The
Secretary responded quickly to the recommendations of the Commission
and directed development of plans to implement the Commission's
recommendations. Of the 22 plans developed:
Eight are complete or now embedded in DOD processes
Nine have met their objective of producing directives,
memoranda, recommendations, or policies, and are progressing
through the staffing process
Work is on schedule for the five remaining plans that
have longer implementation objectives
We have completed a preliminary review of the Commission's final
report and we are pleased that the Commission supported two of our
major strategic initiatives--an Operational Reserve and the Continuum
of Service. We disagree, however, with the Commission's views on the
Department's ability to respond to homeland operations. I was
disappointed that the Commission downplayed the many, significant
changes that the Department and Congress have made to facilitate the
transition to an Operational Reserve and institutionalize the Continuum
of Service. Much has already been accomplished.
We will conduct a comprehensive review of the Commission's
recommendations and propose courses of action for the Secretary to
consider.
Because our Reserve components will be asked to continue their role
as an operational force, we are developing a DOD directive to provide
the framework for an Operational Reserve in a single document. The
National Guard and Reserve continue to be a mission-ready critical
element of our National Security Strategy.
Working together, we can ensure that the Reserve components are
trained, ready, and continue to perform to the level of excellence they
have repeatedly demonstrated over the last 6\1/2\ years.
foreign language and regional proficiency
Foreign language and regional proficiency, which includes cultural
awareness, have emerged as key competencies for our 21st century Total
Force. Skills in foreign language and cultural understanding are
increasingly important ``soft'' skills in the DOD. Our forces are
operating with coalition and alliance partners and interact with
foreign populations, in a variety of regions, with languages and
cultures different from ours. Past experience has proven repeatedly
that we enhance partnerships with our allies and coalition partners
when we are able to communicate and when we demonstrate an
understanding and respect for the cultures of our allies and coalition
partners.
Our challenge lies in the reality that language and regional
proficiency take time to develop and sustain. Even when we devote that
time, the next threat to security will very likely require different
language and cultural capabilities, in an entirely different region of
the world. Any solution, whether it is policy-driven, programmatic,
scientific, or pedagogic, must be adaptable and agile to meet the
challenges of tomorrow as well as the requirements of today.
Essential Soft Skills
Three years ago, the Department did not have policies in place to
effectively manage a true Defense enterprise-wide approach to
establishing foreign language skills and regional knowledge. These
skills were not core competencies within the Total Force, but resided
mostly within the Intelligence Community professionals, Special Forces,
and the Foreign Area Officer program. Now we have DOD directives and
instructions that institutionalize attention to these needs. Three
years ago, cultural training was sporadic across the Department. Now
this vital training, referred to as Regional Area Content, is
incorporated into all aspects of our officer Professional Military
Education, and the Services are extending it to all enlisted
professional military education as well.
Strategic Guidance
The Strategic Planning Guidance (fiscal year 2006 through fiscal
year 2011) directed development of a comprehensive roadmap to achieve
the full range of language capabilities necessary to carry out national
strategy. The resulting 2005 Defense Language Transformation Roadmap,
through its 43 specific actions, has guided the Department in building
language, regional and cultural knowledge skills required to meet our
many and diverse mission requirements. The Roadmap provides broad goals
that ensures a strong foundation in language, regional and cultural
proficiency, a capacity to surge to meet unanticipated demands, and a
cadre of language professionals--our ability to provide the right
resource, at the right level of competency, at the right place, at the
right time.
The 2006 QDR drove an increase in funding of approximately 50
percent through the Future Years Defense Program for initiatives to
strengthen and expand our Defense Language Program. These initiatives
span technology, training, education, recruitment, and outreach
programs to our Nation. The Strategic Planning Guidance for fiscal year
2008 through 2013 outlines the national commitment to developing the
best mix of capabilities within the Total Force and sets forth a series
of additional roadmaps that coincide with the goals of the Defense
Language Transformation Roadmap.
To unify Department efforts to ensure oversight, execution, and
direction for DOD language and culture transformation, the Deputy
Secretary of Defense assigned the Under Secretary of Defense for
Personnel and Readiness responsibility for the overall Defense Language
Program. The Deputy Secretary then created a board of senior leaders to
oversee this effort. The Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Plans
was appointed the DOD Senior Language Authority. We now have Senior
Language Authorities for each Combatant Command, in each of the four
Services, the Joint Staff, Defense Agencies, and Defense Field
Activities. The Defense Language Steering Committee, composed of these
members and principal Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD) staff,
serves as an advisory board and guides the execution of the Roadmap.
The Defense Language Office is now in place to ensure oversight and
execution of the Defense Language Transformation Roadmap and to
institutionalize the Department's commitment to these critical and
enduring competencies.
Screening and Assessment
A critical initiative of the Defense Language Transformation
Roadmap is to identify the capabilities and resources needed across the
Department to meet mission requirements. We have nearly completed a 3-
year effort to identify the language and regional proficiency
requirements necessary to support operational and contingency planning
and day-to-day mission requirements. Simultaneously, we initiated
reviews of all relevant doctrine, policies, and planning guidance to
ensure that they include where appropriate the need for language,
regional and cultural capabilities.
Before 2004, we had never conducted a comprehensive assessment to
identify the specific languages and proficiency levels of the Total
Force. We are now asking every servicemember and inviting every
civilian employee to indicate language proficiency beyond English. We
are pleased to report that we have over 280,000 foreign language
capabilities in-house. As you would expect, it consists primarily of
the foreign languages traditionally taught in the United States such as
French, German and Spanish. However, a surprising number are proficient
in languages of contemporary strategic interest ranging from Chinese to
Tagalog to Igboo. Individuals are now routinely screened as part of the
military accession and civilian hiring process and we now have database
capabilities that allow us to identify needs and match them to existing
resources.
In order to encourage servicemembers to identify, improve, and
sustain language capability, we implemented a revised Foreign Language
Proficiency Bonus (FLPB) policy, and, with the support of Congress,
increased the proficiency bonus from $300 maximum per month, up to
$1,000 maximum per month for military personnel. The number of enlisted
personnel who currently receive this incentive pay has increased about
21 percent since implementation of this policy change. Congressional
support now provides equitable language proficiency bonus policies for
both the Active and Reserve components.
In an effort to identify gaps in capability, we are developing a
Language Readiness Index (LRI), which will be integrated into the
Defense Readiness Reporting System's network of software applications.
The LRI will compare foreign language requirements to the language
capability of individuals available to perform missions across the
Total Force, resulting in the identification of the gaps in the
language capability. The LRI is designed to be used by DOD agencies,
combatant commands, and the Services to provide decisionmakers with the
tools necessary to assess language risk and take appropriate action.
Foreign Area Officers
High levels of language, regional and cultural knowledge and skills
are needed to build the internal and external relationships required
for coalition/multi-national operations, peacekeeping, and civil/
military affairs. In 2005, the Department began building a cadre of
language specialists possessing high-level language proficiency (an
Interagency Language Roundtable (ILR) Proficiency Level 3 in reading,
listening, and speaking ability, or 3/3/3) and regional expertise. We
are working to identify the tasks and missions that will require this
professional-level proficiency and determine the minimum number of
personnel needed to provide this language capability.
The Foreign Area Officers (FAOs) program fulfills the Department's
need for this cadre of language and regional professionals. FAOs are
highly educated, have professional-level fluency in at least one
regional language, and have studied and traveled widely in their region
of expertise. In 2005, there was no unified approach to fielding FAOs.
Two Services did not have FAO programs. The Department now requires all
Services to establish formal FAO programs, standardizing the
requirements that one must meet to become a FAO. Our FAOs must have, in
addition to a broad range of military skills, experience with the
political, cultural, sociological, economic, and geographical factors
of the countries and regions in which they are stationed; knowledge of
political-military affairs; and must be professionally proficient in
one or more of the dominant languages in their region of proficiency.
The Services have dramatically increased the number of FAO positions to
approximately 1,600.
Preaccession
We start building language skills in future officers prior to
commissioning. The 2006 QDR recognized that there is insufficient time
available during most military careers to build advanced language
capabilities throughout the Force for other than FAOs and those
specialties that require the use of language full-time. The three
Military Service Academies have enhanced their foreign language study
programs to develop language and cultural knowledge. They now require
all nontechnical degree cadets and midshipmen to take four semesters of
foreign language study. The United States Military Academy and the
United States Air Force Academy have established language majors in
Arabic and Chinese. The United States Naval Academy, for the first time
in history, will offer midshipmen the opportunity to major in a foreign
language beginning with the Class of 2010.
We are expanding opportunities for members of the Reserve Officers'
Training Corps (ROTC) to learn a foreign language. Of the 1,322
colleges and universities with ROTC programs, 1,149 offer foreign
language study, but many of the languages we need for current
operations are not widely offered at this time. Therefore, the
Department has launched a program to award grants to colleges and
universities with ROTC programs to expand opportunities for ROTC cadets
and midshipmen to study languages and cultures critical to national
security. Increasing the number of what we call ``less commonly taught
languages'' in college curricula remains a challenge in which we are
actively engaged. We seek your support for a fiscal year 2009
legislative proposal to support the Secretary's goal of encouraging
ROTC cadets and midshipmen in Senior ROTC to study foreign language
courses of strategic interest to the Department. The proposal would
award up to $3,000 per year to a ROTC student studying a language of
interest.
Post Accession
Since the September 11 terrorist attacks, we have redirected
training toward the strategic languages, such as Arabic, Chinese and
Persian Farsi. The Defense Foreign Language Institute Foreign Language
Center is the Department's schoolhouse for training military personnel.
Over 2,000 servicemembers graduate each year having studied 1 of 24
languages. In 2006 we implemented the Proficiency Enhancement Program
designed to graduate 80 percent of the students at increased language
proficiency levels. We are well on our way to achieving this goal.
Changes include reducing the student-to-instructor ratio, increasing
the number of classrooms, creating improved expanded curricula,
retooling faculty training, deploying classroom technology integration,
and expanding overseas training. Cultural awareness has also been added
to every language course.
The Defense Language School's foreign language and cultural
instruction extends beyond the classroom, offering Mobile Training
Teams, video tele-training, Language Survival Kits, and online
instructional materials. Since 2001, the Defense Language School has
dispatched over 434 Mobile Training Teams to provide targeted training
to more than 50,000 personnel. Deployed units have received over
800,000 Language Survival Kits--mostly Iraqi, Dari, and Pashto.
Increasing the Capacity to Surge
Ensuring that we have a strong foundation in language and regional
proficiency involves reaching out to personnel who already possess
these skills to employ in our workforce. All of our military Services
have developed heritage-recruiting plans to bring personnel into the
Force with key language skills and regional proficiency. These plans
focus on reaching out to our heritage communities and their children
who possess near-native language skills and knowledge of the culture.
One particularly successful program is the Army Interpreter/Translator
(09L) Program. This pilot program was launched in 2003 to recruit and
train individuals from heritage Arabic, Dari, and Pashto communities to
support operations in Iraq and Afghanistan. The program was so
successful that in 2006, it was formally established as a permanent
military occupational specialty with a career path from recruit through
sergeant major. More than 450 native/heritage speakers have
successfully graduated; an additional 150 personnel are currently in
the training pipeline.
Defense Language Testing
Another critical component of our effort to improve language
capability is to validate and deliver tools for measuring language
proficiency. We have taken steps to strengthen our Defense Language
Testing System by updating test content and delivery. Delivering these
tests over the Internet greatly increases the availability and
accessibility of these tests to Defense language professionals
worldwide.
Supporting the National Agenda
In January 2006, the President of the United States announced the
National Security Language Initiative. The Initiative was launched to
dramatically increase the number of Americans learning critical need
foreign languages such as Arabic, Chinese, Russian, Hindi, and Farsi.
The Secretary of Defense joined the Secretaries of State and Education,
and the Director of National Intelligence to develop a comprehensive
national plan to expand opportunities for United States students to
develop proficiencies in critical languages from early education
through college. The White House provides ongoing coordination as
partner agencies work to implement this plan.
The focal point for the Department's role in the National Security
Language Initiative is the National Security Education Program (NSEP).
NSEP represents a key investment in creating a pipeline of
linguistically and culturally competent professionals into our
workforce. NSEP provides scholarships and fellowships to enable
American students to study critical languages and cultures in return
for Federal national security service. NSEP partners with universities,
providing grants for the development and implementation of National
Flagship Language Programs, specifically designed to graduate students
at an ILR Level Three (3/3/3) language proficiency (in reading,
listening and speaking modalities) in today's critical languages. These
programs provide a major source of vitally needed language proficiency
in the national security community. As part of the DOD's contribution
to the National Security Language Initiative, we have expanded the
National Language Flagship Program to establish new flagship programs
in Arabic, Hindi, and Urdu and to expand the Russian flagship to a
Eurasian program focusing on critical central Asian languages. The
flagship effort serves as an example of how the National Security
Language Initiative links Federal programs and resources across
agencies to enhance the scope of the Federal Government's efforts in
foreign language education. For example, the flagship program is
leading the way in developing programs for students to progress through
elementary, middle, and high school and into universities with more
advanced levels of language proficiency. This enables our universities
to focus more appropriately on taking a student from an intermediate or
advanced level to the professional proficiency. While focusing on early
language learning, this effort has already succeeded in enrolling 10
students, as freshmen, from Portland, OR, high schools in an
experimental advanced, intensive 4-year Chinese program at the
University of Oregon. We have also awarded a grant to the Chinese
flagship program at Ohio State University to implement a State-wide
system of Chinese programs. Finally, we awarded a grant to Michigan
State University to develop an Arabic pipeline with the Dearborn, MI,
school district, announced in conjunction with the Department of
Education's foreign language assistance program grant.
National Language Service Corps
Our second commitment to the President's National Security Language
Initiative is the launching of the National Language Service Corps
pilot program. This effort will identify Americans with skills in
critical languages and develop the capacity to mobilize them during
times of national need or emergency. The National Language Service
Corps represents the first organized national attempt to capitalize on
our rich national diversity in language and culture. This organization
has a goal of creating a cadre of 1,000 highly proficient people, in 10
languages by 2010 and began recruiting in January 2008.
Recently, the department coordinated a series of regional summits
to engage State and local governments, educational institutions, school
boards, parents, and businesses at the local level in addressing
foreign language needs. The NSEP reached out to the proficiency of its
three flagship universities--in Ohio, Oregon, and Texas to convene
these summits and to develop action plans that reflect an organized and
reasonable approach to building the infrastructure for language
education at the State and local level.
Industry, academia, Federal, State, and local governments,
business, nongovernmental organizations and our international partners
must continue to work together in order to achieve our mutual goals.
The United States continues to seek out and increase collaboration in
today's global world. The DOD is leading an effort in the public and
private sectors of the United States to develop a globalized workforce
through the development of language, regional and cultural capabilities
and is deeply committed to this initiative. We have fundamentally
transformed our approach to foreign language and cultural capabilities
and in doing so have ignited a spark across the Nation that is
resulting in increased language and international education programs in
schools and colleges. The need for language, regional and cultural
competence is real and critical and is not confined to the DOD or the
shores of the United States. We clearly face a world challenge that
will require that we embrace the diversity that makes us who we are,
while at the same time, enable us to work together to solve the complex
global challenges that we face.
The Department has, since 2001, led a national effort to address
serious national shortfalls in foreign language expertise. The context
for languages has changed dramatically in less than a decade--we need
to address more and more languages at higher levels of proficiency. We
recognize that we cannot address our own language needs or those of the
broader national security community and Federal sector without a
strategic investment in the development of a more globalized
professional workforce--one that is multi-lingual and multi-cultural.
The results of our own Department language transformation roadmap are
impressive. But we also recognize that in order to successfully address
our ever-expanding needs we simply must invest long-term in key
``leverage points'' in the U.S. education system. Enlarging the
recruitment pool will serve to lower the costs and allow the Department
to devote more time to mission-critical skills. As a side benefit it
will serve to change attitudes and increase the national capability to
respond to military, diplomatic, economic and social needs.
defense health
A crucial part of my portfolio as the Under Secretary of Defense
for Personnel and Readiness is the health of our servicemembers. Over
the last 7 years the Military Health System (MHS) has implemented
significant new programs for its more than 9 million beneficiaries,
overhauled contracts, leveraged new technology, provided global health
and support around the world, and made dramatic improvements in
battlefield medicine and care of the wounded, injured and ill.
Force Health Protection
Force Health Protection embraces a broad compilation of programs
and systems designed to protect and preserve the health and fitness of
our servicemembers--from their entrance into the military, throughout
their military service to their separation or retirement, and follow-on
care by the VA. Our integrated partnership for health between
servicemembers, their leaders and health care providers ensures a fit
and healthy force and that the continuum of world-class health care is
available anytime, anywhere.
In 2007, we recorded remarkable war-wounded survival rates, the
lowest death-to-wounded ratio in the history of American military
operations, and the lowest disease non-battle injury rate.
Lowest Disease, Non-Battle Injury Rate. As a testament
to our medical readiness and preparedness, with our preventive-
medicine approaches and our occupational-health capabilities,
we are successfully addressing the single largest contributor
to loss of forces--disease.
Lowest Death-to-Wounded Ratio. Our agility in reaching
wounded servicemembers, and capability in treating them, has
altered our perspective on what constitutes timeliness in
lifesaving care from the golden hour to the platinum 15
minutes. We are saving servicemembers with grievous wounds that
were likely not survivable even 10 years ago.
Reduced time to evacuation and definitive tertiary
care. We now expedite the evacuation of servicemembers
following forward-deployed surgery to stateside definitive
care. We changed our evacuation paradigm to employ airborne
intensive-care units. Wounded servicemembers often arrive back
in the United States within 3-4 days of initial injury.
One of our most important preventive health measures in place for
servicemembers today--immunization programs--offer protection from many
diseases endemic to certain areas of the world and from diseases that
can be used as weapons. These vaccines are highly effective, and we
base our programs on sound scientific information verified by
independent experts.
The Department has programs to protect our servicemembers against a
variety of illnesses. We continue to view smallpox and anthrax as real
threats that may be used as potential bioterrorism weapons against our
soldiers, sailors, airmen, and marines. To date, through the use of
vaccines we have protected almost 1.6 million servicemembers against
anthrax spores and more than 1.1 million against the smallpox virus.
These vaccination programs have an unparalleled safety record and are
setting the standard for the civilian sector. Since the Food and Drug
Administration published the Final Order confirming that the anthrax
vaccine absorbed is safe and effective for its labeled indication to
protect individuals at high risk for anthrax disease, we restarted the
mandatory anthrax vaccination program.
Insect-repellant-impregnated uniforms and prophylactic medications
also protect our servicemembers from endemic diseases, such as malaria
and leishmaniasis, during deployments. Since January 2003, DOD
environmental health professionals have analyzed more than 6,000
theater air, water, and soil samples to ensure that forces are not
unduly exposed to harmful substances during deployments.
We published a new DOD Instruction, ``Deployment Health,'' in 2006.
Among its many measures to enhance force health protection is a
requirement for the Services to track and record daily locations of DOD
personnel as they move about in theater and report data weekly to the
Defense Manpower Data Center. We can use the data collected to identify
populations at risk for exposure, to easily assign environmental
exposures on a population basis, to study long-term health effects of
deployments, and to mitigate health effects in future conflicts.
Among the many performance measures the MHS tracks is the medical
readiness status of individual members, both Active and Reserve. The
MHS tracks individual dental health, immunizations, required laboratory
tests, deployment-limiting conditions, Service-specific health
assessments, and availability of required individual medical equipment.
We are committed to deploying healthy and fit servicemembers and to
providing consistent, careful post-deployment health evaluations with
appropriate, expeditious follow-up care when needed.
Medical technology on the battlefield includes expanded
implementation of the Theater Medical Information Program and
enhancements to the Theater Medical Data Store in support of Operations
Iraqi Freedom and Enduring Freedom. These capabilities provide a means
for medical units to capture and electronically disseminate near-real-
time information to commanders. Information provided includes in-
theater medical data, medical surveillance analysis and reports,
environmental hazards and exposures, and such critical logistics data
as blood supply, beds, and equipment availability. Theater Medical
Information Program enhancements, particularly in the capture,
distribution, and expanded access to inpatient and outpatient medical
information, enables DOD and VA health care providers to have complete
visibility into the continuum of care across the battlefield, from
theater to sustaining base.
With the expanded use of the Web-based Joint Patient Tracking
Application, our medical providers also will have improved visibility
into the continuum of care across the battlefield, and from theater to
sustaining base. New medical devices introduced to OIF provide field
medics with blood-clotting capability; light, modular diagnostic
equipment improves the mobility of our medical forces; and individual
protective armor serves to prevent injuries and save lives.
DOD has been performing health assessments on servicemembers prior
to and just after deployment for several years now. These assessments
serve as a screen to identify any potential health concerns that might
warrant further medical evaluation. This includes screening the mental
well-being of all soldiers, sailors, airmen, and marines in the Active
Force, Reserves, and National Guard.
We are also ensuring our servicemembers are medically evaluated
before deployments (through the Periodic Health Assessment), upon
return (through the Post-Deployment Health Assessment) and then again
90-180 days after deployment (through the PDHRA). These health
assessments provide a comprehensive picture of the fitness of our
forces and highlight areas where we may need to intervene. For example,
we have learned that servicemembers do not always recognize or voice
health concerns at the time they return from deployment, but may do so
after several months back home.
For the period of June 1, 2005 to January 8, 2008, 466,732
servicemembers have completed a PDHRA, with 27 percent of these
individuals receiving at least one referral for additional evaluation.
By reaching out to servicemembers 3 to 6 months post-deployment, we
have learned their concerns are physical-health concerns, e.g., back or
joint pain, and mental health concerns. This additional evaluation
gives medical staff an opportunity to provide education, reassurance,
or additional clinical evaluation and treatment, as appropriate.
Fortunately, as these clinical interactions occur, we have learned that
only a fraction of those with concerns have diagnosed clinical
conditions.
Mental health services are available for all servicemembers and
their families before, during, and after deployment. Servicemembers are
trained to recognize sources of stress and the symptoms of depression,
including thoughts of suicide, in themselves and others, that might
occur because of deployment. Combat-stress control and mental health
care are available in theater. In addition, before returning home, we
brief servicemembers on how to manage their reintegration into their
families, including managing expectations, the importance of
communication, and the need to control alcohol use.
During the return from deployment process, we educate
servicemembers and assess them for signs of mental health issues,
including depression and Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD), and
physical health issues. During the post-deployment reassessment, we
include additional education and assessment for signs of mental and
physical health issues.
After returning home, servicemembers may seek help for any mental
health issues that may arise, including depression and PTSD, through
the MHS for active duty and retired servicemembers, or through the VA
for non-retired veterans. TRICARE is also available for 6 months post-
return for Reserve and Guard members. To facilitate access for all
servicemembers and family members, especially Reserve component
personnel, the Military OneSource Program--a 24/7 referral and
assistance service--is available by telephone and on the Internet.
Additionally, we have fielded the DOD Deployment Health and Family
Readiness Library (http://deploymenthealthlibrary.fhp.osd.mil/) to
provide a convenient source of deployment health and family readiness
information for servicemembers, family, health care providers and
commanders. We also provide face-to-face counseling in the local
community for all servicemembers and family members. We provide this
nonmedical counseling at no charge to the member, and it is completely
confidential.
To supplement mental health screening and education resources, we
added the Mental Health Self-Assessment Program in 2006. This program
provides military families, including National Guard and Reserve
families, Web-based, phone-based and in-person screening for common
mental health conditions and customized referrals to appropriate local
treatment resources. The program also includes parental screening
instruments to assess depression and risk for self-injurious behavior
in their children, along with suicide-prevention programs in DOD
schools. Spanish versions of the screening tools are available, as
well.
Pandemic influenza represents a new threat to national security.
With our global footprint and far-reaching capabilities, we are
actively engaged in the Federal interagency effort to help effectively
prevent, detect, and respond to the threat of avian influenza,
domestically and internationally. The President's National Strategy for
Pandemic Influenza includes the DOD as an integral component in our
Nation's response to this threat. One example of this integrated
response is DOD's medical Watchboard website, established in 2006, to
provide ready access to pandemic influenza information for DOD
servicemembers, civilians, and their families, DOD leaders, and DOD
health care planners and providers. The DOD Watchboard is linked to
PandemicFlu.gov for one-stop access to U.S. Government avian and
pandemic influenza information.
Then and Now--Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI)
Seven years ago, TBI was not part of our Nation's vernacular.
Today, the MHS is working on a number of measures to evaluate and treat
servicemembers affected or possibly affected by TBI. Our new Defense
Center of Excellence for Psychological Health and Traumatic Brain
Injury will integrate quality programs and advanced medical technology
to give us unprecedented expertise in dealing with psychological health
and TBI. In developing the national collaborative network, the Center
will coordinate existing medical, academic, research, and advocacy
assets within the Services, with those of the VA and Health and Human
Services, other Federal, State, and local agencies, as well as academic
institutions. The Center will lead a national effort to advance and
disseminate psychological health and traumatic brain injury knowledge,
enhance clinical and management approaches, and facilitate other vital
services to best serve the urgent and enduring needs of our wounded
warriors and their families.
Then and Now--Extremity Injury
Under the leadership at Walter Reed, the Military Advanced Training
Center opened in September 2007 to accelerate improvements in amputee
care. Together with prosthetics research and innovations developed and
tested at the Center for the Intrepid in San Antonio--a great gift from
the Fisher family--nearly 15 percent of amputees can now remain on
active duty. Many others are helped by the Computer/Electronic
Accommodations Program.
Then and Now--Health Informatics
Over the last 7 years, the MHS developed and implemented Armed
Forces Health Longitudinal Technology Application (AHLTA), DOD's global
electronic health record and clinical data repository. The MHS
continues to add capabilities to AHLTA, which does not yet have an
inpatient record. The MHS will have requirements for a joint DOD-VA
inpatient record, and work on that will soon begin.
AHLTA, DOD's global electronic health record and clinical data
repository, significantly enhances MHS efforts to build healthy
communities. AHLTA creates a life-long, computer-based patient record
for each military health beneficiary, regardless of location, and
provides seamless visibility of health information across our entire
continuum of medical care. This gives our providers unprecedented
access to critical health information whenever and wherever care is
provided to our servicemembers and beneficiaries. In addition, AHLTA
offers clinical reminders for preventive care and clinical-practice
guidelines for those with chronic conditions.
In November 2006, we successfully completed worldwide deployment of
AHLTA Block 1 at all DOD MTFs. Our implementation-support activities
spanned 11 time zones and included training for 55,242 users, including
18,065 health care providers. DOD's Clinical Data Repository is
operational and contains electronic clinical records for more than 9
million beneficiaries. AHLTA use continues to grow at a significant
pace. As of January 4, 2008, our providers had used AHLTA to process
66,491,855 outpatient encounters, and they currently process more than
124,000 patient visits per workday.
The MHS is accelerating AHLTA's responsiveness with version 3.3,
which will be appreciably faster and more user friendly.
Then and Now--Health Care Communications
Seven years ago, MHS communications were mostly one-way. Today,
with the arrival of web 2.0, the MHS has an opportunity to be
transparent about quality, satisfaction and cost effectiveness. TRICARE
launched a new Web site in 2007 with a new approach to delivering
information to its beneficiaries that is based on extensive user
research and analysis. A key feature of the redesign is that users now
receive personalized information about their health care benefits by
answering a few simple questions about their location, beneficiary
status and current TRICARE plan.
Recently, the MHS launched a new Web site, www.health.mil. Its
purpose is to inspire innovation, creativity, and information sharing
among MHS staff.
Then and Now--Health Budgets and Financial Policy
The TRICARE benefit has been enhanced through the implementation of
TRICARE for Life, expansion of covered services and new benefits for
the Reserve component. These benefit enhancements have come at a time
when private-sector employers are shifting substantially more costs to
employees for their health care. TRICARE has actually moved in the
other direction.
At the direction of Congress, we executed new health benefits which
extend TRICARE coverage to members of the National Guard and Reserve.
We implemented an expanded TRS health plan for Reserve component
personnel and their families, as mandated by the NDAA for Fiscal Year
2007. Today, more than 61,000 reservists and their families are paying
premiums to receive TRS coverage. In addition, we made permanent their
early access to TRICARE upon receipt of call-up orders and their
continued access to TRICARE for 6 months following active duty service
for both individuals and their families. Our fiscal year 2009 budget
request includes $407 million to cover the costs of this expanded
benefit.
The Department is committed to protecting the health of our
servicemembers and providing the best health care to more than 9
million eligible beneficiaries. The fiscal year 2009 Defense Health
Program funding request is $23.6 billion for Operations and
Maintenance, Procurement and Research, and Development, Test and
Evaluation Appropriations to finance the MHS mission. Total military
health program requirements, including personnel expenses, is $42.8
billion for fiscal year 2009. This includes payment of $10.4 billion to
the DOD Medicare Eligible Retiree Health Care Fund, and excludes
projected savings of $1.2 billion, based on recommendations provided by
the DOD Task Force on the Future of Military Health Care for benefit
reform.
As the civil and military leaders of the Department have testified,
we must place the health benefit program on a sound fiscal foundation
or face adverse consequences. Costs have more than doubled in 7 years--
from $19 billion in fiscal year 2001 to $39.9 billion in fiscal year
2008--despite MHS management actions to make the system more efficient.
Our analysts project this program will cost taxpayers at least $64
billion by 2015. Health care costs will continue to consume a growing
slice of the Department's budget, reaching 12 percent of the budget by
2015 (versus 6 percent in 2001).
Simply put, the Department and Congress must work together to agree
on necessary changes to the TRICARE benefit to better manage the long-
term cost structure of our program. Failure to do so will harm military
health care and the overall capabilities of the DOD--outcomes we cannot
afford.
Budgeting for the Defense Health Program (DHP)
The MHS utilizes a collaborative, disciplined process to develop
the DHP budget. Throughout the process, the MHS analyzes and validates
requirements identified for funding by the three Service Medical
Departments and the TRICARE Management Activity (TMA). We balance
resource priorities to achieve an integrated, effective budget that
reflects senior leader guidance and allocates required resources to
sustain operational readiness while continuing to provide high-quality,
accessible health care. The following MHS committees review and make
recommendations on issues pertaining to the development and execution
of the DHP budget:
The Resource Management Steering Committee, includes
the senior resource managers for the Service Surgeons General
and the TMA Private Sector Care Program.
The Chief Financial Officer Integration Council,
includes the Service Deputy Surgeons General and the TMA Deputy
Director.
The Senior Military Medical Advisory Council, includes
the Service Surgeons General and the Assistant Secretary of
Defense (Health Affairs), Deputy Assistant Secretaries of
Defense within Health Affairs and the TMA Deputy Director.
Issues that cannot be resolved within the MHS are addressed in the
Department-wide Budget Review. A medical issue team is established and
includes representation from DOD staff, as well as representatives from
the Military Departments (medical and line), the Under Secretaries of
Defense, and the Joint Staff. The team thoroughly evaluates all
outstanding issues, develops alternatives, and provides recommendations
for coordination within the Department. Final decisions are made by the
Secretary of Defense and incorporated into the President's budget
request.
The DHP budget enacted by Congress is distributed to the Army,
Navy, Air Force medical components and TMA. The Service Surgeons
General approve the allocation of funding provided to the military
treatment facilities and oversee the execution of the funds used during
the fiscal year. In addition to the funding included in the President's
Budget, unbudgeted requirements, such as global war on terrorism
emergencies, such as Humanitarian Relief activities, are included in
the DOD's request for supplemental funding for validated, essential
requirements. During execution of the budget, we use resources that may
become available to fund emerging, priority requirements, primarily in
the in-house care system. Budgeting for health care benefits is an
imprecise science--the 1 percent (previously 2 percent through fiscal
year 2007) carryover authority authorized by Congress for the DHP has
served as an invaluable tool to manage DHP resources appropriately
within the enacted budget.
Management
The Department has initiated several management actions to use
resources more effectively and help control the increasing costs of
health care delivery. The MHS continues to implement a prospective-
payment system in a phased, manageable way that provides incentives for
local commanders to focus on outcomes, rather than on historical
budgeting. We are confident this budgeting approach will ensure our
hospitals and clinics continue to deliver high-quality, efficient
health care to our patients within the military medical institutions.
In addition, the MHS is instituting a new strategic plan that
includes actionable metrics. Through this plan, the MHS is
strengthening its commitment to military medical forces, to our war
fighters, and to our Nation's security. The MHS strategic plan takes
important steps toward consolidating administrative and management
functions across the MHS, and it will strengthen joint decisionmaking
authorities.
With implementation of the base realignment and closure (BRAC)
recommendations, the major medical centers in San Antonio and the
national capital area will be consolidated. These BRAC actions afford
us the opportunity to provide world-class medical facilities for the
future while streamlining our health care system and creating a culture
of best practices across the Services.
Under the BRAC recommendations, we are also developing a medical
education and training campus that will colocate medical basic and
specialty enlisted training at Fort Sam Houston, TX. By bringing most
medical enlisted training programs to Fort Sam Houston, we will reduce
the overall technical-training infrastructure while strengthening the
consistency and quality of training across the Services.
In the meantime, we are doing everything possible to control our
cost growth. We are executing our new TRICARE regional contracts more
efficiently, and we are demanding greater efficiency within our own
medical facilities. However, one area--pharmacy--is particularly
noteworthy. Nearly 6.7 million beneficiaries use our pharmacy benefit,
and in fiscal year 2007, our total pharmacy cost was more than $6.8
billion. If we did nothing to control our pharmacy cost growth, we
project pharmacy costs alone would reach $15 billion by 2015.
To address this issue, we are taking every action for which we have
authority: promoting our mandatory generic substitution policy, joint
contracting with Veterans Affairs, promoting home-delivery, and making
voluntary agreements with pharmaceutical manufacturers to lower costs.
We also continue to effectively manage the DOD Uniform Formulary. We
avoided approximately $450 million in drug costs in fiscal year 2006,
and more than $900 million in drug costs in fiscal year 2007 due to key
formulary-management changes and decisions.
We have worked with industry experts to design and develop the
government requirements for TRICARE's third generation of contracts (T-
3). The Managed Care Support Contracts are TRICARE's largest and most
complex purchased-care contracts. Others include the TRICARE Pharmacy
Program (TPharm), the active duty Dental Contract, and the TRICARE
Quality Monitoring Contract. Request for Proposals have either been, or
will soon be, released for these contracts. Recent successful T-3
awards include the TRICARE Retiree Dental Contract to Delta Dental of
California, and the new TRICARE Dual Eligible Fiscal Intermediary
Contract (TDEFIC) to Wisconsin Physicians Services, Inc.
The three TRICARE Regional Directors are actively engaged in
managing and monitoring regional health care with a dedicated staff of
both military and civilian personnel. They are strengthening existing
partnerships between the active duty components and the civilian
provider community to help fulfill our mission responsibilities.
The Balanced Scorecard has guided the MHS through the strategic
planning process over the last 5 years and helped the MHS manage
strategy at all levels of the organization. Using this strategic
planning tool, the MHS is identifying the most critical mission
activities, and then applying Lean Six Sigma methodology to create a
data-driven, decision-making culture for process improvement. The
Service Surgeons General have aggressively incorporated this
methodology into their business operations, and we are already
witnessing the fruits of this commitment to building better processes.
We also have hired a nationally recognized expert in Lean Six Sigma to
help facilitate integration of the National Capital Area and San
Antonio under our BRAC work.
Defense Mishap Reduction Initiative
As a world-class military, we do not tolerate preventable mishaps
and injuries. The direct cost of mishaps is more than $3 billion per
year, with estimates of total costs up to $12 billion. We have
rededicated ourselves to achieve a 75 percent accident-reduction goal
and are aggressively working toward it. For example, the Marine Corps
has reduced its civilian lost-day rate by 62 percent, and last fiscal
year, the Air Force achieved the best aviation class ``A'' mishap rate
in its history.
To reach the next level in military and civilian injury reductions,
safety is now a performance element under the new National Security
Personnel System (NSPS) and in military evaluations. The Department is
implementing Occupational Safety and Health Administration's Voluntary
Protection Program (VPP) at more than 80 installations and sites. This
program brings together management, unions, and employees to ensure
safe working conditions. VPP and our other accountability programs have
the highest visibility and support within the Department.
We also technology can address many safety issues. Safety
technologies include both systems and processes. For example, we are
pursuing the Military Flight Operations Quality Assurance process to
reduce aircraft flight mishaps. We are exploring the use of data
recorders and roll-over warning systems as tools to help drivers avoid
wheeled vehicle accidents. Our plan is for DOD components to include
these and other appropriate safety technologies as a standard
requirement in future acquisition programs.
Taking Proper Care of the Wounded
The Department is committed to providing the assistance and support
required to meet the challenges that confront our severely injured and
wounded servicemembers, and their families. The new Post-Deployment
Health Assessment and PDHRA forms with the TBI screening questions and
other improvements were officially published September 11, 2007.
The Department is working on a number of additional measures to
evaluate and treat servicemembers affected or possibly affected by TBI.
In August 2006, we developed a clinical-practice guideline for the
Services for the management of mild TBI in theater. We sent detailed
guidance to Army and Marine Corps line medical personnel in the field
to advise them on ways to look for signs and to treat TBI.
The ``Clinical Guidance for Mild Traumatic Brain Injury (mTBI) in
Non-Deployed Medical Activities,'' October 2007, included a standard
Military Acute Concussion Evaluation (MACE) form for field personnel to
assess and document TBI for the medical record. The tool guides the
evaluator through a short series of standardized questions to obtain
history, orientation (day, date, and time), immediate memory (repeat a
list of words), neurological screening (altered level of consciousness,
pupil asymmetry), concentration (repeat a list of numbers backwards),
and delayed recall (repeat the list of words asked early in the
evaluation). The evaluator calculates and documents a score, which
guides the need for additional evaluation and follow-up. The MACE also
may be repeated (different versions are available to preclude
``learning the test'') and scores may be recorded to track changes in
cognitive functioning.
U.S. Central Command (USCENTCOM) has mandated the use of clinical
guidelines, which include use of the MACE screening tool, at all levels
of care in theater, after a servicemember has a possible TBI-inducing
event. Furthermore, Landstuhl Regional Medical Center is using MACE to
screen all patients evacuated from the USCENTCOM area of responsibility
with polytrauma injuries for co-morbid TBI. In addition, MACE is used
in MTFs throughout the MHS.
Each Service has programs to serve severely wounded from the war:
the Army Wounded Warrior Program (AW2), the Navy Safe Harbor program,
the Air Force Helping Airmen Recover Together (Palace HART) program,
and the Marine4Life (M4L) Injured Support Program. DOD's Military
Severely Injured Center augments the support provided by the Services.
It reaches beyond the DOD to other agencies, to the nonprofit world and
to corporate America. It serves as a fusion point for four Federal
agencies--DOD, the VA, the Department of Homeland Security's
Transportation Security Administration (TSA), and the Department of
Labor.
The Military Severely Injured Center unites Federal agencies
through a common mission: to assist the severely injured and their
families. The VA Office of Seamless Transition has a full-time liaison
assigned to the Center to address VA benefits issues ranging from
expediting claims, facilitating VA ratings, connecting servicemembers
to local VA offices, and coordinating the transition between the
military and the VA systems. The Recovery and Employment Assistance
Lifelines (REALifelines) initiative is a joint project of the U.S.
Department of Labor, the Bethesda Naval Medical Center, and the Walter
Reed Army Medical Center. It creates a seamless, personalized
assistance network to ensure that seriously wounded and injured
servicemembers who cannot return to active duty are trained for
rewarding new careers in the private sector. The Department of Labor
has assigned three liaisons from its REALifelines program, which offers
personalized employment assistance to injured servicemembers to find
careers in the field and geographic area of their choice. REALifelines
works closely with the VA's Vocational Rehabilitation program to ensure
servicemembers have the skills, training, and education required to
pursue their desired career field. The Department of Homeland
Security's TSA has a transportation specialist assigned to the Center
to facilitate travel of severely injured members and their families
through our Nation's airports. The Center's TSA liaison coordinates
with local airport TSA officials to ensure each member is assisted
throughout the airport and given a facilitated (or private) security
screening that takes into account the member's individual injuries.
The Military Severely Injured Center has coordinated with more than
40 non-profit organizations, all of which have a mission to assist
injured servicemembers and their families. These non-profits offer
assistance in a number of areas from financial to employment to
transportation to goods and services. Many are national organizations,
but some are local, serving service men and women in a specific region
or at a specific military treatment facility.
The American public's strong support for our troops shows
especially in its willingness to help servicemembers who are severely
injured in the war, and their families, as they transition from the
hospital environment and return to civilian life. Heroes to Hometowns'
focus is on reintegration back home, with networks established at the
national and State levels to better identify the extraordinary needs of
returning families before they return home. They work with local
communities to coordinate government and non-government resources
necessary for long-term success.
The Department has partnered with the National Guard Bureau and the
American Legion, and most recently the National Association of State
Directors of Veterans Affairs, to tap into their national, State, and
local support systems to provide essential links to government,
corporate, and non-profit resources at all levels and to garner
community support. Support has included help with paying the bills,
adapting homes, finding jobs, arranging welcome home celebrations, help
working through bureaucracy, holiday dinners, entertainment options,
mentoring, and very importantly, hometown support.
The ability of injured servicemembers to engage in recreational
activities is an important component of recovery. We continue to work
with the United States Paralympics Committee and other organizations so
that our severely injured have opportunities to participate in adaptive
sports programs, whether those are skiing, running, hiking, horseback
riding, rafting, or kayaking. We are also mindful of the need to ensure
installation Morale Welfare and Recreation (MWR) fitness and sports
programs can accommodate the recreational needs of our severely injured
servicemembers. At Congressional request, we are studying the current
capabilities of MWR programs to provide access and accommodate eligible
disabled personnel.
Over the last year we have addressed important issues that deserved
and received our immediate and focused attention. First and foremost,
we are listening. We are actively surveying (by telephone, on the web,
and in person) our wounded servicemembers and their families, and we
are acting on the answers they provide. Our goal is to improve patient
satisfaction, and these surveys let us know where we need to put
resources to continuously improve. In addition to surveys, we encourage
leadership to spend time with servicemembers and their families who are
receiving long-term rehabilitative care. On February 14, we held our
first webcast town-hall meeting on our new website www.health.mil to
receive additional, anonymous feedback from the wounded, injured, ill
and their families. We are taking all of this input back to DOD
leadership--where we have clear leadership--as we develop and implement
solutions.
DOD and VA are working together through a Senior Oversight
Committee (SOC), co-chaired by the Deputy Secretaries of each
Department. It builds on the earlier and continuing word of the Joint
executive Council. The SOC is developing implementation plans and
future funding requirements for eight ``lines of action'' that address
the disability system, case management, data sharing between the
Departments, facilities requirements, personnel and pay support, as
well as such wounded warrior health issues as TBI and psychological
health. The recommendations and decisions from this group are being
implemented now and will drive future funding requests for both
Departments.
We can best address the changing nature of inpatient and outpatient
health care requirements, specifically the unique health needs of our
wounded servicemembers and the needs of our population in this
community through the planned consolidation of health services and
facilities in the National Capital Region. The BRAC decision preserves
a precious national asset, Walter Reed, by sustaining a high-quality,
world-class military medical center with a robust graduate medical
education program in the Nation's Capital. The plan is to open this
facility by 2011. In the interim, we will sustain the current Walter
Reed Army Medical Center (WRAMC) as the premier medical center it is.
Process of Disability Determinations
We know that both the servicemember and the Department expect:
Full rehabilitation of the servicemember to the
greatest degree medically possible
A fair and consistent adjudication of disability
A timely adjudication of disability requests--neither
hurried nor slowed due to bureaucratic processes.
We currently have a pilot program in place to improve the
disability process and implement one system that is jointly
administered by both DOD and VA. Our goal is to create a process that
requires one exam and one rating, binding by both DOD and VA within
current law. The new Disability Evaluation System pilot program, which
began in late November, will provide smoother post-separation
transition for veterans and their families--including medical
treatment, evaluation, and delivery of compensation, benefits and
entitlements.
Process of Care Coordination
The quality of medical care we deliver to our servicemembers is
exceptional; independent review supports this assertion. Yet, we need
to better attend to the process of coordinating delivery of services to
members in long-term outpatient, residential rehabilitation.
The Army's new Warrior Transition Brigade became operational at
WRAMC on April 26, 2007. As of February 4, 2008, the 35 Warrior
Transition Units throughout the Army had 9,774 wounded warriors
assigned to them (this number includes Active and Reserve component
members). Many of the Warrior Transition Unit cadres have volunteered
for their assignments, and each officer or noncommissioned officer goes
through an interview process before he or she is selected.
Each wounded warrior is also assigned a primary care manager, a
nurse case manager and a squad leader. They follow up with soldiers
after they return to their units or transfer to the VA.
The Federal Recovery Coordination program began in November 2007.
The role of Federal Recovery Coordinators is to be the ultimate
resource to oversee the development and implementation of services
across the continuum of care from recovery through rehabilitation to
reintegration, in coordination with relevant governmental, private, and
non-profit programs.
DOD-VA Collaboration.
The 2008-2010 DOD-VA Joint Strategic Plan will improve the quality,
efficiency, and effectiveness of the delivery of benefits and services
to veterans, servicemembers, military retirees, and their families
through an enhanced VA and DOD partnership. The plan incorporates
concrete performance measures and strategies that link directly to the
actions of the SOC, joint communications, improved case management,
better information sharing, and collaborative training and continuing
education for health care providers.
We are committed to working with the VA on appropriate electronic
health information exchanges to support our veterans. The Federal
Health Information Exchange (FHIE) enables the transfer of protected
electronic health information from DOD to the VA at the time of a
servicemember's separation. We have transmitted messages to the FHIE
data repository on more than 4.1 million retired or separated
servicemembers.
Building on the success of FHIE, we also send electronic pre- and
post-deployment health assessment and PDHRA information to the VA. We
began this monthly transmission of electronic pre- and post-deployment
health assessment data to the FHIE data repository in September 2005,
and the PDHRA in December 2005. As of January 2008, VA had access to
more than 2 million pre- and post-deployment health assessments and
post-deployment health re-assessment forms on more than 838,000
separated servicemembers and demobilized National Guard and Reserve
members who had been deployed.
The Bidirectional Health Information Exchange (BHIE) enables real-
time sharing of health data for patients being treated by DOD and VA.
Access to BHIE data is available through AHLTA and through VistA, the
VA's electronic health record, for patients treated by both
departments.
To increase the availability of clinical information on a shared
patient population, VA and DOD have collaborated to further leverage
the BHIE functionality to allow bidirectional access to inpatient
documentation from DOD's Essentris System. In December 2007, we
announced the enterprise-wide release of enhancements to the BHIE and
the Clinical Data Repository/Health Data Repository (CHDR) interfaces.
With these enhancements, DOD and VA are now able to view each other's
clinical encounters, procedures, and problems lists on shared patients
using the BHIE. This adds to the pharmacy, allergy, microbiology,
chemistry/hematology data, and radiology reports we made available
previously.
Additionally, DOD and VA providers may now view theater data
(including inpatient data) from the Theater Medical Data Store (TMDS).
OD providers no longer have to log out of AHLTA and into another
application to see it.
To support our most severely wounded and injured servicemembers
transferring to VA Polytrauma Centers for care, DOD continues to send
radiology images and scanned paper medical records electronically to
the VA Polytrauma Centers.
We have worked closely with our partners in the VA, in our shared
commitment to provide our servicemembers a seamless transition from the
MHS to the VA. DOD implemented a policy entitled ``Expediting Veterans
Benefits to Members with Serious Injuries and Illness,'' which provides
guidance for collecting and transmitting critical data elements for
servicemembers involved in a medical or physical evaluation board. DOD
began electronically transmitting pertinent data to the VA in October
2005 and continues to provide monthly updates, allowing the VA to
better project future workload and resource needs.
We have provided information for more than 28,000 servicemembers
while they were still on active duty, allowing the VA to better project
future workload and resource needs. When the VA receives these data
directly from DOD before servicemembers separate, it helps to reduce
potential delays in developing a benefits claim. This process ensures
that the VA has all the relevant information to decide claims for
benefits and services in a timely manner.
We are committed to discharging well the joint responsibilities of
the DOD and VA. The VA/DOD Joint Executive Council, that I co-chair
with DVA Deputy Secretary Gordon Mansfield, provides guidance and
policy for our collaborative efforts. Much has been accomplished, but
much remains to be done.
military community & family policy
The Department has long-recognized that families also serve. Since
the beginning of the AVF in the 1970s, the Department forged programs
to meet the needs of young military families.
As the American standard of living has changed, military programs
and policies have been updated to match improvements and cultural
changes going on in the Nation as a whole. In 2002, we published the
first DOD Social Compact, recognizing the three-way relationship among
the servicemember, the family, and the Department.
In the President's State of the Union Address this January, he
addressed the sacrifices military families make for America. He
acknowledged the responsibility of the Nation to provide for our
military families, and asked that Congress support military families'
need for more child care for well deserved educational opportunities,
and for support to spousal careers.
Child care
We have a robust child care program in DOD and our child
development services continue to be a national model. Yet, we still
have unmet demand for thousands of children. The President directed the
Department to build more centers and provide more care.
To increase the availability of child care, the Department proposes
to accelerate the child development center construction program and to
increase public-private ventures with nationally recognized
organizations. Our plan would result in an additional 58,000 child care
spaces.
Spousal careers and education
Our survey of active duty military spouses in 2006 not only
confirmed that the vast majority of military spouses want to work (over
77 percent), but that they want a career--a portable career. An
overwhelming 87 percent of military spouses would like to further their
education, but the cost of education is their primary reason for not
enrolling in school or training.
In an effort to meet the educational needs of military spouses, the
Department partnered with the Department of Labor to make Career
Advancement Accounts available to military spouses at 18 installations
as a pilot program. These accounts enable spouses to pursue college or
technical training and credentials or licenses to advance them into
high-demand occupations in health services, education, information
technology, financial services or trades (e.g., electrician, plumber).
Spouses will be able to obtain recertification or licensure training as
they move from State to State. Congressional authority to include
spouses in a nationwide program is required for fiscal year 2009
implementation.
The President also proposed that a servicemember's unused
Montgomery GI Bill benefits be made transferable to the spouse or
dependent children. This will provide further support to our military
families in an area of great concern to them. While the Department
enjoys limited existing authority to offer such transferability in
critical skills in return for an extension of service, we anticipate
soon forwarding proposed legislative language that would grant broader
authority to carry out the President's initiative.
Family support of the National Guard and Reserves
Reaching the geographically dispersed families of the National
Guard and Reserves has always been a challenge. In response to
Congressional direction, we established the Joint Guard and Reserve
Family Assistance Program in 15 States. Partnering with the Red Cross,
this program facilitates a Federal, State, and local team that can
offer benefits and transition assistance throughout each of the
participating States.
Morale, Welfare, and Recreation (MWR)
Recognizing that participation in recreation, fitness, sports,
cultural arts programs are key to active living which leads to improved
personal health and well-being and helps build strong families and
healthy communities, the Department plans to explore ways to expand the
military MWR benefit to those who do not have access to installation
MWR programs. This will include pursuing national partnerships to
provide discounts for fitness and other recreation programs. We are
working with many non-profit organizations that provide recreation
opportunities and also the National Recreation and Park Association to
partner with State and local community parks, recreation and library
departments to enlist their support in meeting the needs of our
military personnel, particularly the National Guard and Reserve
members.
An additional component of family well-being is the ability to stay
in touch. Military spouses indicate that being able to communicate with
their servicemember is a primary factor in being able to cope with
deployments. Affordable phone rates ease the burden of deployment and
we've been aggressively working to reduce phone rates. We've provided
access to computers and Internet service in our family support centers,
recreation centers, installation libraries, and youth centers to help
families stay connected.
Servicemembers have free access to the military internet by using
their military e-mail address, including aboard ships. They also have
free internet access at 610 MWR-operated internet cafes in Iraq and 43
MWR-operated internet cafes in Afghanistan--an increase of 478 cafes
over the last year. MWR Internet cafes offer voice over internet
protocol phone service at less than $.04 per minute.
The Exchanges also provide unofficial telephone service at low
international rates for both land and sea based deployed members. The
Army and Air Force Exchange Service operates 73 call centers with 1,664
telephones in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Kuwait. The Navy Exchange Service
Command (NEXCOM) supports most ships in theater with 1, 10, or 20
telephone lines depending on the size of the ship.
Military OneSource (1-800-342-9647 and www.militaryonesource.com)
Launched in 2002, Military OneSource provides support services 24/7
for our troops and their families. Military OneSource is one of the
Department's resounding successes, proven especially useful during
Hurricane Katrina. Military OneSource offers free, convenient access to
confidential resource and referral support for servicemembers and their
families. When a Service or family member calls or emails, a master's
level consultant provides assistance. Military OneSource is especially
beneficial to those geographically separated from installation services
or those who are unable to seek assistance during traditional working
hours.
MilitaryHOMEFRONT Web portal (www.militaryhomefront.DOD.mil)
This portal is the Department's ``Google'' for quality of life
information. As a sister site to Military OneSource, the HOMEFRONT
provides the library of DOD information on quality of life issues,
useful to installation staff and policymakers. In fiscal year 2007
there were over 1.7 million visits to the site.
To help our servicemembers and their families plan smooth
relocations, usually every 3 years, to their next duty locations, we
have developed a new online tool called Plan My Move. Plan My Move
provides a fully customizable calendar and 'to do' list that links
individual moving tasks with related installation information and
points of contact.
A second new tool is MilitaryINSTALLATIONS. From any page on the
MilitaryHOMEFRONT users can access information about military
installations throughout the world. MilitaryINSTALLATIONS includes
specifics about 23 different topics of interest on each installation
(such as child care, check in procedures or housing).
In the past 2 months, MilitaryHOMEFRONT, in coordination with the
Joint Guard and Reserve Family Support Assistance Program, has
introduced MySTATE (www.mystate.mhf.DOD.mil), a powerful new tool
providing State and local servicemembers and their families across the
Nation with access to various organizations and businesses that offer
special discounts and services specifically for military personnel and
their families. MySTATE includes State directories, locations of
programs and services, maps, directions, and much more. It also gives
users the opportunity to provide feedback on the organizations or
businesses listed.
Another important communication tool is the military spouse career
network Web portal, www.military.com/spouse. Spouses can use this site
to search for employment opportunities at their new installation. Over
400 spouse-friendly employers are actively recruiting military spouses
for their vacant positions; these organizations can post jobs at no
cost and can search this exclusive database for military spouse
candidates. Since this site was opened in 2005, there have been 3.6
million spouses who have visited the site, and over 7.2 million job
searches have been conducted. Over 36,000 spouses have posted resumes.
Financial Readiness Campaign
We aggressively promote a culture within the military that values
financial competency and responsible financial behavior. The eight
``pillars'' of the Campaign represent the personal financial readiness
objectives for military personnel. Mission success will be determined
by all servicemembers and their families meeting each pillar's
objective. The pillars are:
To protect valuable security clearances by resolving
financial issues early
To establish, maintain, and protect good credit
To develop financial stability by living within one's
means
To establish routine savings
To participate in military benefit programs such as
the Thrift Savings Plan and the Savings Deposit Program
To maintain enrollment in Servicemember's Group Life
Insurance
To utilize legitimate, low-percentage alternative loan
products and avoid predatory lenders
To take advantage of military MWR Programs as a
healthful option to spending money
From February 24 to March 3, 2007, the Department held its first
``Military Saves'' Week Campaign, a social marketing campaign to
encourage military members and their families to start a savings plan
and to ``Build Wealth, Not Debt.'' The Military Services each engaged
with this first Military Saves Week and had over 50 on-installation
credit unions and banks participating, nearly 1 million public affairs
items sponsored, almost 80,000 saving events/actions held, and 8,500
new ``Military Savers'' enrolled. Defense Credit Unions reported nearly
a 10-fold increase in the number of special certificates opened during
this week thanks to savings account incentive programs and a nearly 5-
fold increase in deposits. This year's Military Saves Week will take
place February 24 to March 2, 2008, and we are expecting even greater
success at enrolling servicemembers and their families to become part
of what the Campaign calls the ``Military Savings Community.''
Military OneSource now features telephonic financial counseling to
augment those programs provided by the Services. At the request of
National Guard and Reserve units, the Department dispatched Military
Family Life Consultants with financial readiness specialties to attend
special events such as drill weekends and reunion ceremonies to meet
with Guard and Reserve members and families and provide education on
many aspects of financial readiness.
TURBO TAP
The key to a successful transition is understanding military
benefits earned during service in the military. The TURBO TAP web
portal is a joint initiative between the DOD, the Department of Labor,
and the VA and allows each servicemember to obtain a lifelong account
to connect them to veteran benefits' information. This portal was
launched in 2007. The key partners in the TurboTAP effort are currently
assisting DOD in expanding and promoting the new TurboTAP.org website
and online Individual Transition Plan Accounts system which link
servicemembers to transition assistance services and benefits, many of
which have significant cash value. Examples include the Montgomery GI
Bill, the Thrift Savings Plan and the Savings Deposit Program.
In the fall, DOD TurboTAP Mobile Training Teams began training the
National Guard and Reserves. This highly specialized outreach team
travels to State level deployment support and reintegration programs at
the request of National Guard and Reserve component leaders to connect
servicemembers to the benefits they have earned through military
service. The TurboTAP Mobile Training Team provides information about
transition assistance, service-related benefits, and related on-demand
counseling services. By the end of 2009, it is our goal to have
TurboTAP fully integrated into deployment support, transition
assistance and financial awareness programs in all 50 States.
Predatory Lending Regulation
On October 1, 2007, the congressionally-mandated Predatory Lending
Regulation went into effect, capping the annual percentage rate on
three specific types of loans to 36 percent, these include payday
loans, vehicle title loans, and tax refund anticipation loans. I thank
Congress for its support of this critical piece of legislation; it is
already showing positive results in protecting our servicemembers and
families from unscrupulous practices within the fringe banking
industries. Feedback from the field indicates that lenders are
refraining from offering these loans to servicemembers and their
families. State regulators have said that their examinations of payday
stores have shown general compliance. A few lenders have developed
products that comply with the restrictions in the regulations and we
have heard of only one lender modifying a payday loan product in an
attempt to evade these restrictions. The trade group representing
military banks reported that one major member has seen a significant
increase in the use of alternative loan products by servicemembers and
their families.
Since the implementation of the regulation, the Department has
continued to work with the Federal regulators on interpretations and
answers to questions. Additionally, the Department is developing
relationships with State regulators. In November, we sent letters to
Governors expressing the Department's interest in working together to
ensure the protections afforded to servicemembers and their families
are enforced. Our initial review of States indicates at least 28 are
committed to working with the Department on the oversight and
enforcement issue.
The Department of Defense Education Activity (DODEA)
DODEA has provided military students with an exemplary education
for over 60 years. It recently received expanded authority to create
educational partnerships with local education agencies that educate
military students to complement the work of the National Governors
Association. The ongoing relocation of thousands of military students
through BRAC, global rebasing, and other force structure changes, has
created an urgent need and obligation to partner with military-
connected communities to ensure the best possible educational
opportunities for students. On October 1, 2007, DODEA launched the
Educational Partnership Directorate (EPD) to fulfill this mission.
There are many facets to improving the education of school-age
military students. From the strictly education perspective, EPD will
develop partnerships with schools and districts to focus on educational
best practices and to provide online/alternative learning opportunities
for students worldwide. From the transition support perspective, EPD
will facilitate agreements at the local, State, and Federal levels to
reduce the many transition and deployment issues that military students
face. Other facets of EPD's mission and strategy are to:
Gather, disseminate, and promote research-based
educational best practices
Manage the MilitaryStudent Web site, the primary
vehicle for communication to parents, students, service
representatives, and local schools
Support and influence foreign language education, to
include strategic languages, in partner schools and districts
Establish a virtual school district for military
students that can be accessed by school districts nationwide
and homeschoolers worldwide
Provide information to parents and commands about
school choice, including information and, upon request,
assistance in establishing charter schools
Marshall resources to meet the unique educational and
transition needs of military-connected schools and districts
Administer the DOD Supplement to Impact Aid to
eligible schools nationwide
The Department has also recognized that some of the key issues
important to the quality of life of servicemembers and families require
more than individual State effort. For example, school transition
issues that impact military children, such as differing enrollment,
placement and graduation rules, require interstate cooperation.
Consequently, the Department sought out the assistance of the Council
of State Governments (CSG), which among other services, works with
State governments on issues that are inherently the responsibility of
the State, but require an interstate effort. CSG has developed an
interstate compact, with the assistance of a variety of national and
State-based education stakeholders, which will resolve many of these
transition issues confronting military children. The interstate compact
is now being reviewed by States for consideration during their 2008
legislative sessions. At last count, 24 States were actively
considering the compact and 15 State legislatures have bills under
review. We are working with States to have a minimum of 10 adopt the
compact, at which time the compact will be enforceable.
State assistance to accommodate the transient nature of military
life is equally impressive. A total of 48 States are supporting the
educational needs of active duty service families by extending in-State
tuition rates while the family resides within the State regardless of
residency, and 34 of these States continue that coverage for family
members after the servicemember has reassigned out of the State, as
long as the family member stays enrolled in a State institution of
higher learning. As another example, 21 States now provide a departing
spouse unemployment compensation as a result making a military move--an
increase of 11 States since 2004.
Sexual Assault Prevention
In 2004, I was directed to review the Department's sexual assault
prevention and response policies and programs. As a result, we quickly
assembled the Care for Victims of Sexual Assault Task Force and charged
it with recommending changes that would enhance the quality of care and
support for victims. The Sexual Assault Prevention and Response Joint
Task Force followed and focused victim care, prevention, improved
reporting, and accountability for offenders. Both Task Forces published
a report with a series of recommendations and findings. We have acted
on these recommendations. One of the major recommendations focused on
the Department's need for a single point of accountability regarding
sexual assault policy. In 2005, we established the Sexual Assault
Prevention and Response Office, and institutionalized a research-based
policy supported by three pillars: care and treatment for victims,
prevention through training and education, and system accountability.
This new policy revolutionized the Department's sexual assault
response structure and established programs that are quickly becoming
the benchmark for America. At the heart of the policy is a reporting
system that respects the privacy and needs of the victim. One of the
greatest challenges in responding to sexual assault is motivating
victims to report the crime and get much needed medical and
psychological care. National studies indicate that as many as 8 out of
10 sexual assaults go unreported in the civilian sector--largely
because victims are fearful of the life-changing consequences and loss
of privacy that often come with a public allegation. Consequently, we
introduced a reporting system that allows victims to make a choice
about how they report the crime of sexual assault. Our policy
encourages victims to make an Unrestricted Report--that is a report to
military law enforcement and command--that allows the Department to
investigate and hold perpetrators accountable. However, should victims
feel unready to participate in the military justice system, they may
choose to make a Restricted Report. This option enables victims to
receive medical care, mental health care, and other support services
without initiating a criminal investigation or alerting their command
structure. This flexible reporting system is designed to respect the
needs of victims and encourage them to get care quickly. Experts in
this area inform us that quicker entry into care often translates into
a healthier recovery and improved coping by victims.
Our policy also created a new and unique framework for an expanded
and comprehensive response system. We now have 24/7 support network at
all military installations and for deployed units worldwide. Sexual
Assault Response Coordinators and Victim Advocates are now available to
provide consultation and support so that our military members
understand their options and get the care and support they need. We
believe the response structure we have now institutionalized will
continue to instill trust and confidence in servicemembers who are
victims of sexual assault and spur them to come forward for assistance.
Responding to these horrible crimes is only half the battle.
Clearly, we owe it to our people to eradicate sexual assault from
military service. Toward this goal, the Department implemented an
aggressive and wide-reaching education program in 2006. Mandatory
training about sexual assault and its prevention is now required at
every rank and in all professional military education programs. In
addition, Sexual Assault Prevention and Response Office (SAPRO)
conducted a worldwide Sexual Assault Response Coordinator Conference in
June 2006, training more than 350 professional from installations
worldwide. The military Services have also expanded their training
programs to adapt training curricula to their unique needs, providing
prevention training to over 1 million Active Duty and Reserve
servicemembers.
We have only just begun our efforts to prevent sexual assault.
SAPRO is currently developing a strategic plan to guide the military
Services' efforts to stop this crime before it happens. Again, we are
tapping the experts in this field to guide our path. Last July, SAPRO
partnered with the National Sexual Violence Resource Center to convene
a Prevention Summit with leading military and civilian advocacy
experts. As a result of this summit, SAPRO is continuing to work with
the Services and the national experts to develop a prevention policy
that fosters a research based, measurable, and effective approach to
stopping this crime. The expert consensus is that bystander
intervention should be a major focus on our efforts. We have discovered
that by teaching people how and when to act, we may be able to turn
bystanders into actors. This bystander intervention approach, augmented
by a powerful social messaging campaign, holds great promise. No sexual
assault prevention effort has ever occurred on such a widespread level.
We hope to provide a benchmark for the Nation.
Our aggressive training and outreach program, coupled with the new
reporting option, has sent an unmistakable message: The Department
cares about its active duty servicemembers. I believe our
servicemembers are hearing us. After 2 full years of the new policy
being in effect, we are seeing victims making both Restricted and
Unrestricted reports and entering care. While we are saddened when even
one sexual assault occurs, we see members use of the Restricted Report
process as a very positive indicator of confidence in the program. We
believe that these military members would never have sought this
service had they not had the ability to select how and when to engage
our support system.
What is the future of Family Support?
Along with the common stressors of daily living, there are
stressors unique to military service--and the global war on terrorism
places new demands on every aspect of military life. From the anxieties
of nation building in hostile environments to the significant number
and length of family separations, the stress currently affecting the
military has not been of this magnitude since the inception of the AVF.
The Department has made family support a priority and redesigned
and boosted family support in a number of ways to recognize the crucial
role families play in supporting servicemembers deployed worldwide.
While outstanding support is provided through installation family
centers, family and spousal support groups, and family assistance
centers, we know more needs to be done. Looking to the future:
We must address how the Department defines ``family''
We must build programs and resources to deliver family
support to meet wartime levels of engagement to recognize the
sacrifices families endure
We must provide equitable family support programs and
services for Reserve component families
We must reach out to the community to augment support
programs to meet the needs of the military who live off the
installation and Reserve component families
We must resource joint family programs to meet the
needs of the total population to be served, regardless of
Service and component
We must provide high quality support programs that
servicemembers and their families can expect to receive,
regardless of their location
We must address the needs of special interest groups:
Severely injured servicemembers and their
families
Family members of the deceased
Family members with special needs
Family members with incarcerated
servicemembers
Extended family members who care for children
of deployed single and dual military parents
Individual Augmentees, AGRs, IRRs, ROTC
We must develop effective partnerships with Federal,
national, State, local, and private agencies to meet the needs
of military members and their families regardless of where they
reside
We must synergize our efforts to build systems instead
of silos. Our work will not be effective if it is done in a
vacuum--it requires integration, collaboration and
communication with all helping professionals--including a
partnership with our clinical colleagues
We must leverage technology to meet the communication
needs of the ``digital generation''
readiness and training
Improving Readiness Assessment and Reporting
Since 2000, the Department has fundamentally changed the way we
view and assess readiness. We have come from an inflexible, Cold War
approach which was based on the prescribed resources assigned to a
unit. Our old view of readiness was a static analysis with known
adversaries based on plans that changed little over the years. We
assessed ourselves as ready against a stationery target.
Today, we have, for the first time, given the Department the
ability to answer the question, ``Ready for what?'' We have worked with
the Services, Joint Staff, Combatant Commands, and Combat Support
Agencies to address the bureaucratic intransigence and opposition to
reform cited by Congress to bring about a new readiness reporting
system. Combatant Commanders now have a view of their resources and
capabilities for assigned missions which did not exist before. Because
the new Defense Readiness Reporting System (DRRS) allows the user to
``drill down'' to root causes impacting the ability to perform
missions, it enjoys the support of commanders and the leadership of the
joint community. DRRS is a major transformation, moving the focus of
force managers from reporting and assessing unit resources to managing
force capabilities. We continue to expand the concept of this readiness
system through our work with the Department of Homeland Security to
develop the National Preparedness System. This system will provide
increased situational awareness and assist the Department to integrate
and coordinate our response to domestic crisis. Development and
implementation of DRRS will continue through 2009.
Joint Training--The Engine of Force Transformation
The senior leadership of the department concluded just prior to
September 11, in the QDR, that while the military departments had
established operationally proven processes and standards, it was clear
that further advances in joint training and education were urgently
needed to prepare for complex multinational and interagency operations
in the future. Our ability to successfully defend our Nation's
interests relies heavily upon the Department's Total Force--its Active
and Reserve military components, its civil servants, and its
contractors--for its warfighting capability and capacity. The Total
Force must be trained and educated to adapt to different joint
operating environments, develop new skills and rebalance its
capabilities and people if it is to remain prepared for the new
challenges of an uncertain future. Our forces must be capable of
adapting to rapidly changing situations, ill-defined threats, and a
growing need to operate across a broad spectrum of asymmetric missions,
to also include stability and support operations and disaster response.
Since September 11 we have transformed DOD training (T2) to meet
the national security needs of the 21st century. With your
encouragement and direction we expanded the heretofore successful open,
collaborative, transparent and incentivized business process to include
a wider array of joint training programs through the Department-wide
Combatant Commander Exercise and Engagement Training Transformation
initiative. We created three new joint training capabilities: Joint
Knowledge Development and Distribution Capability (JKKDC--joint
training and education for individuals), Joint National Training
Capability (JNTC--joint unit and staff training), and Joint Assessment
and Enabling Capability (JAEC--metrics development and assessments to
answer the question are we truly transforming training). Collectively
these joint capabilities have created a globally distributed and
persistent ability to distribute and access knowledge, reach back for
subject matter expertise, and immerse units, staffs and individuals in
to a live-virtual-constructive training environment that replicates the
rigor and reality of real-world operations with ground truth, realism,
a dedicated opponent and feedback prior to deployment.
Today the focus of joint training is on the deploying joint force
prior to deployment with robust mission rehearsals. Our goal is to
ensure that no member of the deployed joint force will experience a
joint task for the first time in combat. Lessons learned are garnered
on a weekly basis with operational forward deployed commands sharing
real-time subjects with stateside training counterparts at Service
training centers and schoolhouses. Mission rehearsal exercises now
routinely integrate Afghan, Iraqi, and coalition partner personnel as
participants, mentors, and advisors. Cultural and language concerns and
matters receive prominent consideration through role-playing.
Intergovernmental and nongovernmental and international organizations
and personnel are habitually included in mission rehearsals.
Ten years ago the DOD had not harnessed the power of individual
learning technologies. In great part this was due to the plethora of
proprietary software or computing systems that did not allow the
exchange of courseware in an interoperable manner. Another Service
could not discover learning content developed by one Service for
repurpose and reuse for its own needs. In effect, this lack of
capability created an inefficient, duplicative, and costly development
cycle for learning content and courseware while precluding its global
exchange.
Since 2001, in collaboration with academia and industry we have
made great strides in expanding the Department's Advanced Distributed
Learning (ADL) Initiative and the ADL Co-Laboratory System. The vision
remains constant--to provide access to the highest quality education
and training, tailored to individual needs, delivered cost effectively,
anywhere and anytime.
The ADL Initiative is recognized across the Department and Federal
agencies for having developed the standards and guidelines that define,
and are being used to develop, the technology-based global digital
learning environment. ADL is a global movement, for example, in use by
NATO, Partnership for Peace countries, the United Kingdom, Korea,
Singapore, Norway, numerous Federal agencies, and industry leaders such
as Boeing, Chrysler, and FedEx/Kinko. ADL is the technology enabler of
JKDDC. Available courses anywhere and anytime to members of the Armed
Forces, interagency or international partners and to the general public
grew from zero available courses to over 157 course to include, for
example, Joint Antiterrorism Course, Global Command and Control System,
Interagency Coordination, Contractors on the Battlefield, Pre-
Deployment Cultural Awareness--Afghanistan, and Combating Trafficking
in Persons.
We owe a debt of gratitude to Congress for enacting legislation
providing authority for the DOD to distribute to certain foreign
military personnel education and training materials and information
technology to enhance military interoperability with our allies and
partners. I ask that Congress support the administration's proposed
Building Global Partnerships Act. I ask that Congress extend to
permanent authority section 1207 of the NDAA for Fiscal Year 2007.
Another achievement is the designation of training as a Selective
Key Performance Parameter in Defense systems acquisitions there by
strengthening the process of training our service men and women in the
proper employment of new equipment in task performance, and educating
commanders in the proper doctrinal application of the equipment in
operations and combat.
Range Sustainment--Training
Over the last 10 years our existing training infrastructure, bases
and ranges, have come under increasing pressure. Continued and assured
access to high-quality test and training ranges and operating areas
plays a critically important role in sustaining force readiness.
However, the Department finds itself in growing competition with a
broad range of interests for a diminishing supply of land, air and sea
space and frequency spectrum that we use to test and train effectively.
Exacerbating the encroachment challenge, the demands of the military
mission are also very dynamic. The increased complexity and integration
of training opportunities necessary to satisfy joint mission
requirements, combined with the increasing testing and training
battlespace needs of new weapons systems, evolving tactics and end-
strength growth associated with force transformation, point to a
military need for more, rather than less, range and operating area
space. The confluence of these competing trends demonstrates a
continuing challenge to preserving test and training flexibility and
military readiness. Successful range sustainment clearly requires a
comprehensive and continuing response.
Since 2001, the Department's Range Sustainment Integrated Product
Team has actively worked to mitigate encroachment impacts on readiness
and coordinated OSD and Service efforts to ensure the long-term
sustainability of military readiness and the resources entrusted to our
care. Congressional action on selected DOD legislative clarifications,
in conjunction with DOD policy and comprehensive planning initiatives,
have provided increased mission flexibility, and at the same time have
enabled improved environment management on DOD lands. The Department is
increasing working beyond our fence lines to engage with local, State,
regional, and national stakeholders to address shared interests and
build effective partnerships both enhancing the environment and
advancing range sustainment and the military mission.
civilian personnel policies
Human Capital Planning
The Department civilian strategic human capital planning focuses
human capital investments on long-term issues. Guiding principles are
continually reviewed and refreshed in the Department's Human Capital
Strategic Plan (HCSP). Our 2006-2011 HCSP recognizes the need to
refocus civilian force capabilities for the future--a civilian
workforce with the attributes and capabilities to perform seamlessly in
an environment of uncertainty and surprise, execute with a wartime
sense of urgency, create tailored solutions to multiple complex
challenges, build partnerships, shape choices, and plan rapidly.
Our HCSP is based upon the 2006 QDR and the 2006 NDAA, and calls
for an updated, integrated human capital strategy for the development
of talent that is more consistent with 21st century demands. The QDR
and the Secretary's leadership and transformation requirements called
for a human capital strategy that is competency-focused, performance
based, and links compensation and rewards to individual employee
performance. Our human capital strategy aims to ensure DOD has the
right people, doing the right jobs, at the right time and place, and at
the best value. The HCSP is delineated by a DOD enterprise-wide set of
human resources goals and objectives that focus on leadership and
knowledge management, workforce capabilities, and a mission-focused,
results-oriented, high-performing, diverse workforce. These goals and
objectives incorporate a competency-based occupational system, a
performance-based management system, and enhanced opportunities for
personal and professional growth. The Department's Civilian Human
Capital Strategic Plan has four goals, which are helping to produce and
maintain a future civilian workforce that is decisive, agile, and
integrated with the total force and is capable of supporting the
warfighter in carrying out DOD's mission.
The Department's approach to workforce planning, a continuous
process that ensures the right number of people in the right jobs at
the right time, has become more deliberate and systematic with the
publication of QDR 2006. I want to be clear on this point--the
Department conducts workforce planning on both the military side and
civilian side. However, on the civilian side, workforce planning has
been done by each individual component. The Department developed a new
model for workforce planning that will provide both DOD-level workforce
planning and component level workforce planning based upon the
requirements of QDR 2006.
Now, I would provide some specifics about our new workforce
planning efforts. QDR 2006 set the mission direction for reshaping the
Defense enterprise for the 21st century, and required the new human
capital strategy to be ``competency-focused'' and ``performance-
based.'' \1\ This section of my statement will discuss the Department's
efforts to reorient its workforce planning to a ``competency-focused''
approach. Later sections will describe the Department's ``performance-
based'' workforce planning approach.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Quadrennial Defense Review Report, ``Developing a 21st Century
Total Force,'' 2006, page 80.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Recognizing that each DOD component has a discrete mission with
unique occupational series and occupational emphasis, the Department's
strategy provides an overarching framework for the components to plan,
identify and assess workforce requirements and to integrate their own
workforce requirements. The strategy also provides for a set of core or
common workforce planning requirements which will provide new
foundational competencies for the civilian workforce, such as knowledge
of joint matters, and enhance any component mission. It is the
combination of DOD and component workforce planning that will provide
the Department with important information about its talent needs in the
21st century.
The workforce planning strategy consists of the following elements
which cascade from the Department-level to the component level:
Phase 1: Setting the Direction: Uses the QDR 2006, the CHSP,
and other component goals and objectives to identify the
mission requirements for the next 5 years and beyond.
Phase 2: Identifying the core competencies for DOD Mission
Critical Occupations. Uses surveys, focus groups, research,
etc., to validate the essential workforce knowledge, skills,
abilities, and behaviors required in the updated mission
critical occupations.
Phase 3: Assessing the workforce talent against the Core DOD
Mission Critical Competencies. Uses a gap analysis process to
compare the current and desired state of workforce talent
Phase 4: Implement the Strategy across the employment
lifecycle. Uses enterprise tools to bring the workforce plan to
life and defines the measures/milestones to deliver the
information, trains and equips the workforces, recruits and
retains a workforce.
Phase 5: Monitor, Evaluate, and Adjust. Uses performance
measurement for ongoing evaluation and adjustments.
We are also working diligently to create and institutionalize a
comprehensive competency management framework that can be used across
the enterprise. To that end, we have established a multi-faceted
component work group to develop common competency taxonomies, job
analysis methodologies, workforce planning strategies and tools,
competency gap assessment methodologies and common reporting
requirements. Our goal is to have a number of these deliverables
completed by the end of fiscal year 2008, with the remaining completed
during fiscal year 2009.
While this strategic work of building an enterprise-wide competency
approach evolves, the Department, and its components and Defense
Agencies are addressing immediate competency requirements for those
occupations which will be the key to meeting future mission
requirements. Thus far, enterprise-wide competency/skill gap
assessments have been conducted on the following occupations: human
resources; information technology; civil engineers; pharmacists;
logistics; and contracts. Additionally, the Department of the Army has
completed a full competency gap assessment for 75 of its occupations,
starting with its mission critical occupations, and plans on the
completion of a full competency gap assessment for 157 of its
occupations by the end of fiscal year 2008.
The Department of the Navy (DON) is approaching its competency gap
assessment initiative from a total force perspective. Under the
leadership of the Assistant Secretary of the Navy (Manpower & Reserve
Affairs), the DON is embarking on an aggressive, comprehensive approach
that will identify key competencies for critical positions, along with
career roadmaps for competency development for those competencies for
which gaps have been identified. The Air Force is also conducting
competency gap analyses for both those competencies which are
institutional, i.e., behavioral competencies that should be present
across the enterprise, and those that are technical or functional for
their mission critical occupations. Similarly, the Defense Agencies are
also conducting competency gap analyses for their mission critical
occupations, as is evidenced by the efforts of the DFAS, the Defense
Information Systems Agency, and the Defense Logistics Agency.
With the development of an enterprise approach to competency
management underway and the conduct of competency assessments ongoing,
the Department is now embarking on how best to forecast its future
workforce needs. We have formed a work group of component subject
matter experts to develop a Department approach to workload/workforce
projections and succession planning, and to gather information on those
workload projections initiatives already underway to leverage best
practices. We will also discuss with the VA and the Social Security
Administration the methodologies they are using to determine their
applicability to the Department's needs.
Many efforts are underway within the Department to ensure we have a
healthy pipeline in place. We are using a variety of recruitment and
compensation programs to meet our talent needs and develop the skills
needed for the future. These include intern and career development
programs, student employment programs, recruitment at job fairs with
diverse candidates, and establishing liaisons with professional
organizations to leverage their candidate pools. There are also
numerous fellowship and scholarship programs in operation throughout
the Department, providing us a pipeline for those positions deemed
critical. Two such examples are the NSEP, through which the Department
grants scholarships in the study of language and cultures in return for
service, which are especially important to the Department as it
conducts its Stability/Reconstruction efforts throughout the world; and
the Science, Mathematics, and Research for Transformation Program,
through which the Department assists students with tuition in the
Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics arena in return for
service, ensuring we keep our edge in these most vital of career
fields.
Pipeline/succession planning efforts also include a wide array of
education and training, and professional development programs, such as
the: Army Fellows Program, Training-With-Industry, Army Comptrollership
Program, Graduate Cost Analysis Program, DOD Professional Enhancement
Program, Logistics and Acquisition Management Program, Logistics
Executive Development Program and the DOD Professional Enhancement
Program. This is not an all inclusive list but provides a flavor of the
type of education and training the Department provides to ensure it has
the current and future talent it needs.
The Department is also exploring new recruitment methodologies,
such as ``Boutique Recruiting,'' which was successfully used to recruit
and hire large numbers of positions in the medical arena, to include
pharmacists, one our mission-critical occupations. This is in addition
to the more standard recruitment sources, such as Federal Career
Interns and veterans.
We are also looking at the Department's compensation systems to
ensure all needed compensation strategies are available to our managers
to recruit and retain the talent needed. We are in process of
developing a new ``Hybrid'' compensation plan for our doctors and
dentists that will leverage the best of Title 5 and Title 38 hiring
flexibilities. By so doing, we will be able to remain competitive in
reaching and keeping those critical medical skills. We also recently
obtained approval from the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) to
offer retention incentives for moves within the Federal Government for
mission critical personnel at BRAC bases. This new compensation
flexibility will enable us to retain needed skills as we deploy the
current BRAC recommendations. These compensation flexibilities are in
addition to those currently in use, such as student loan repayment,
special salary rates; recruitment, retention and relocation incentives,
and the flexibilities offered by the NSPS compensation system.
As evidenced in the last several years, DOD civilian employees
continue to support the global war on terrorism at home and on the
front-lines to help build democracies in Afghanistan and Iraq. Just as
agile military forces are needed to meet a mission characterized by
irregular, catastrophic and disruptive challenges, the Department needs
agile and decisive support from our DOD civilians. It is only through
the integration of DOD civilian employees that we can realize the
potential of a Total Force. The Department's civilian employees are a
critical component as DOD works with the various other Federal
agencies, including the Department of State to place expanded
Provincial Reconstruction Teams in Iraq and staff the new formed Africa
Command.
At the same time, it is important to ensure that benefits remain
balanced and commensurate with the commitments we are requesting of our
DOD civilians. In that lane, I want to thank Congress for reauthorizing
the authority to waive the annual limitation on total compensation paid
to Federal employees working overseas under the auspice of the CENTCOM
and for enacting the a death gratuity of $100K for those brave Federal
civilians who die of injuries incurred in connection with their service
in support of a military contingency operation
Additionally, the NSPS improves the way the Department compensates
and rewards its civilian employees covered by NSPS and provides a
performance management system that aligns performance objectives with
DOD's mission and strategic goals. To date, the Department has
converted 135,000 employees under NSPS with another 75,000 slated for
conversion in fiscal year 2008. .
Acquiring, Developing, and Retaining Civilians
The Department's civilian workforce supports DOD's national
security and military missions. Technological advances, contract
oversight, and complex missions have generated the need for more
employees with advanced education and more sophisticated technical
skills. Additionally, there must be a very active campaign to recruit,
train, and develop a diverse workforce. We take seriously the
responsibility to foster and promote an environment that is attractive
to individuals from all segments of society.
The Department is committed to providing disabled veterans who want
to serve our country as DOD or Federal civil servant the opportunity to
do so. The Hiring Heroes campaign demonstrates this commitment. The
Hiring Heroes job fairs concept is a collaborative initiative to inform
and educate our wounded servicemembers on the various employment
opportunities available to them within the Department and private
sector after they complete their military Service. Generally lasting 2
days, the job fairs offer servicemembers an opportunity to attend
technical workshops covering a variety of topics such as resume
writing, job interview skills, dressing for success, and learning about
social security and veterans' benefits. Additionally, the job fairs
also provide a unique opportunity for wounded servicemembers to meet
with potential employers, veterans' organizations and government
agencies. Over 50 organizations usually attend the job fairs.
Through the Hiring Heroes campaign, we offer wounded servicemembers
the opportunity to find new careers, as DOD civilian employees, in over
700 diverse, challenging, and rewarding occupations. Since 2005, the
Department has hosted 13 Hiring Heroes career fairs at various major
medical facilities including Walter Reed, Madigan Army Medical Center,
Balboa Naval Hospital and Brooke Army Medical Center. Five more Hiring
Heroes are scheduled between March and September 2008. Additionally, we
maintain the Defense website specifically designed for our disabled
veterans--www.DODVETS.com. This web portal serves as a resource of
employment information for veterans, their spouses, and managers.
Through our efforts, many servicemembers have been offered positions at
various DOD and Federal agencies, but more important, they have been
exposed to a network of both DOD and Federal recruiters dedicated to
helping them transition back to productive employment where and when
they are ready. We continue work with other Federal agencies, including
the VA and the Department of Labor, to provide job training,
counseling, and reemployment services to seriously injured or wounded
veterans.
We have dedicated an office within the Department to help us
transform the way we attract and hire talented civilian employees.
Under its lead, we have developed a comprehensive outreach program with
colleges, universities and professional and heritage associations,
reenergized our branding and marketing materials, and revamped our
website to align with the interests of those whom we are trying to
attract. Our nationwide recruitment campaign takes us to college and
university campuses where we personally invite talented individuals to
serve the Department. Since the fourth quarter of fiscal year 2007
through the end of February 2008, our DOD recruiters made 50
recruitment visits. An additional 25 visits are planned through fiscal
year 2008, budget permitting. In one of these visits alone, the
Department made 60 job offers to engineering students, primarily of
Hispanic origin. Efforts such as these help ensure the Department has
the diverse, talented workforce it needs to meet the challenges of the
21st century.
The Department launched another innovative program in fiscal year
2007, known as the DOD Student Training Academic Recruitment program.
Under this program, DOD has hired four honors-level student who are
responsible for developing and executing a marketing plan, through
which students with academic studies match DOD mission critical skills
are made aware of and are encouraged to consider employment with the
Department. We continue to leverage technology including, importantly,
the Internet, to educate and interest talent from a variety of sources.
Our website showcases vignettes of current Department employees who
discuss their work and the satisfaction they realize from it, as well
as the benefits of working for the Department. We believe these
testimonials will further our efforts to have the Department viewed as
an ``Employer of Choice''. In addition, we routinely sponsor live web
chats with DOD career functional managers who can answer questions from
potential employees about working for DOD as well as provide them with
the tools they need to successfully apply for DOD jobs.
Our outreach is not only to those young men and women who are about
to graduate from college. In recognition of the OPM's Career Patterns
initiative, in which recruitment strategies are developed to target
candidate sources in entry, mid and senior points of their careers, we
are collaborating with the Partnership for Public Service (PPS) in a
pilot program to reach retirees from the corporate world who are
looking for challenging work and the opportunity to share their
knowledge and talent, while serving the public good. PPS has
established the initial pilot with retirees from IBM. Within the DOD,
we will be working with PPS and IBM to identify possible placement
opportunities in the acquisition community. Although the pilot is in
its infancy stage, we are hopeful it may produce yet another source of
diversified, qualified talent to fill some of the most critical
positions in the Department.
The ``Career Patterns'' initiative also suggests that the use of
different work life dimensions will enhance the success of recruitment
efforts. To that end, the Department continues its analysis of our
workforce to identify the recruitment strategies that will engender the
talent we need for the 21st century.
We have paid special attention this year on improving recruitment
and retention strategies for our health care practitioners, especially
those caring for our wounded warriors. I'd like to thank you for
providing us additional direct hire authority for both our medical and
mental health care practitioners. Through this authority, we will be
able to compete more readily with our private sector counterparts and
more expeditiously hire the critical care givers we so urgently need.
Coupled with this direct hiring authority, we have developed some
innovative, enterprise-wide recruitment approaches, gleaned from
literature research and industry best practices, to further enable us
to recruit the numbers and quality of candidates we need. We have also
structured some new salary schedules to enable us to remain competitive
in some of our more critical occupational needs, such as nurses and
professors at our Health University. Although medical recruitment is a
challenge across the Nation, both in the public and private sector, you
can be assured we are using a variety of innovative recruitment and
compensation approaches to meet this challenge as aggressively as
possible. Our wounded warriors deserve no less.
As the Chair of the Federal Chief Human Capital Officer's
Subcommittee for Hiring and Succession Planning, I personally work with
a number of other Federal agencies and the OPM to streamline and
improve the Federal hiring process. The subcommittee has made a number
of recommendations, the benefits of which we hope to see over the next
several years. Additionally, over the next coming months, my
Subcommittee will be working closely with OPM on a new project
entitled, ``Improve the Federal Hiring Experience,'' which will explore
new recruitment methodologies, and strategies for improving end-to-end
recruitment cycle time and candidate quality.
While recruiting and supporting the civilian workforce which we
need to meet our mission demands, we are also cognizant of our need to
support our military families. At the direction of the President in his
State of the Union Address, we are pursuing strategies to support the
spouses of our active duty military. We are exploring three approaches
to meeting the President's request. When taken together, these three
approaches will address the hiring, training and career portability
requirements that are the key to keeping spouses employed as they
accompany their military husbands/wives to their different posts of
duty.
The first approach is a non-competitive appointing authority for
military spouses, which would allow an agency in the executive branch
to noncompetitively appoint to the competitive service a spouse of an
active duty military member. Such an authority would facilitate the
hiring of spouses into Federal positions and would provide a vehicle
for spouses to access Federal employment upon completion of training
under the Career Advancement Account Program, which together with the
Department of Labor, we began piloting in January 2008. The Department
is working jointly with OPM in developing legislation that we hope to
submit to you very shortly for your consideration. In recognition of
the benefits such an appointing authority would engender, I hope it
will receive your favorable attention and action.
The second initiative would assist spouses in obtaining Federal
positions that provide training for advancement into journey positions,
i.e., a military spouse Federal intern program. Under this program, the
DOD would fund the salary and benefits of a set number of military
spouses as they participate in the career intern programs of other
Federal agencies. The spouse would be permanently employed at the host
Federal agency, but first year costs would be borne by DOD. We believe
such a program will encourage other Federal Agencies to hire military
spouses into their intern programs, thereby giving the military spouse
the ability to again experience and training in a portable career
field.
The third initiative being explored is the expansion of the current
DOD Military Spouse Preference Program throughout the Federal
Government. This program facilitates spouses being able to maintain
their careers as they accompany their sponsors to new posts of duty, by
affording them preference for vacant positions for which they are
considered well qualified. The third initiative being explored is the
expansion of the current DOD Military Spouse Preference Program
throughout the Federal Government. This current program facilitates
spouses being able to maintain their careers as they accompany their
sponsors to new posts of duty, by affording them preference for vacant
positions for which they are considered well qualified.
World Class Leaders
Our HCSP ensures the continuity of world class, civilian leaders
who are fully capable of leading DOD's efforts within a larger national
security context. To meet this goal, the Department launched an
initiative aimed at the deliberate identification, development,
management, and sustainment of senior executive leadership for the
Department's 21st century requirements. This effort will expand the
current, enduring executive leadership competencies to include
knowledge of joint matters and building an enterprise-wide perspective
acquired through a portfolio of diverse experiences. The definition of
``joint matters'' expands beyond that prescribed in Goldwater-Nicholas
Act to recognize the realities of today's multinational and interagency
operating environment. Further, cultural awareness and regional
expertise are part of the required core competencies. In the conflicts
and wars faced by the Department, cultural awareness, language and
regional expertise become key skills needed by every leader.
To build a qualified and talented pipeline to sustain leadership
continuity, the HCSP provides for the identification and closing of
leadership competency gaps and strengthening of the talent pipeline to
ensure continuity of diverse and capable leaders. To ensure the
deliberate development of our current and future leaders, we are
instituting a new joint civilian leader development system that will
have at its core a future-focused framework of competencies based on
the OPM Executive Core Qualifications, but strengthened with the DOD-
unique requirements that will enable the Department to accomplish its
national security mission in today's complex environment and beyond.
Our DOD joint civilian leader development framework is designed to
produce world-class leaders with an enterprise-wide perspective for
leadership positions across the continuum from entry to executive
level. It will be implemented across the Department later this year,
upon completion of our ongoing work to formally validate the Defense-
unique competencies, define proficiency benchmarks, and identify
targeted proficiency levels needed for successful performance at
successive leadership levels. This year, we will also complete the
initial assessment of the proficiency of our current leadership cadre
against the new competency framework. This baseline analysis will
identify any systemic competency gaps, and guide future leader
development initiatives as needed to close those gaps.
Building upon existing programs, the framework ultimately will
include a series of DOD-sponsored courses, programs and other learning
opportunities, designed to meet the specific competency requirements of
the civilian Defense leader. These opportunities will serve as
retention incentives for high performing DOD employees and will also
support DOD initiatives to increase diversity in the senior ranks.
Two highly competitive DOD-wide leader development programs are key
building blocks of the new leader development framework. The Executive
Leadership Development Program (ELDP) and the Defense Leadership and
Management Program (DLAMP) have been thoroughly reviewed for alignment
to the competency framework. ELDP, with over 20 years of success, will
remain as the premier program for high potential mid-level leaders.
ELDP provides participants with an extensive exposure to the roles and
missions of the entire Department and an increased understanding and
appreciation of today's warfighter. The curriculum features immersion
weeks of hands-on experiential training with each of the military
Services, an overseas command, a unified command, and the National
Guard; and topical seminars.
Our review of DLAMP against the framework resulted in the decision
to significantly restructure and rename the premier program for high
potential senior civilian leaders. Accordingly, the new Defense Senior
Leader Development Program (DSLDP) will be fully developed this year
and will admit its first class in early fiscal year 2009. Complementing
component leader development efforts, DSLDP will focus on strengthening
individuals' enterprise-wide perspective, through a robust program of
professional military education, targeted developmental assignments,
and Defense-focused leadership seminars, designed to ensure application
of critical leader competencies in the joint environment. The
transition DSLDP will be complete by the end of fiscal year 2010.
Workforce analysis and modeling tools will further ensure the
Department's leadership succession plan and strategy is sound, future-
focused, and adaptive to mission requirements. We are confident that
ensuring alignment of our programs with the DOD-wide competency model
and best practices in private and public sector leader development will
further position us for strong civilian leadership in the decades
ahead.
Senior Executive Service Pay for Performance
The NDAA for Fiscal Year 2004 established a new performance-based
pay system for members of the Senior Executive Service (SES). OPM
approved the design of DOD's performance management system on April 1,
2005 and on October 9, 2007, fully certified the system for calendar
years 2007 and 2008. This relatively new performance system is a
critical tool in building a results-oriented performance culture within
the Department.
The system expects excellence in senior executive performance,
links individual performance with the DOD's strategic goals and
priorities, sets and communicates individual and organizational goals
and expectations, systematically appraises executives using measures
that balance organizational results with customer, employee, and other
perspectives, and uses the performance results as a basis for pay and
performance rewards.
DOD strengthened performance management training to help build a
performance management culture--one with rigorous performance
requirements, greater accountability, and deliberate focus on results.
The training has focused on the five stages of the Federal performance
evaluation process, planning, monitoring, developing, appraising, and
rewarding.
The Department also strengthened the alignment of individual
performance plans to DOD-wide goals. For the second year, the Secretary
of Defense issued DOD's top organizational priorities for the
performance year. These priorities then are embedded in each
component's strategic plans and translated to specific, measurable, and
results-oriented performance requirements for executives. Annually, the
Department issues an organizational assessment, which supplements that
which may be issued by individual components, to help inform executive
rating decisions.
The Department performed its first longitudinal study of the
performance management system upon completion of the 2006-2007
performance cycles to determine the impact of the performance
management system on building a high performing, results-oriented
performance culture in DOD over time. Additionally, the Department
implemented a common ``Tier Structure'' for its SES members. The tier
structure establishes common pay ranges and associated business rules
to support transparency and comparability in executive position and
compensation management.
International Workforce Programs
The Department recently reviewed the foreign national (FN) human
resources program, which covers over 70,000 workers in some 22
countries to ensure alignment with the Department's 21st century
requirements. The Department employs the FN workforce under various
laws, treaties, and international agreements, host nation labor
policies and labor union contracts. The current FN human resources
policies have evolved over many decades. It has been over 20 years
since there was a comprehensive review of the FN human resources
program. To launch the review, the Department hosted a worldwide
conference of U.S. and FN human resources personnel. They offered
enlightened thinking and a set of recommendations to help refine the
current FN human resources program. The Department is considering these
recommendations.
The Department continues to be engaged in establishing Status of
Forces Agreements (SOFAs) with new NATO partners, such as Romania,
Poland, Bulgaria, and the Czech Republic. As part of these SOFAs, the
Department has developed a new framework for FN employment which will
ensure a ready, capable, and agile FN workforce.
Pipeline Reemployment Program
The Pipeline Reemployment program enables partially recovered
employees with job related injuries and illnesses to return to work.
The program supports the President's Safety, Health, and Return-to-
Employment initiatives by assisting each Department installation in
reducing lost days resulting from injuries. DOD organizations will have
resources and funding to reemploy partially recovered injured employees
for up to 1 year. Returning injured employees to suitable productive
duty, as soon as they are able, improves that employee's sense of value
to the organization while minimizing the cost of workers' compensation
disability payments. To date, the Pipeline program has returned 500
employees to productive positions; 91 employees refused valid job
offers and were removed from compensation rolls. This saves the
Department approximately $427.5 million in lifetime cost charges.
In addition to bringing employees back to work, we are striving to
improve injury compensation program management across the Department.
We have embarked on a program to renew the skills of our field
personnel through the development of a comprehensive e-learning
curriculum, which provides program managers a thorough knowledge base
from which to manage their programs. Additionally, we are collecting
the best practices of our field personnel, especially in regard to case
management with the Department of Labor, and will be instituting those
practices across the enterprise. By so doing, we hope to further reduce
costs that the Department may be accruing.
Civilian Force Shaping
A number of initiatives influence the size and shape of the
Department's civilian workforce. The most significant are upcoming BRAC
actions, global repositioning of deployed military and civilians,
competitive sourcing, and military-to-civilian conversions. The DOD is
committed to providing comprehensive transition tools and programs to
assist our valued employees and their families as these force shaping
initiatives are implemented.
Since the first BRAC round in 1988, the Department has reduced the
civilian workforce by more than 400,000, with less than 10 percent of
that number involuntarily separated. To mitigate the impact of these
force shaping initiatives on our civilians, the Department has
aggressively sought and obtained authority for several essential
transition tools assuring that drawdowns or reorganizations are handled
in the most efficient and humane manner possible, while ensuring we
have the talent needed to effectively continue Department operations.
Employees adversely affected by BRAC may be offered the opportunity to
separate voluntarily under the Voluntary Early Retirement Authority or
the Voluntary Separation Incentive Payment program, or both.
Involuntarily separated employees are also eligible for a number of
post-separation benefits and entitlements, including: temporary
continuation of health insurance for 18 months with the Department
paying the employer portion of the premium, severance pay with a lump-
sum payment option, and, unemployment compensation.
The Department will implement legislative changes, as directed by
section 1109 of the NDAA for Fiscal Year 2008 to assist employees
affected by these actions in transitioning to other positions, careers,
or to private employment. We are continuing to establish and foster
employment partnerships with Federal agencies, State, county, and local
governments, trade and professional organizations, local Chambers of
Commerce, and private industry. For example, DOD is partnering with the
Department of Labor to provide BRAC installations outplacement
assistance under their Workforce Investment System (WIS). The WIS
consists of over 3,000 State One-Stop Career Centers prepared to offer
assistance such as retraining, career counseling, testing, and job
placement assistance.
Emergency Planning
We have taken great strides to ensure we have plans in place to
continue our operations and safeguard our employees in times of crisis.
Significant planning has gone into Pandemic Influenza preparedness. We
have developed a human resources practitioner guide for use by managers
and human resource practitioners in planning for, and executing actions
during emergencies, which include nuclear, chemical and biological
attacks, and natural disasters, as well as a resource practitioner
guide for use during a pandemic crisis. We have supported this guide
with exercise criteria to assess our plans and refine them as needed.
We conducted a 3-day Pandemic Influenza exercise within the OSD
Personnel and Readiness organization. The purpose of the exercise was
to assess our ability to carry on essential work, in light of an
assumed 40 percent pandemic absenteeism rate, and our ability to
``socially distance'' while in the Pentagon, a key strategy for
pandemic influenza avoidance. The exercise was extremely valuable in
assessing our preparedness and indicating those areas on which
additional preparations may be needed. The lessons learned from our
exercise have been shared throughout the Department, as well as with
our Federal Agency colleagues. We continue to work on our information
technology preparedness to ensure essential work will be able to be
performed in case a pandemic influenza should occur.
conclusion
The health of our AVF is best measured by the opinions of its
members. Eighty percent of active duty members believe they are
personally prepared, and two-thirds believe their unit is prepared, for
their wartime jobs. These views have held steady from the start of OIF
(March 2003) through the latest survey (August 2007). Although
deployments can place a strain on servicemembers and their families,
two-thirds of members deployed since the start of OIF indicated that
access to the Internet and e-mail while away have greatly improved
their quality of life. In terms of compensation, more than two-thirds
of servicemembers reported being financially comfortable in April 2007,
and four-fifths indicated saving a portion of their household income.
In August 2007, more than two-thirds of servicemembers were satisfied
with their medical (69 percent) and dental (76 percent) benefits.
Overall, in August 2007, 56 percent of servicemembers indicated they
are likely to stay on active duty. Based on research using prior
surveys, 90 percent of servicemembers who indicate they are likely to
stay actually do stay. Therefore, we feel confident that almost three-
fifths of our current active duty force will stay in the military.
After declining retention improved between May 2003 and November
2004, Reserve retention intentions have stabilized and are currently at
69 percent. Reports of family support to stay in the National Guard/
Reserve have also stabilized. The June 2007 survey indicates that
approximately two-thirds of members say they have not been away longer
than expected; average nights away actually decreased from June 2006.
Results from this survey also show that roughly three-quarters of
reservists working for employers consider them to be supportive of
their military obligations. Where employment problems have occurred and
reservists have sought assistance, roughly two-thirds turned to ESGR.
Of those who contacted ESGR, 62 percent reported they were satisfied
with the manner in which their request for assistance was handled.
In the past year, we also fielded special surveys to spouses so we
could fully understand the impact of deployments on the family. Results
indicate that 61 percent of active duty spouses and 75 percent of
Reserve spouses support their husband or wife staying in the military.
These results are encouraging, as spouses' reports of their support are
even higher than members' assessments of spouse support. We plan to
continue fielding regular surveys of spouses to better understand the
issues facing today's military families.
We continue to have a dynamic, energetic, adaptable All-Volunteer
Total Force. With your help we are confident we can sustain that Total
Force. These volunteers have performed magnificently under the most
arduous and perilous of circumstances. They have not failed us; we must
not fail them.
Senator Ben Nelson. Thank you.
General Rochelle?
STATEMENT OF LTG MICHAEL D. ROCHELLE, USA, DEPUTY CHIEF OF
STAFF, G1, UNITED STATES ARMY
General Rochelle. Thank you, sir. Thank you for the
opportunity to appear before the subcommittee once again.
Chairman Nelson, Senator Graham, and distinguished members
of the subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to report on
the Army's personnel posture for 2008 and entering 2009. Thank
you for your continued support of America's Army.
Without question, our Nation's Army remains the best-
trained, best-equipped, best-led Army in the world; and, I
might add, quite resilient. As we enter the 7th year of
conflict, however, the third-longest period of armed conflict
in our Nation's history, there's little question that our Army
is, today, out of balance. Your Army soldiers and their
families are remarkable, having endured lengthy and repeated
deployments and hardships. Many have been injured, and many
have made the ultimate sacrifice.
In spite of the tremendous burdens they bear, they remain
resilient and committed to serving our Nation. Indeed, they are
our Nation's heroes, truly a national treasure. I look forward
to our dialogue today regarding how best to support and sustain
them. Thank you for this opportunity, once again.
Restoring balance and creating readiness is our top
priority after winning the global war on terror. Regaining our
boxer stance, if you will, the ability to shift our weight and
respond decisively, requires that we apply the Chief of the
Staff of the Army's four imperatives: sustain, prepare, reset,
and transform.
He is growing the Army to 547,000--point four--as soon as
possible, and we are on track to do that by the end of fiscal
year 2010. We are on target to meet this goal by 2010, as I
said, thanks largely to the support from this committee. Army
growth will help us return to shorter deployments, increased
time at home between deployments, and greater predictability
for soldiers and families in both the Active and Reserve
components. We must grow, to become a modular, expeditionary
force that is fully capable of supporting combatant commanders
in meeting the full spectrum of contingencies.
Our efforts to grow the Army are challenging. Only 3 in 10
of our 18- to 24-year-olds today are fully eligible for
enlistment. The remainder fall short in some element of
standards for health, education, or character. Our recruiting
mission is difficult, given the lowest propensity for military
service in two decades, declining support from those who
influence our youth, opportunities for post-secondary
education, and a competitive job market. In spite of what is
happening in the United States, we are on track to meet our
recruiting goal for fiscal year 2008.
I'm concerned about the Nation's ability to produce the
highest-possible caliber of military recruits, and, I might
add, the citizens that we will need to be competitive in the
21st and 22nd century. Declining high school graduation rates
and alarming rates of obesity among our young adult population
constitute a pending human capital crisis, a crisis that not
only has the potential to undermine military readiness, but
threatens our Nation's well-being, as a whole. I share your
concerns about quality, and am committed to recruiting a
quality force with the highest-possible educational attainment
and aptitude scores.
Our current analysis and our commanders in the field tell
us that soldiers assessed in fiscal years 2006 and 2007 are
performing exceptionally, and I would emphasize exceptionally.
Every one of these soldiers is qualified in his or her military
occupational specialty, and their demonstrated performance on
the battlefield speaks for itself.
I believe that a willingness to serve in the Army today, a
nation at war, at this place in time, portends a very unique
aspect of quality that accession metrics simply cannot measure:
the heart of a well-led, well-trained volunteer soldier.
While equipment and technology are certainly vital to
readiness and transformation, people are the Army. Retaining
soldiers starts at home. We must sustain soldiers and their
families, as you both have spoken to, with a quality of life
commensurate with the quality of the service they provide. This
is absolutely essential to both near-term and long-term
readiness.
With support from this committee and Congress, the Army has
made tremendous strides in this regard, from funding for
improved housing facilities and essential services, to
increased pay and benefits, and all are appreciated. Our
soldiers and their families recognize, and deeply appreciate,
actions taken by their military and civilian leadership,
especially Congress. These targeted improvements to policies,
programs, and services delivery mitigate risks exacerbated by a
prolonged conflict and the many stresses that conflict entails.
We ask for continued congressional support for these programs
that provide our soldiers and families with the quality of life
they so richly deserve.
In closing, I thank you for the opportunity to appear
before you today. I thank you for the continued support. I look
forward to taking your questions.
[The prepared statement of General Rochelle follows:]
Prepared Statement by LTG Michael D. Rochelle, USA
Chairman Nelson, distinguished members of this subcommittee, thank
you for the opportunity to talk today on behalf of America's Army. Our
Army is out of balance as we enter the 7th year of the Long War. Demand
for forces exceeds our capacity to supply them on a sustained basis. As
a result, our soldiers and their families in both the Active and
Reserve component have endured repeated, lengthy deployments and the
countless stressors that accompany the many sacrifices they have made.
In spite of this, and facing an uncertain future, they remain committed
to serve. We have no greater heroes than America's most precious
resource--our soldiers. These soldiers and their families, backed by
our civilian workforce, represent the very best of American values and
ideals. While we may be out of balance, we are not broken, a fact we
can attribute to the inspiring resilience and dedication of these
American heroes. The Army leadership is committed to their well-being,
consistent with their quality of service and many sacrifices.
The Army's number one priority is restoring balance to the All-
Volunteer Force, while supporting the National Security Strategy.
Restoring balance requires that we grow the Active Army by 65,000, to
547,400, by the end of fiscal year 2010. Restoring balance also
requires that we grow our Reserve component force, with the Army
National Guard and Army Reserve adding 8,200 and 1,000 soldiers,
respectively to their end strengths. We must do this if we are to
continue to effectively support current military operations, while
transforming the Army to meet the needs of the Combatant Commanders in
a dynamic and lethal security environment. We must reduce deployment
lengths from 15 months, increase time spent at home-station between
deployments, and provide predictability across all components, if we
are to relieve the considerable stress placed on our Army, our
soldiers, and our Army families.
Though facing national-level challenges, we remain committed to
sustaining [growing] the best-trained, best-led, best-equipped Army in
the world. While facing a number of manpower challenges, these factors
have not decreased the resolve, nor the quality, of the American Army.
The Army is also dedicated to caring for soldiers and families who
have borne the burden of battle. The Army must have timely resourcing
to ensure we are able to match the quality of life offered to soldiers
with the quality of the tremendous service they provide the Nation.
Through initiatives like the Army Soldier Family Action Plan, the Army
Wounded Warrior Program, improvements to the Physical Disability
Evaluation System, and providing soldiers with critical skills the
ability to transfer portions of their Montgomery GI Bill benefits to
dependents, the Army is working hard to care for soldiers and families.
We are indebted to Congress for your tremendous support and
leadership--they have been instrumental to the considerable progress
made on behalf of these American heroes. With your continued support,
we will further improve our programs and develop meaningful, effective
new programs for the benefit of the entire Army community.
grow the all-volunteer force
For the first time since the inception of the All-Volunteer Force,
America is recruiting and retaining its military during a period of
protracted combat. With the help of Congress and the support of the
American people, the Army has accomplished its recruitment and
retention milestones. However, growing the All-Volunteer Force will not
be without challenges.
Wartime recruiting is challenging. It is made even more challenging
by a declining eligible population. Fewer than 3 out of 10 of America's
youth are fully qualified to serve in our Nation's military due to
medical, conduct, or aptitude disqualifications. Many 17-24-year-old
men and women may want to join the Army, but are not actively recruited
because they have disqualifying physical conditions, have committed
crimes, or do not have a high school diploma.
For example, the rate of obesity among youth tripled since 1980.
Today, up to 19 percent of the Nation's 6-19-year-olds are overweight.
The Nation's high school graduation rate is only 70 percent. For
minorities, the graduation rate falls to 50 percent and, for youth
living at or below the poverty level, the rate drops to an alarming 30
percent.
These lower capacities among our Nation's 17-24-year-old population
are not only an Army recruitment issue--they are a national crisis.
Fixing these problems will require concerted, long-term national
commitment. We simply cannot afford for the American public to become
complacent.
To help meet these challenges, we developed a program called the
Assessment of Recruit Motivation and Strength test. This test allows
those who pass the physical test, but are a few percentage points over
Army accessions body-fat standards, to serve in the Army. To ensure
quality, participants must lose the weight within 1 year from the time
they ship to Basic Combat Training. For fiscal year 2006 and fiscal
year 2007 combined, over 2,500 recruits entered the Active Army under
this program, a significant boost to our recruiting efforts.
Another initiative is the Army's Prep School, which will provide
high quality youth the opportunity to complete their General
Educational Diploma (GED) prior to commencing Basic Combat Training.
Fort Jackson, SC, will be the location for the pilot program beginning
in third quarter, fiscal year 2008, with expansion dependent upon
analysis of the pilot's success and through-put capacity.
Concerns regarding graduation rates, rising rates of obesity, and
incidents of misconduct requiring administrative review
notwithstanding, young millennials, as they are referred to, continue
to answer the Nation's call.
Despite the toughest recruiting and retention environment ever
faced by the All-Volunteer Force, the Army's accomplishments in these
areas are noteworthy. Two key accomplishments are worth highlighting:
(1) the Army recruited more than 170,000 soldiers in fiscal year 2007,
and (2) the recruiting and retention success enabled America's Army to
grow its combined end strength by almost 49,000 soldiers. By making
prudent use of the incentive authorities granted by Congress, the
Active component and Army Reserve exceeded their respective recruiting
objectives of 80,000 and 26,500 in fiscal year 2007, while the Army
National Guard achieved 96.6 percent of its 65,115 soldier objective
before reducing recruiting effort to remain within mandated end
strength limits.
The propensity for America's youth to serve in our Nation's All-
Volunteer Force is at its lowest point since the Army began surveying
such metrics. Their willingness to do so depends on a demonstrated
commitment on our part to reward the sacrifices of those who willingly
accept this responsibility--one that so many others either cannot, or
choose not to, perform.
To ensure that military service remains an attractive career
option, the Army continues to shape its recruiting efforts through a
mix of innovation, incentives, and bonuses. We again thank Congress for
providing the necessary funding to support and sustain our recruitment
efforts.
The Army Advantage Fund is a pilot program launched on February 4,
2008, in Albany, Cleveland, Montgomery, San Antonio, and Seattle; it
has already produced 17 high quality enlistments. The prospects for
widening the pilot in the near future are excellent.
Just as crucial as recruitment is the retention of trained, highly
skilled soldiers in the Army, and bonuses have been a strong incentive
for soldiers to reenlist. The Army Retention Program adjusts to meet
the needs of the Army to ensure that the right soldiers with the right
skills reenlist to meet Army manpower requirements.
Army retention continues at very high levels, reflecting the
commitment of soldiers and the quality of Army leaders. Even while
engaged in persistent conflict, the Army surpassed its retention goals
each year since 2002. This continued success is directly attributed to
the talented men and women in the Army who provide ``boots on the
ground'' around the world. It is important to note that their success
would not be possible without great leadership, the backing of their
families, and the tremendous support provided by Congress. The Active
Army retained 69,777 soldiers in fiscal year 2007, finishing the year
at 112 percent of mission. The Army Reserve finished the year achieving
119 percent of mission and the Army National Guard finished at 100
percent of mission.
To achieve overall manpower levels in fiscal year 2008, the Active
Army must retain 65,000 soldiers, the Army Reserve must retain 14,946
soldiers, and the Army National Guard must retain 31,889 soldiers.
Current indicators show the Army on track to meet its retention mission
for fiscal year 2008. As of the end of January, the Active Army
achieved 118 percent of its year-to-date mission, the Army Reserve
achieved 103 percent of its year-to-date mission, and the Army National
Guard achieved 113 percent of its year-to-date mission. A robust bonus
program has been essential in enabling the Army to meet required
retention goals.
Careful and deliberate adjustments are made to bonus levels to
target retention of soldiers in critical skills and grades. Retention
of combat experienced veterans is imperative to future readiness. The
deployed reenlistment bonus targets soldiers assigned to units in Iraq,
Afghanistan, and Kuwait. Recently deployed units, or units currently
deployed to these areas of operations, have reenlistment rates ranging
between 110-120 percent of their annual goals. General Petraeus
presided over a single reenlistment ceremony for 600 troops who
reenlisted in Baghdad on Independence Day this past year. More than 100
Army Reserve soldiers gathered January 18, 2008, at the Al Faw palace
at Camp Victory, Iraq, to reenlist during a ceremony marking the 100th
anniversary of the Army Reserve. Currently, 50 percent of all
reenlistments occur in the deployed theater.
The Army implemented a pilot program in 2006 to allow reenlisting
soldiers with critical military skills to transfer their Montgomery GI
Bill benefits to their spouses. Based on the feedback received from
soldiers, we expanded the pilot in November 2007 to include transfer of
benefits to their children. Reaction from soldiers indicates that these
benefits contributed to their decision to reenlist. We are still in the
assessment phase of this pilot.
quality of the force
While the Army met recruiting quality marks mandated by law, we did
fall short of the Department of Defense goal to have 90 percent of our
new recruits enter with a high school diploma. The Army looks at
quality as more than DOD quality marks and, therefore, each soldier we
enlist with a waiver is thoroughly screened before being approved for
entry. We have seen increases in waivers over the past few years and
remain vigilant in our screening process. Our 2007 study of waivered
soldiers, as compared to non-waivered soldiers from 2003 to 2006,
showed that the waivered soldiers performed comparably. Feedback from
commanders in the field continues to support this analysis. We do not
envision the quality of the force or future readiness of the Army
suffering as our goal remains focused on DOD quality benchmarks.
army officer corps
The Army's greatest challenges in officer manning are the sudden
and rapid growth of officer requirements, the conversion to new modular
formations, and the transition in Reserve component employment from a
strategic to operational Reserve. The Army will grow over 9,000 new
officer billets from fiscal year 2007 to fiscal year 2010 in the Active
component alone, with over 6,000 of those at the grades of Captain and
Major. Combined with the longstanding Reserve component shortages, our
officer production capability remains challenged. It will take several
years for the Army to balance competing requirements and fully fill its
officer corps. We are launching a strategic review of commissioned
officer requirements, production sources, policy and legislation to set
the conditions for future success, as recommended by the recent
Government Accounting Office report.
Officer retention is a critical component of ensuring our officer
corps is adequately manned to meet these increasing requirements. While
fiscal year 2007 officer attrition in the Active component was lower
than the historical average, we must reduce attrition even further to
meet increased officer requirements by fiscal year 2011. To address
these challenges, the Army implemented a number of measures to maximize
growth in the officer corps. Accessions have increased from all
traditional commissioning sources. Additionally, with cooperation from
our sister Services, we have added highly qualified officers from the
Air Force, Navy, and our Army Reserve components. Those efforts have
produced almost 1,500 additional commissioned officers for the Active
Army.
The Army also instituted an unprecedented Army Captain's Critical
Skills Retention Bonus Retention Menu of Incentives Program. This
program has guaranteed retention of more than 12,689 captains thru
fiscal year 2010, nearly 90 percent of our goal of 14,184 captains
retained from the eligible captain year groups. After review of the
initial phase of this program, the Army plans to initiate a second
phase of the Incentive Program beginning in the second quarter of
fiscal year 2008 that will add additional captain year groups. The
Office of the Secretary of Defense recently approved a similar program
for a range of Reserve component captain specialties that should
substantially increase officer retention in critical specialties
required in the Reserve component.
The Army increased officer accession missions for fiscal year 2008
and beyond to meet requirements for captains and majors by fiscal year
2011. The United States Military Academy (USMA), Reserve Officers'
Training Corps (ROTC), and Officer Candidate School (OCS) will increase
production, with heavy short-term emphasis on OCS due to its short
lead-time. A pre-commissioning incentives program targets high-
performing USMA and ROTC cadets to select their branch, posting, or
graduate education, upfront, in exchange for an additional 3-year
service obligation. This program ensures improved retention at critical
career decision points in fiscal year 2010 and beyond and, since its
inception in 2006, has guaranteed the retention of nearly 3,000
additional officers from year groups 2006 and 2007. We anticipate an
additional 1,500 officers in year group 2008 will participate in this
program.
incentives and enlistment bonuses
Incentives and bonuses are effective tools to open the door to the
possibility of military service, but going through the door requires
the vision of serving a greater good. During his recent appearance
before the Senate Armed Services Subcommittee on Personnel, Major
General Bostick, the Commanding General of the United States Army
Recruiting Command, said, ``No amount of money would be enough to
convince them [America's soldiers] to continue to serve if they did not
believe in what they were doing.'' Once men and women become soldiers,
they realize the significance of what they volunteered to do for their
country, their families, and themselves. The incentives and bonuses
serve, in a small way, to reinforce their choice and the Army, our
soldiers and their families are indebted to Congress for your
invaluable, continued support in this crucial area.
army civilian workforce
Only through the integrated efforts of Army civilians and soldiers
can the Army accomplish its assigned missions and make the most
effective use of resources. The Army civilian workforce offers vital
support to our soldiers and families in this era of persistent
conflict. Short of actual combat, Army civilians share full
responsibility for mission accomplishment by delivering combat support
and combat service support--at home, abroad, and on the battlefield.
More than ever, Army civilians are an absolutely invaluable component
of readiness.
Currently, the Army's Civilian Corps is over 265,000 strong, over
3,500 of whom are serving in harm's way in the U.S. Central Command
Area of Operations.
Army civilians also serve the Nation in myriad non-combat Army
missions such as maintaining waterways and flood control, domestic
emergency response, and scientific research. They work in over 550
different occupations, with the highest concentrations in logistics,
research and development, and base operations functions.
army diversity
Diversity in America's Army assures that the Army remains relevant
to the Nation and the demographically evolving American society it
serves. Diversity of culture, language, gender, race, and ethnicity, as
well as diversity of thought, contribute materially to the Army's
unmatched warfighting effectiveness. Further, a richly diverse force
serves as a strategic hedge against uncertainty in an increasingly
unpredictable global security environment. The Army established the
Army Diversity Task Force in November 2007, which is led by a general
officer. Reporting directly to the Secretary and the Chief of Staff,
the Task Force will conduct a holistic review and assessment of
diversity programs and progress for military and civilian components of
the Army, as well as the adequacy of the resources currently available
to achieve the Army's diversity vision. An inclusive environment will
underpin efforts to build and sustain the workforce needed for the 21st
century environment.
caring for soldiers and families
The well-being of our soldiers, civilians, and their families
centers on life domains such as standard of living, health, career,
community life, and personal and family life. A strong sense of well-
being across these life domains enables our soldiers, civilians, and
their families to focus on performing and supporting the Army's mission
while improving a quality work-life balance. Identifying those life
domain areas that are out of balance serves as a platform from which to
base policy and strategy decisions in order to restore balance and
sustain the All-Volunteer Force.
We, as an institution, are deeply committed to providing for the
well-being of the force. These life domains define the Army's ability
to influence institutional outcomes of recruiting, retention, readiness
and morale. We are leading the effort in building a comprehensive
system of subjective and objective metrics and analytics to monitor
potential stress and health of the force indicators that affect
soldiers and Army families. This process will serve as a key element of
the Well-Being Index that will assist the Army in its efforts to
restore balance of the force.
Our objective is to provide leaders a greater depth of
understanding upon which to base policy and strategy decisions; develop
a clearly defined multi-component Human Capital Strategy; strengthen
the Army's ability to recruit and retain the right human capital; and
reinforce the commitment of our soldiers to serve in the All-Volunteer
Army.
The Army is committed to continual combat readiness, but certain
stressors can inhibit the personnel readiness of the Army. The Army
continuously monitors data that provides indicators of the Well-Being
of soldiers, families, and civilians. Data shows that soldiers and
families are feeling strained by this era of persistent conflict. The
Army is committed to providing an environment that mitigates the
effects of the stress they experience. We will ensure that soldier and
family programs meet the needs of our people.
The Army remains committed to eliminating incidents of sexual
assault from our ranks. Sexual assault is contrary to Army Values and
degrades our readiness--it has no place in our Army. We continue to
lead the effort to refine and improve a comprehensive sexual assault
prevention and response program. This program serves as a key element
of each Army leader's responsibility to create a climate that minimizes
sexual assault, encourages victims to come forward, and takes
appropriate action against offenders.
While a number of trends remain steady or show a decline, there are
some areas of great concern to Army leaders. One area of continuing
concern is the increasing number of suicides and attempted suicides.
The loss of any soldier is a tragedy, and we remain dedicated to
suicide prevention. A General Officer Steering Committee is reviewing
the Army Suicide Prevention Program with a focus on better integrating
and strengthening our efforts to decrease the current trend. This is a
multi-disciplined approach that includes Army researchers, behavioral
health professionals, legal professionals, law enforcement
professionals and chaplains. Central to the program are actions begun
in 2007 to reduce the stigma associated with seeking help for mental
health issues. We are also reinvigorating in small unit leaders and
teammates the responsibility to be proactive in identifying issues and
behaviors that may signal suicidal behavior.
The Army Chaplain Corps' ``Strong Bonds'' Training Program is
expanding to reach more soldiers and family members to develop
relationship-building skills intended to reduce failed relationships,
the leading stress factor associated with completed suicides. The
Army's Medical Command is recruiting and hiring additional behavioral
health providers, and screening all soldiers for possible mental health
problems during Initial Entry Training, as well as during pre- and
post-deployment health assessments. In addition, commanders have
continued to emphasize Battlemind Training, which is designed to build
resiliency for soldiers and families.
Our plan for providing comprehensive mental health support to our
soldiers includes continuing to expand our capacity for behavioral
health treatment, and improving the continuity of care between medical
facilities and providers, to include Veterans' Administration treatment
facilities for Reserve component soldiers. Future steps include the
development of an action plan utilizing core strategies in developing
life-coping skills, maintaining constant vigilance, encouraging help-
seeking behaviors, reducing stigma, maintaining constant surveillance
of behavioral health data, and integrating and synchronizing unit and
community programs.
The longstanding Army Family Action Plan (AFAP) is a bottom-up
system that also provides a means for soldiers and their families to
inform leadership about what is working, what is not working, and what
might be done to make improvements. As a result of AFAP input,
servicemembers' group life insurance benefits increased, family support
groups have been institutionalized, and new programs for single
soldiers have been introduced.
We are strengthening programs and services so that the well-being
of our men and women remains at the forefront of Army life. These
programs address personal issues around substance abuse, suicide
prevention, and sexual assault as well as personnel issues involving
diversity, safety, occupational health, equal employment opportunity
and comprehensive deployment cycle support.
congressional assistance
Recruiting, retaining, and providing for the well-being of the best
Army in the world requires a significant commitment by the American
people. The Army is grateful for the continued support of Congress for
competitive military benefits and compensation along with incentives
and bonuses for soldiers and their families and the civilian workforce.
Congress recently authorized pay raises sufficient to provide 3.5
percent increase in compensation for soldiers for fiscal year 2008. The
Army is programming a 3.4 percent pay raise for fiscal year 2009 and
would appreciate Congress' support in this plan.
The Army also thanks Congress for new ability to consolidate
special pay, incentive pay and bonuses authorities which will give the
Army the necessary flexibility to direct programs at specific needs,
such as a Warrior Pay program to pay Soldiers who are frequently
deployed.
I would like to emphasize that your tremendous support has proven,
and will continue to prove, absolutely essential to Army readiness.
From recruiting and retention piloting authorities, to funding directed
at caring for soldiers and families, your yeoman efforts serve as a
catalyst for success--be it on the battlefield, or at home stations
across the Army. We are Growing and Transforming the Army in a period
of prolonged war. We will do so with young men and women of the highest
caliber whose willingness to serve portends an immeasurable aspect of
quality and commitment. We look forward to meeting the challenges ahead
with your continued leadership and support for the Army.
Senator Ben Nelson. Thank you, General.
Admiral Harvey?
STATEMENT OF VADM JOHN C. HARVEY, JR., USN, DEPUTY CHIEF OF
NAVAL OPERATIONS (MANPOWER, PERSONNEL, TRAINING, AND
EDUCATION), UNITED STATES NAVY
Admiral Harvey. Yes, sir. Chairman Nelson, Ranking Member
Graham, distinguished members of this subcommittee, I
appreciate the opportunity to appear before you today on behalf
of the 330,000 Active Duty and 70,000 Reserve component sailors
currently serving our Nation.
Thanks in no small part to the extraordinary support and
work of this committee and its professional staff, your Navy
today is ready, relevant, and responsive. We are recruiting a
high-quality force, and we are retaining those sailors we need
to sustain a high-quality force, and we intend to keep it that
way.
We're sustaining our Nation's engagement in Iraq and
Afghanistan, both directly and in support of Army and Marine
ground forces, and we are simultaneously strengthening our
engagement around the world, in keeping with the guidance in
our new Cooperative Maritime Strategy for the 21st Century.
I would like to give you an example of what your Navy is
doing on any given day. Last week, on February 20, the Nation's
attention was focused on the U.S.S. Lake Erie, one of our Aegis
cruisers, as it successfully engaged a failing satellite with a
Navy standard missile launched by Fire Controlman Second Class
Andrew Jackson of Raytown, MO. But, also on February 20, just
as Lake Erie was engaging the satellite in an extremely
challenging and complex real-world scenario, our Navy was also
operating newly developed riverine forces in the Euphrates
River, near the Haditha Dam. Navy SEALs were pursuing al Qaeda
deep in Afghanistan and throughout Iraq, and the Harry S.
Truman Carrier Strike Group and the Tarawa Expeditionary Strike
Group, just entered through the Straits of Hormuz into the
Gulf, supporting Operation Iraqi Freedom (OIF) and Operation
Enduring Freedom (OEF).
February 20 was a day on which 127 of our 279 ships--about
46 percent--were underway or deployed, including 2 aircraft
carriers and 5 big-deck expeditionary warfare ships. That day,
your Navy had 54,000 sailors forward deployed overseas,
including about 24,000 sailors in the Central Command (CENTCOM)
area of operations (AOR), of whom 10,000 were afloat and 14,000
were boots-on-ground in various capacities. On that day, 1,700
sailors from our Navy medical team--doctors, nurses, and
corpsmen, of whom 400 are reservists--were deployed to the
European Command and CENTCOM AOR in support of OIF and OEF,
from Landstuhl to Balad.
On February 20, we had approximately 10,000 sailors on
individual augmentation missions, serving in roles ranging from
our traditional areas of expertise in intelligence, medical
support, explosive ordnance disposal, and combat-zone
construction, to delivering new capabilities in areas like
civil affairs, Provincial Reconstruction Teams, running
detainee operations, and combating improvised exposive devices
while embedded in Army and Marine tactical units.
Also in the CENTCOM AOR on 20 February, three of our
surface combatants were engaged in anti-piracy operations in
and around the Horn of Africa, attempting to ensure the flow of
relief for famine and drought conditions in those bereaved
countries.
Sailors in the Naval Forces, Europe, region supported
President Bush's trip to Africa with Operation Nomad Fire,
while the U.S.S. Fort McHenry and highspeed vessel Swift
continued the inaugural deployment in support of Africa
partnership stationing in the Gulf of Guinea, where 14 percent
of our Nation's oil is generated.
On February 20, we had frigates and P-3s partnering with
the Coast Guard, conducting counternarcotics operations in the
Caribbean and off the coast of South America, an operation
which has resulted in seizing 4.4 metric tons of drugs, just
since December and January.
Closer to home, in Newport News, on the 20th, we saw
construction continuing on our newest nuclear-powered aircraft
carrier, the U.S.S. George H.W. Bush. Finally, on that day, we
had about 870 of our newest recruits conducting the battle
stations-21 exercise at Great Lakes, the culminating experience
of their initial training at boot camp.
On February 20, the common element in all these missions,
from the high-end operations of our Aegis weapon system, to the
low-tech, but far more demanding, riverine mission in the
combat zone, was our people. It is the Navy's people who are
making it all happen, executing these important missions and
achieving great success. It is that same Navy that accomplishes
all these diverse tasks; and our Navy's people--our young men
and women who have volunteered to serve a cause much larger
than themselves, deserve all the credit and our gratitude for
the immeasurable achievements made in the defense of our
Nation.
In the years that have passed since September 11, your Navy
has undertaken a truly significant reshaping in order to
develop the capability to engage worldwide at every level of
warfare and peace maintenance, while still maintaining our
ability to dominate the blue water anywhere around the globe.
So as we approach our steady-state force levels of about
322,000 sailors in the Active component and 68,000 sailors in
the Reserve component, it is clear we will not become just a
smaller Navy, we will be a different Navy. To get the essential
manpower, personnel, training, and education pieces of this
different Navy right, we are putting together all the component
parts of our value chain for people to ensure we have the right
sailor in the right job at the right time with the right
experience, a concept we call ``Fit.'' Our efforts will ensure
we are still ready to respond to any mission at any time,
anywhere, from the deep ocean to well beyond the shoreline.
Your Navy is a Service whose routine forward presence around
the world, actively supporting friends and allies, pursuing our
enemies, and maintaining the global maritime stability upon
which our economic well-being depends, clearly illustrated by
the many missions we accomplish on a typical day, is a fact
now, and will certainly remain so for the indefinite future.
On behalf of all our sailors, Active and Reserve, I wish to
thank this committee for their steadfast support of all our
Navy people who are doing so much for so many every day. I am
standing ready to respond to your questions, sir.
Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Admiral Harvey follows:]
Prepared Statement by VADM John C. Harvey, Jr., USN
introduction
Chairman Nelson, Senator Graham, and distinguished members of the
Personnel Subcommittee, thank you for providing me with the opportunity
to appear before you to present an overview of Navy's recruiting,
retention, and compensation programs.
I want to express my deep appreciation for your support of the many
new and enhanced authorities to support sailors and their families
included in the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
2008. I am particularly pleased you included Defense Officer Personnel
Management Act (DOPMA) Control Grade Relief and an increase in senior
enlisted strength authorization, which will prove essential to our
ongoing efforts to properly size and shape the Navy Total Force of the
future.
During testimony last year, I informed this subcommittee of our
challenge to sustain core capabilities and readiness, while
simultaneously building the future naval fleet and developing a
workforce capable of operating, fighting, and leading in a variety of
challenging environments. Demands on the Navy Total Force are growing,
and our ability to deliver sailors with the skills required to meet
those demands is becoming increasingly challenging in an austere fiscal
environment and ever more-competitive recruiting and retention
marketplace.
I expressed that recruiting, personnel management, training, and
compensation systems which served us well in the past, would not be
sufficient to deliver the workforce of the future. Sustaining the All-
Volunteer Force through recruiting, developing, retaining, and taking
care of this Nation's best and brightest young Americans is my primary
responsibility and most solemn obligation. Upon taking the helm of the
United States Navy, Admiral Gary Roughead established a goal that Navy
be recognized as a top 50 employer during his tenure as Chief of Naval
Operations (CNO). The first step toward accomplishing this goal is to
align the life and career goals of our people with the mission
requirements of our Navy--current and future--in a way that provides
the greatest opportunities for personal and professional development.
Achieving this view of our future for sustaining the high quality All-
Volunteer Force entails providing a robust pay and benefits package,
professional and personal fulfillment and affirmation of the value we
place on sailors, their families, and their selfless service to our
country.
During congressional testimony last year, I highlighted three key
priorities that were the focus for our efforts:
Navy Total Force Readiness
Sizing, Shaping, and Stabilizing the Navy Total Force
Strategies for the Future Navy Workforce
I want to set the stage for my testimony this year by taking a
brief look back at each of those areas:
Navy Total Force Readiness
To support Navy's mission and sustain combat readiness, we focused
on elements of readiness subjected to risk by impending recruiting and
retention challenges, community health issues, and barriers to
individual readiness and family preparedness.
In 2007, recruiting and retention efforts focused on communities
experiencing the most stress associated with the global war on terror:
Naval Construction Force (Seabees)
Naval Special Warfare and Special Operations (NSW/
SPECOPS)
Health Professionals
While we are pleased to report significant progress in improving in
Seabees/NSW/SPECOPS recruiting over the past year, our highest priority
this year, and where I may need further help, is with health
professionals.
We implemented improvements in our Individual Augmentee/Global War
on Terror Support Assignment (IA/GSA) process by developing a better
understanding of the shift from an emerging to an enduring requirement.
We established an effective management plan and process for assigning
sailors to these critical positions, including a more integrated total
force approach, and dramatically improved support for sailors and
families before, during and after deployments. IA/GSA sailors also earn
points towards advancement and officers are awarded appropriate joint
credit.
We made great progress in all areas of sailor readiness and family
preparedness, focusing on issues of greatest concern, such as support
to injured sailors, fitness, education and professional development,
personal financial management, child and youth programs, and sea-shore
rotation.
We established a Special Assistant to the CNO to develop and
implement a coherent and complete plan of action to sustain effective
casualty care for all our sailors and their families. This plan will
incorporate, at a minimum, all required elements of the recently
enacted ``Wounded Warrior Act.''
Sizing, Shaping, and Stabilizing The Navy Total Force
Extensive work has been invested in recent years to validate Navy's
proper force size, through a capability-based analysis of current and
future force structure and warfighting requirements associated with a
313-ship, 2,813-aircraft-Navy. That analysis also took into account
present and projected global war on terror requirements. The outcome
was an optimized steady-state Active component end strength requirement
of 322,000, which we anticipate reaching by 2013.
In June 2007, a Reserve recruiting and retention cross-functional
team was stood up to address the challenges of resourcing the Reserve
Force. In conjunction with United States Fleet Forces Command, this
team is conducting a review of overall Reserve capabilities based on
Active component requirements. Selected Reserve end strength of 68,000
is about right, but this analysis will build upon the work of the 2003
Zero-Based Review of the Reserve Force and may further refine that
number.
Having identified the required force size, we shifted our primary
focus to ``FIT'', which entails force shaping (getting the right
sailors in the right positions at the right time) and stabilizing
(establishing a flexible and adaptable personnel management system that
proactively responds to changing war-fighting requirements). Our goal
is to build upon last year's efforts with greater emphasis on those
areas most critical to our role in supporting the Maritime Strategy--
delivery of training, focus on jointness, language skills, regional
expertise and cultural awareness, and continued Active Reserve
Integration efforts, particularly in leveraging Reserve capabilities
when sourcing global war on terror assignments.
Although the Navy manpower management system is flexible and
capable of responding to changes in manpower requirements and force
structure, recruiting and developing sailors takes time and
necessitates the best alignment of sailors to the mission they are
required to perform. Accordingly, Navy is developing a demand-based
personnel system to better link Fleet requirements to training
resources and pipelines necessary to fulfill a unit's mission.
where we are today--sustaining the all-volunteer force
Strategies for the Future Navy Workforce
The Strategy for Our People (SFOP) provides the framework through
which we will continue to shape our workforce into a diverse Navy. Our
Navy has undergone tremendous change over a relatively short period of
time, not only in terms of expanding nontraditional missions, in the
way that we operate, fight, and lead, or in regard to force structure
changes, but certainly from a personnel standpoint. The numbers of
Active-Duty and Selected Reserve sailors has steadily declined since
2002, in part due to our shift to more technologically advanced, less
manpower-intensive platforms and weapons systems. Despite the
technological advances, maintaining the right balance between people
and warfighting capabilities will continue to prove challenging in an
increasingly constrained fiscal environment. As we move to a leaner,
more sea-centric, and technologically advanced force, we must increase
our focus on investing in our most valuable asset--our people.
Readiness
By incorporating lessons learned from past experiences, sailors and
their families are better prepared today for the range of operations
they're asked to support. Navy Fleet and Family Support centers
worldwide are improving support for families of deployed sailors, as
well as supporting them during disasters such as the 2007 San Diego
fires.
As GSA detailing is new for most sailors and their families, Navy
continues to tailor deployment services and support to the unique
situations of IA sailors and families. IA sailor, family and command
handbooks are posted on the Web and provide comprehensive information
on GSA deployment preparation, readiness and reunion issues. Fleet and
Family Support Centers and Command Ombudsmen distribute a monthly GSA
Family Connection Newsletter to GSA families.
Additionally, Navy improves sailor readiness and family
preparedness through a number of Morale, Welfare and Recreation (MWR)
programs, Quality of Life programs and services assessments, fitness
development, and family financial readiness education.
Physical Readiness is being institutionalized across
Navy through the ``Culture of Fitness'' program, which focuses
sailor and command attention on the entire scope of healthy and
physically fit sailors.
Liberty Programs are offered to sailors in alcohol and
tobacco-free Liberty Centers, which serve as ``family rooms''
that promote camaraderie among single and unaccompanied
sailors, while providing healthy recreation alternatives.
Sailor and Family Assessments solicit feedback from
sailors, families, and command leaders on Navy life, programs,
and services, which lead to program changes focused on
providing an optimal level of support.
Family Financial Readiness is important to mission
readiness and improves retention. Navy provides educational
programs tailored to family members and teens. We have also
implemented a career life-cycle-based training continuum that
directs when, where, and how sailors receive specific Personal
Financial Management (PFM) training.
Shaping and Stabilizing the Force
Efforts to align the career goals of sailors, through learning and
development, with Navy's mission requirements, are at the core of
shaping the force. Stabilizing the force cannot be accomplished without
changing programs, practices, policies and laws, in ways that promote
improved life-work balance. We must align the life and career goals of
sailors with the mission requirements of the Navy in order to sustain
warfighting readiness; and ensure we deliver the sailor required to
operate, fight, and lead the Fleet of the future.
We know IA/GSA requirements will remain for the foreseeable future,
and as such, we established long-term support processes. Additionally,
the Cooperative Strategy for 21st Century Seapower calls for new
capabilities and capacity. We will leverage the Reserve component to
meet these demands; develop an enduring cultural, historical, and
linguistic expertise in our Total Force, and further our efforts to
maximize Navy's contribution to the global operations.
Individual Augmentation/Global War on Terror Support Assignment
Detailing
Significant progress has been made in filling IA requirements,
particularly in high demand skill sets. In many cases, Navy identified
skill sets resident in lesser-stressed communities and fulfilled
requirements with alternate sourcing. This flexible response, coupled
with effective strategic communications to the Fleet, reduced some
uncertainty of repeat IA deployments and helped provide predictability
and stability for sailors and their families.
Through GSA Detailing, we are filling the majority of joint
warfighting requirements by our mainstream assignment processes.
Sailors now have increased influence over when they choose to do an IA,
improved management of their careers, and longer ``lead times'' for
preparation, improving sailor readiness and family preparedness for
these long deployments.
GSA sailors receive Permanent Change-of-Station (PCS) orders to San
Diego or Norfolk and Temporary Duty Under Instructions (TEMDUINs)
orders for all training and movement. PCS orders allow for moving
dependents to Fleet concentration areas with significant support
services and infrastructure. Advancement boards will continue to stress
the value of GSA and IA tours. Other benefits include advancement
points, flexible advancement exam options, and joint credit. Execution
of GSA detailing requires the merger of two systems currently operating
in parallel--GSA and the Individual Augmentation Manpower Management
(IAMM) systems. Placing global war on terror billets and IA
requirements into the normal detailing process will improve unit
manning stability. Navy Personnel Command and USFF will collaborate to
balance Fleet readiness and GSA requirements. Until GSA detailing is
fully implemented, USFF will continue to fill a portion of IA
requirements through IAMM. The short-term goal of GSA detailing is to
create an environment where GSA assignments are the normal business
practice and IAs are the exception.
In support of Central Command, we have more personnel ashore than
afloat. Today, over 14,000 sailors support Operation Iraqi Freedom
(OIF)/Operation Enduring Freedom (OEF) staffs and missions ashore,
while over 12,000 sailors afloat in Central Command are performing
their traditional Maritime Missions. As of 2007, we have deployed or
mobilized 62,811 sailors (17,435 Active component/45,376 Reserve
component) as IAs since OEF in 2001. Almost 75 percent of IAs are
employed using core Navy competencies, such as electronic warfare,
airlift support, cargo handling, maritime security, medical support,
explosives engineering, and construction. This additional commitment of
providing IAs comes at a cost--we are carefully monitoring the strain
on our PCS and TEMDUINs accounts to ensure we can execute core Navy and
global war on terror missions while also fostering the necessary
development of our people. There is also a ``cost'' in terms of filling
global war on terror support assignments by removing sailors from their
primary assignments. Currently, 8,000 Active Duty sailors are on these
assignments, requiring others to ensure their duties in the affected
commands are carried out.
Active-Reserve Integration
Through Active-Reserve Integration (ARI), Navy is increasing its
overall capability and readiness. We continue to blend units in many
communities, including Intelligence, NSW/EOD, Medical Support,
Helicopter Combat Support, Riverine, Maritime Expeditionary Security
Force and Naval Construction Battalions (Seabees), as well as surface
and aviation warfare. We are working on developing methods to smooth
the transition between components. One of our key Task Force Life Work
initiatives is implementing an Active component/Reserve component ``On/
Off Ramp'' concept, which may require legislative relief.
Personnel planning, in support of global war on terror, includes a
sustainable operational Reserve Force with capacity to support current
operations, while maintaining a Strategic Reserve capability.
Additionally, Reserve sailors are now aligned with Navy region commands
to better support a Total Force response to Homeland Defense/Security
and natural disaster requirements. We are also more closely aligning
Active component/Reserve component medical care and medical case
management policies and practices. Caring for sailors mandates a Total
Force approach that will ensure sailors receive the best possible
medical care.
Diversity Campaign Plan
In the past year, we focused on implementing the CNO's Diversity
Concept of Operations (CONOPs). We stood up the Diversity Directorate,
growing from an office of 3 to its present size of near 20. The
Diversity Directorate made great strides in working to improve
diversity in our Navy. The CONOPS called for focus on five key areas:
accountability, outreach, training, mentoring, and communication.
We initiated an accountability regimen that identified areas Navy
enterprises and communities can leverage to ensure the Navy's talent is
promoted and retained. In taking a snapshot view of their diversity,
the enterprises and communities were able to identify baseline
diversity statistics, potential negative or positive trends, and areas
for potential focus or study. Four Enterprises completed their initial
review and briefed the CNO, while the remaining enterprises and
communities are on deck this year. Once we have completed the initial
round of reviews, we will go back annually and revisit the review,
following up on how the enterprises and communities have worked to meet
the challenges and goals outlined in their initial accounting.
As part of the initiative to spread the word of Navy education and
career opportunities, we worked to create a focused, sustained outreach
program with identified individuals and affinity groups, such as the
National Society of Black Engineers and the Society of Hispanic
Professional Engineers. Additionally, we encouraged increased Flag
level and junior officer and enlisted participation in the two Navy-
affiliated affinity groups, the National Naval Officers Association and
the Association of Naval Service Officers. These groups are
instrumental in maintaining and retaining our diverse Navy force,
particularly through their mentoring and professional development
efforts.
We created a Navy-wide mentoring culture by developing a consistent
framework that will ensure all sailors have mentors and mentoring
networks. Our draft mentoring instruction is currently in circulation
with officer and enlisted leadership.
From E-1 to O-7, we provide detailed training curricula to
institutionalize the importance of diversity in the Navy. At every
level of the Navy's training continuum, we emphasize the benefits of a
diverse organization and how those benefits relate to our core
principles.
Finally, none of these efforts would be effective without a
strategic communication plan to deliver a concise, consistent, and
compelling message on diversity to both internal and external
audiences. In the past year, we layered our communications by
distributing the diversity message through a variety of internal media.
We are also working to increase our success stories through external
media; including those most important to members of the diverse
affinity groups with whom we have developed relationships.
Millennial Generation Values
We are quickly learning that the one-size-fits-all personnel
policies we have in place today won't work in the future. The young men
and women of the Millennial Generation, those junior Officers and
Enlisted under the age of 24, expect to change jobs or career fields
multiple times over their life and expect a life-work balance that
allows them to serve as well as explore outside interests and attend to
personal and family needs. Their career paths, pay, and benefits must
evolve to a more flexible system that supports mid-career off and on-
ramps, part-time service and temporary sabbaticals.
Inflexible Navy careers and the adverse impact to quality of life,
particularly among junior sailors, is borne-out in recent survey data.
Sixty-percent of respondents on a 2005/2006 survey of Surface Warfare
Officers (SWO) reported the ability, or lack thereof, to start a family
or plan personal activities significantly influenced their decision to
leave active duty. Of those who decided to make Navy a career, only 26
percent reported the current SWO continuation pay was a strong
influence on their decision. Additionally, as of the beginning of
December 2007, retention of SWOs in Year Group 2002 was at 19.4
percent, against a goal of 33.3 percent. In a 2006 Naval Aviation
Survey, 49 percent of female officers said that to be successful in the
aviation field they have to choose their career over marriage, and 71
percent said to be successful they have to choose their career over
having children. However, many of the things that are important to
women in the workplace are proving to be important to both the men and
women of the Millennial generation--family, stability, a true sense of
fulfillment and value from their work. Continuing retention challenges
demonstrate a need to develop new and different ways to influence long-
term retention decisions.
Military service is not often first among career options
Millennials consider. Today's influencers, most of who have never
served in the military, are often not inclined to steer Millennials
toward a military option. We are responding to this challenge by
meeting Millennials on their terms, appealing to their search for
something more, their sense of service, their spirit of volunteerism
and their interest in the world around them. The Navy must recognize
and respect generational traits to ensure it appeals to and competes
with the best of industry for the talent we seek to recruit and retain.
Initiatives such as the Navy's Diversity Campaign and Task Force Life
Work will help us achieve that goal. Our focus in the next several
years is building a menu of retention options for our changing
workforce and striving to capitalize on the diversity and differences
of our Navy Total force to ensure our Navy is a family-friendly ``Top
50'' place to work.
building a path to the future
This Nation commits our greatest talent and good will toward
achieving peace and freedom for a better future, at home and abroad.
The readiness we've attained, and global leadership role we hold, in
warfighting, diplomacy, maritime security, and humanitarian assistance,
are all dependent on the honor, courage and commitment of the men and
women in our All-Volunteer Total Force. To maximize their potential and
provide the most ready force to the fleet and joint warfare commanders,
we will continue to improve upon our personnel systems, policies, and
development tools. Our investment will offer greater life-work balance;
place the right sailor in the right job at the right time, and prepare
our 21st century leaders to operate adeptly in our dynamic global
environment.
Achieving FIT
The concept of FIT is centered on the idea of delivering the right
sailor to the right job at the right time. ``Right sailor'' is defined
as an individual with the proper mix of knowledge, skills and abilities
to match the demands of the assignment--the ``right job.'' The timing
element refers to both the timeliness of that sailor arriving in the
position to support the operational unit's schedule, and the right
point in the sailor's career to provide the seniority and leadership
required. We must assign sailors to positions that draw from and
enhance their talents and strengths, and emphasize continued
professional growth and development, through learning and experience.
Achieving FIT means we enhance their development in stages that align
to career milestones, affording them the opportunity to progress and
remain competitive for advancement and promotion. Over the next year,
we will continue to focus our efforts to achieve FIT by:
Developing our people, through learning and
experience, in a way that fulfills the promise of our people
and aligns their careers aspirations with Navy commitments
Meeting our recruiting and retention challenges by
modifying our programs, policies, and incentives to meet the
life and career goals of our people, providing an appropriate
balance between the two, while meeting the mission requirements
of the Navy
Achieving FIT--Development of our People
Training and education are the critical enablers to developing the
knowledge, skills, and abilities of our sailors. In accordance with the
Maritime Strategy, we will focus our efforts on delivery of training,
emphasis on joint management, development and training continuum,
graduate education programs, and implementing Navy's Language Skills,
Regional Expertise and Cultural Awareness Strategy.
Train to Qualify
Navy ships must be designed and developed based on capability
requirements, a sustainable CONOPs, robust Human Systems Integration,
and sound Acquisition Strategies. These upfront deliverables drive the
analysis to properly operate and maintain ship systems. In May 2007,
the Vice Chairman, Joint Chiefs of Staff, approved a Systems Training
Key Performance Parameter (KPP) establishing training thresholds and
objectives for appropriate acquisition programs. The new KPP ensures
performance standards and training are developed based on Personnel
Qualification Standards, Navy Mission Essential Task Lists, and
Objective Based Training. The Littoral Combat Ship (LCS) is one of the
first programs to use the Systems Training KPP.
The LCS Program makes use of many other concepts that pose new
challenges, as well as presenting many opportunities to improve the
effectiveness and efficiency of the Surface Force. The Navy's
Cooperative Maritime Strategy identifies a total requirement of 55 LCS
ships in the 313-ship Navy Shipbuilding Plan. Maintaining readiness and
sustaining operations on these ships requires improved manpower,
personnel, training, and education solutions.
The LCS Train-to-Qualify training methodology sets in motion a
challenging new training paradigm for the Surface Force critical to
supporting the LCS manning, readiness, and sustainment. The training
methodology is conducted in an off-ship training environment that
trains an individual in the knowledge, skills and abilities required to
competently perform basic tasks associated with specific shipboard
watch stations or positions. Training delivery methods include some
combination of classroom instruction, computer-based lessons, live and
virtual simulations, and live evolutions, in port and, where
appropriate, at sea. Delivery is conducted in both individual and team
training environments and focuses on achieving qualification and
proficiency prior to reporting on the ship.
Sailors are prepared to join an LCS core or mission package crew
via billet training tracks that satisfy the required knowledge, skills
and abilities. Sailors' previous schools and qualifications are
examined to avoid redundant training and tailored to fill in the gaps.
Navy Learning and Development Strategy
During the last year, a series of reviews were conducted to ensure
our learning and development strategy for sailors would support not
only the Cooperative Maritime Strategy, but be fully integrated with
Navy's SFOP. Our goal was to look objectively at the impact of changes
made in how we prepared our sailors for their Navy careers over the
last 5 years, a period referred to as the Revolution in Navy Training.
Tasks consisted of:
A review of changes made to learning strategies
A review of training organizational alignments
Evaluation of learning technology acquisitions
Benchmarking ourselves against projected advances in
learning within industry, academia, and our sister Services
The results verified efforts our Navy learning organization is
undertaking and we have made minor adjustments to learning
organizations and investment strategies for the future.
We are well-positioned to train and prepare our sailors for the new
technologies and platforms they will be tasked to operate, fight, and
maintain in the future. The accelerating rate of technology insertion
and new platform acquisition drives our manpower and training
organizations to continued close collaboration with all Navy
enterprises to ensure our learning strategy remains fully-integrated
and resources are optimized to support current and future fleet
training readiness. Investments in new learning technology and delivery
systems will fully support the professional development of our sailors
necessary to man the future fleet and further our efforts to become a
competency-based Total Force.
Joint Management, Development, and Joint Training Continuum
Navy remains committed to the Chairman's vision for Joint
Development in both the officer and senior enlisted communities across
the Total Force. In 2007, we began developing an action plan for Joint
Development, which will improve how we plan, prepare and assign Navy
leaders to joint positions in a way that maximizes Navy's contribution
to joint, interagency, and multi-national coalition partners.
Joint Qualification System (JQS). Authorities enacted by the John
Warner National Defense Authorization Act of Fiscal Year 2007, provided
us with the first significant updates to the Goldwater-Nichols Act in
over 20 years. Last August and September, the Joint Staff conducted
Experience Review Panels under the new JQS, recognizing the changing
nature of jointness and allowing the Services to increase the pool of
O-6s eligible for promotion to flag via the new experience path. We are
working diligently with DOD to continue implementing the JQS and to
extend jointness to our Reserve Force.
Joint Training Continuum/Professional Military Education (PME). The
Navy continues its emphasis on PME designed to prepare its leaders for
challenges at the tactical, operational and strategic levels of war.
During the last year we met several key milestones in implementing the
Navy's PME Continuum with its embedded JPME for E-1 through O-8. We
conducted two flag-level courses to prepare future 3-star officers to
serve effectively as Maritime Component Commanders for Joint Force
Commanders. One of those courses was a Combined Course with flag
officers from our partner nations in the Pacific Command. The course
was designed to develop and deepen relationships to meet regional
challenges and advance understanding of security issues facing the
participating nations.
The Naval War College (NWC) successfully completed its first
academic year with the disaggregated intermediate and senior-level
courses which was approved by CJCS for JPME phase II. Officer student
throughput for the senior and intermediate-level courses, resident and
non-resident, increased with significant numbers of graduates
immediately assigned to follow-on joint duties in accordance with
established assignment policies. All of these efforts directly
contribute to Navy's continued development at the operational-level of
war.
The Primary PME Course for junior officers (O-1 to O-3) and Chiefs
(E-7 to E-8) completed its first year with an enrollment of about
10,000 sailors. In January 2008, the Navy implemented the PME Continuum
by launching the Introductory PME Course for sailors (E-1 to E-4) and
the Basic PME Course for leaders in the grades of E-4 to E-6. With the
complete fielding of the Continuum, PME will become an important
element of assignment and career progression for all sailors, officer
and enlisted. The Navy will continue to use resident and distance
learning options to provide the capability and flexibility to prepare
Total Force leaders--military and civilians--for the operating
environments of today and the future.
Education Strategy
In 2007, we completed the second in a series of studies on graduate
education within the Navy. Our examination yielded some valuable
insights into the role, timing and content of education as a key
enabler of the Total Force. In 2008, we will apply those insights to
the development of a strategy that addresses graduate education
requirements to support successful execution of our joint and maritime
missions. At the core of the Education Strategy will be an emphasis on
the knowledge elements delivered through graduate education that will
enable the Total Force to maximize its effectiveness. When coupled with
the ongoing work on the Learning and Development Strategy and the PME
Continuum, the Education Strategy will help Navy deliver enhanced
capability to meet the challenges laid out in the Cooperative Maritime
Strategy.
Language Skills, Regional Expertise, and Cultural Awareness
Strategy
As we have seen in our recent missions with U.S.N.S. Comfort in
Latin America and the U.S.S. Peleliu Pacific Partnership in Southeast
Asia, our effectiveness overseas is as dependent on our ability to
comprehend and communicate as it is on firepower and technological
superiority. Facility with languages, expertise in regional affairs,
and broad awareness of foreign cultures is essential to effective
interaction with our diverse international partners and emerging
friends. These competencies are key to theater security cooperation,
maritime domain awareness, humanitarian efforts, and shaping and
stability operations; they are crucial to intelligence, information
warfare, and criminal investigations. They are a prerequisite to
achieving the influence called for in the Maritime Strategy.
January 2008, we promulgated Navy's Language Skills, Regional
Expertise, and Cultural Awareness Strategy--a plan that aligns and
transforms Language Skills, Regional Expertise and Cultural (LREC)
across the Navy Total Force. The LREC Strategy galvanizes the following
efforts:
The Foreign Area Officer (FAO) Program has been
reconstituted as a community restricted line community. FAOs
will augment Navy Component Commands, forward-deployed Joint
Task Forces, Expeditionary and Carrier Strike Groups, American
embassies, and coalition partners. At full operational
capability, Navy FAOs will number 400. To date, 138 have been
identified with selection boards convening twice each year to
select more.
The Personnel Exchange Program (PEP) is being
realigned for consistency with theater engagement strategies of
Navy Component Commanders. PEP billets with some of our
traditional allies will be redistributed to support new
relationships with emerging partners. The program will be made
more competitive and career enhancing, particularly for
commissioned officers. As theater security cooperation is
indeed a core Navy mission, PEP is an essential ingredient in
global and theater engagement strategies.
Language Instruction. We are increasing language
instruction for non-FAO officers at the Defense Language
Institute (DLI). Beginning in fiscal year 2008, OPNAV
programmed 100 seats per year for officers in non-FAO
designators. Officer Community Managers at the Navy Personnel
Command now have greater flexibility to incorporate DLI
training into the career paths of officers whose duty
assignments require facility with a foreign language.
Foreign Language Skills Screening. We continue to
screen for foreign language skills at all Navy accession points
and ensure the information is captured in personnel databases.
The data allows us to identify and track these skills for
operational purposes. As I reported last year, we executed a
one-time Navy-wide self assessment of language capacity in
2006, which yielded unprecedented visibility on this
increasingly critical capability. When we rebase-lined our data
in July 2007, we counted over 143,000 individual assessments
(not people--some people are fluent in more than one language)
of proficiency in more than 300 separate languages and
dialects. As expected, approximately half the capability is in
Spanish with large populations of French, German and Tagalog;
however, exceptional capability--much of it native--is in
obscure, less commonly-taught languages from remote areas of
the world. These bi- and multi-lingual sailors are a valued
capability woven into the fabric of the force.
Foreign Language Proficiency Bonus (FLPB). We continue
to enhance the FLPB to incentivize the acquisition,
sustainment, and improvement of skill in strategic languages.
Formerly restricted to the Navy's crypto linguists and others
serving in language-coded billets, FLPB eligibility has
expanded dramatically to include sailors and officers with
qualified (i.e., tested) proficiency in critical languages,
irrespective of billet. Consistent with National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2007, we modified our
policies to pay incentives at lower proficiency for sailors
engaged in special or contingency operations. Eligibility is
contingent upon successful completion of the Defense Language
Proficiency Test.
Navy Center for Language, Regional Expertise and
Culture (CLREC). Through the Center for Information Dominance
(CID) in Pensacola, we continue to expand language and culture
training support to an increasing number of Fleet constituents.
Conceived in February 2006, CID CLREC started as a clearing-
house for LREC-related training, but has gradually expanded its
portfolio to include development of individual country and
regional studies tailored to Fleet operations. CID CLREC
developed collaborative relationships with NWC, Naval
Postgraduate School, and the U.S. Naval Academy, as well as
with the DLI, in Monterey, and the language and cultural
centers of our sister Services. These cooperative relationships
yielded promising results to date, including dedicated pre-
deployment training to the three Riverine Squadrons which have
or are deploying to Iraq, as well as the aforementioned support
to both U.S.N.S. Comfort and U.S.S. Peleliu in 2007.
LREC Instruction. We continue to provide LREC
instruction to the Total Force. Naval Postgraduate School's
(NPS) Regional Security Education Program embarks NPS and U.S.
Naval Academy faculty and regional experts in Navy strike
groups to deliver underway instruction in regional threats,
history, current affairs and cultural/religious awareness.
Similarly, NWC continues to develop integrated regional content
in its resident curricula, and developed PME modules containing
regional content available both in resident and in non-resident
venues, including on-line.
Achieving FIT--Meeting the All-Volunteer Force Recruiting
Challenges
During 2007, Navy executed a focused, integrated Active/Reserve
recruiting effort, attaining 101 percent of Active enlisted accession
goals and 100 percent of Reserve enlisted affiliation goal. Officer
recruiting, however, fell short obtaining 88 percent of the Active
component goal and 52 percent of the Reserve component goal.
Our goal is to position the Navy as a top employer, in order to
gain a competitive edge in the market and provide our people the
appropriate life/work balance, not only to attract and recruit them,
but to retain them. Retention will be defined as providing the
opportunity to transition between types of naval service (Active,
Reserve, civilian, or contractor support). We aim to provide a
continuum of service to our people, affording our Navy the maximum
return on our most valuable investment. This year, we will focus our
recruiting and retention efforts in the areas that pose the greatest
risk and challenge to our ability to sustain the All-Volunteer Force.
Medical Recruiting
As mentioned earlier, meeting medical program recruiting goals is
our highest recruiting priority for 2008. While overall manning levels
within the medical department are improving, we continue to face
retention challenges in physician critical specialties of which many
require 3-7 years of specialty training beyond medical school. We
currently face manning shortages of medical professionals. Dental Corps
is manned at 89 percent (1,007 inventory vs. 1,127 billets) with 70
percent of our junior dentists leaving the Navy at their first decision
point. The Medical Service Corps is currently manned at 91 percent
(2,293/2,512) and while overall Nurse Corps manning levels appear sound
(94 percent) the Navy has experienced relatively high attrition in the
junior officer ranks (O-2/O-3). While recruiting medical professionals
has historically been a challenge, it is it becoming increasingly
difficult for several reasons:
There is an increasing shortage of health care
professionals in the civilian sector
The number of students attending medical schools has
increased at a much slower pace the past three decades as
compared to the overall population growth of the United States
and the requirement for medical professionals to support that
growth.
The demographics of the medical school students have
changed with females now making up more than 50 percent of the
students attending medical school.
New financial scholarships in the civilian sector have
made military scholarships less attractive.
Potential recruit concerns derived from the OIF/OEF
While the recruiting of medical professionals has improved in 2007
from previous years, Navy still attained only 82 percent of the Active
component medical specialty mission and 57 percent of the Reserve
component medical goals. To combat the recruiting challenges and
continue supporting the increased demand for the OIF/OEF, we
implemented the following:
Increased accession bonuses for the Nurse Corps and
Dental Corps
Initiated plans for a Medical Corps accession bonus
Funded a critical skills accession bonus for medical
and dental school Health Professions Scholarship Program (HPSP)
participants
Increased the stipend for HPSP students, as well as
Financial Assistance Program participants
Expanded the critical skills wartime specialty pay for
Reserve component medical designators
Recently implemented a Critical Wartime Skills
Accession bonus for Medical and Dental Corps.
Implemented Critical Skills Retention Bonus for
clinical psychologists.
Enlistment Bonuses
Our incentive programs were a key component of our enlisted
recruiting success in 2007. The enlistment bonus continues to be our
most popular and effective incentive for shaping our accessions. The
authority to pay a bonus up to $40,000 made a significant contribution
to our Navy Special Warfare and Navy Special Operations recruiting
efforts. Likewise, our Reserve component success would not have been
possible without the availability of enlistment bonuses.
Education Incentives
Tuition assistance remains a powerful enlistment incentive-offering
the opportunity to pay for college while serving. The Navy College
Program Afloat College Education (NCPACE) provides educational
opportunities for sailors while deployed. The Navy College Fund,
another enlistment incentive, provides money for college when a sailor
decides to transition to the civilian sector. In 2007, we initiated a
pilot program called Accelerate to Excellence, which pays recruits who
attend community college while in the delayed entry program before boot
camp then continue school through their initial skills training,
culminating in a rating specific Associate's Degree. Lastly, our Loan
Repayment Program allows us to offer debt relief of up to $65,000 to
recruits who enlist after already earning an advanced degree.
Achieving FIT--Meeting the All-Volunteer Force Retention Challenges
The dynamics of retention have shifted from the behavioral patterns
of previous generations who valued long-term commitments to a new
generation, most of whom expect to change employers, jobs and careers
several times in their working life. Our sailors have more choices
available to them now than ever before. They expect innovative and
flexible compensation policies, a commitment to continuing education,
and professional development opportunities. Despite a weakening
economy, there will be increased competition for our Nation's best
talent. Retaining our sailors will continue to be challenging due to
comparable compensation and benefits offered by industry balanced with
the sacrifices and commitments we ask of our sailors.
To address these challenges we are aggressively pursuing the use of
tools that allow us to manage our people to achieve four desired
outcomes: predictability, stability, personal and professional growth,
and satisfying real work. To achieve these outcomes, with the goal of
promoting a ``Stay Navy'' message, we are considering alternative
manning solutions, providing our sailors with professional
credentialing opportunities, exploring initiatives that support the
life/work balance our people desire, and providing greater sailor and
family support.
Sea Shore Flow
Last year, I testified the Navy was becoming increasingly sea-
centric and that the Navy's first priority was to man sea-duty and
front-line operational units. As we continue to assess the size and
shape of the Navy workforce that will be required to meet future
capabilities, it has become evident that one of the key variables to
effective management of sailors is to determine the optimal sea-shore
rotation periodicity. To that end, we stood up the Sea Shore Rotation
Working Group comprised of representatives from throughout the Navy
with significant senior enlisted representation. The working group was
charged with conducting a comprehensive review and overhaul of the
current plan, to ensure that we man the Fleet with the right sailor, in
the right job, at the right time.
Today, it is a pleasure to inform you that we made substantial
progress in finding solutions that optimize our enlisted career paths.
We developed an evolutionary method, known as Sea-Shore Flow, for
determining sea tour lengths for our sailors. Sea-Shore Flow provides
the optimal balance of sea and shore duty throughout a sailor's career;
improves Fleet manning; and gives sailors more career choices for
professional and personal development with improved geographic
stability. This year we intend to revise the Navy policy that currently
sets sea tour lengths based solely on a sailor's pay grade to a policy
that sets sea tour lengths based on the optimal Sea-Shore Flow career
path for each enlisted community. In some cases this may mean
shortening sea tour lengths in order to achieve a better FIT in the
Fleet. In other cases, a market-based rotation system that rewards
sailors for self-selecting more time at sea, through monetary
incentives like Sea Duty Incentive Pay, and non-monetary incentives
like guaranteed geographic stability, may be more effective.
Although sustaining a more sea-centric military workforce will be
more costly, the policy is based on optimal Sea-Shore Flow career
paths, coupled with a market-based rotation system that leverages
incentive programs will minimize those costs, improve fleet manning,
and enhance each sailor's life work balance.
Navy Credentialing Opportunities On-Line
Since June 2006, the Navy embraced licensure and certification as a
key means of helping sailors apply their military training and work
experience in attainment of industry-recognized credentials. We
conducted extensive research to link the Navy's ratings, jobs, and
occupations to civilian jobs and applicable civilian licenses and
certifications. We found that 100 percent of the Navy's enlisted
workforce has applicable civilian credentials. This program is
available to over 300,000 enlisted Active and Reserve sailors.
The Navy Credentialing Opportunities On-Line (COOL) Web site
(https://www.cool.navy.mil) provides sailors, counselors, family
members, veterans, prospective Navy applicants, and employers with
comprehensive information about certification and licensure relevant to
Navy Ratings, jobs, and occupations. It helps sailors find civilian
credentialing programs best suited to their background, training, and
experience; and to understand what it takes to obtain a credential and
to identify resources that will help pay credentialing fees.
Clear ``side benefits'' of credentialing can also be seen in the
use of Navy COOL for recruiting (on-ramp), continuum of service
(retention), and ultimately transition (off-ramp). The recruiting
workforce integrated Navy COOL as part of its training and sales
strategy. Anecdotal evidence has shown that use of Navy COOL in
recruiting directly increased conversion of new contracts and led to
higher Delayed Entry Program retention.
Though retention metrics have not yet been established (funding of
credentials began October 2007), Navy COOL and credentialing is
expected to positively impact retention of the workforce. To be
eligible for Navy-funded credentialing, the sailor must have a minimum
of 1 year remaining in service. This provides the Navy with at least 1
year use of enhanced sailor skills and knowledge, and time for the
sailor to decide to re-enlist to obtain further credentialing
opportunities. As a transition tool, Navy COOL provides the sailor
valued information in translating their military training and work
experience to the civilian workforce.
COOL Web site usage has been high. There have been over 16 million
hits since the web site was launched in June 2006, with visitors
reviewing the site in excess of 9 minutes per visit. Since the
authorization to fund for credentialing exams began in October 2007,
over 97.4 percent of sailors completing civilian exams have passed and
been certified, compared to a civilian pass rate of around 80 percent.
The evidence is clear, sailor credentialing is not only successful, but
is also meeting the goals and desires of the sailor and Navy.
Task Force Life Work Initiatives
We experienced some success through the use of monetary retention
incentives such the Selective Reenlistment Bonus; however, monetary
incentives do not always produce the desired retention effects among
some population segments in certain specialties or skills. For example,
female SWOs and female aviators retain at only half the rate of their
male counterparts, despite the existence of robust retention bonus
programs in these communities. Because female SWOs comprise more than
25 percent of the SWO community, insufficient retention among this
segment of the population has led Navy to explore alternative
incentives as a means of achieving required long-term retention goals.
On/Off Ramps. This proposal would provide temporary authority to
the Navy to test an alternative retention incentive allowing sailors in
a demonstration program to take an ``intermission'' in their careers
not to exceed 3 years, to attend to personal matters (family issues,
civic duties, advanced education, etc.) and then return to active duty
service. During the ``intermission'' participants would not be eligible
to receive active duty pays and allowances; however, they would be
eligible to continue receiving certain active duty benefits (medical/
dental care, access to commissary, exchange, MWR facilities, and child
care, etc.).
Expanded Education Benefits Initiative. The Navy has operated
educational programs in the past that allowed enlisted sailors to
attend school for up to 2 years in lieu of a shore tour to complete an
associate or bachelors degree, but those programs were incorporated
into the Seaman-to-Admiral program in the late 1990s. As a result, the
only full-time college programs were commissioning programs; therefore,
sailors who desired to remain enlisted could not benefit from this
valuable program. In addition to Tuition Assistance and NCPACE, the
Advanced Education Voucher program provides educational assistance for
senior enlisted to earn a bachelor or masters degree in an off-duty
status. In the next year, we will consider the benefits of several
education programs specifically targeting the enlisted sailor, similar
to the discontinued Enlisted Education Advancement Program (EEAP), and
create a ``Mini-EEAP'', whereby sailors could take 6 months or a year
between assignments, to complete their degree.
Improved Sailor and Family Support
We continue to provide our sailors and their families with a myriad
of benefits--housing, health care, deployment support, child care,
family employment support, education, and efforts to improve geographic
stability. Below is an overview of the sailor and family support
programs and initiatives we will focus on this year.
Housing is a key element of the quality of life of our sailors and
their families by providing suitable, affordable, and safe housing in
the community, in privatized or government owned housing, or in the
community.
Navy successfully privatized 95 percent of its continental United
States (CONUS)/Hawaii family housing units and recently awarded two
unaccompanied housing privatization projects. The unaccompanied housing
projects were the first for the Department of the Defense.
The first Unaccompanied Housing Privatization project site, Pacific
Beacon, in San Diego will feature 4, 18-story towers with 941 dual-
master suite apartments. Two sailors will share an apartment, with
their own master suite, walk-in closet, and private bathroom. The
apartments will have eat-in kitchens, in-suite washers and dryers,
living rooms, and balconies. Sailors will enjoy the comfort, style, and
privacy of a place they can proudly call home.
Navy also executed approximately $40 million in Major Repair
projects in Japan, Guam, Northwest Region, and Guantanamo Bay. Our goal
to eliminate inadequate housing by fiscal year 2007 was realized by
having all contracts in place by October 2007.
Our sailors and their families appreciated these improvements as
reflected in the Annual Resident Satisfaction Survey, which showed high
satisfaction levels with Navy housing.
Navy is also implementing the Homeport Ashore initiative by
ensuring shipboard sailors have the opportunity to live ashore when in
homeport. Eleven projects at eight locations were programmed from
fiscal year 2002-fiscal year 2008. The final projects to complete this
initiative were approved at Naval Base Kitsap Bremerton, WA, for fiscal
year 2008 with occupancy by fiscal year 2010.
Sailor Care Continuum. The Navy has a long and proud history of
providing outstanding support for all sailors who are wounded, ill, and
injured. Sailors receive both clinical and non-clinical care through
established programs. Medical care is coordinated by Navy Medicine
while non-medical support is provided through sailors' parent commands
and the Naval Personnel Command with the goal of reintegrating a
wounded, ill or injured sailor with their Command, their family, and
their community at the earliest possible opportunity.
Based on our experiences in OIF/OEF, we see a different mix of
injuries than we've seen in the past. These injuries often involve
complex medical issues that require closer coordination of support for
members and families. Each sailor's situation is different and their
support must be tailored to meet their unique needs.
In an effort to ensure we are meeting these obligations, we
recently examined how we can best close any seams that exist between
our current organizations and processes as well as applying new
resources to those sailors and families in the most demanding cases--
the severely and very severely injured.
One group that we focused renewed attention on was those sailors
and their families who are our severely wounded, ill, and injured. The
Navy's commitment is to provide severely injured sailors personalized
non-medical support and assistance; to better guide them through
support services and structures. This is accomplished through
addressing the non-medical needs and strongly reinforcing the message
that they, our heroes, deserve the very best attention and care of a
grateful nation. These individuals and their families often have the
greatest need for tailored and individualized attention in order to
deal with personal challenges from the time of injury through
transition from the Navy and beyond.
Safe Harbor staff establishes close contact, with each severely
injured sailor, as soon as he or she is medically stabilized after
arriving at a CONUS medical treatment facility. Safe Harbor Case
Managers are located at major Navy medical treatment centers as well as
the VA Poly-trauma Centers at Tampa, FL, and Palo Alto, CA, and Brooke
Army Medical Center, San Antonio, TX. Typical assistance provided
includes: PFM including financial assistance referral and waiving of
debt, member/family member employment, PCS moves, assisting with non-
medical attendant orders for assisting attendants, post-separation case
management, expediting travel claims, and assisting with VA and Social
Security benefits and remedying personnel/pay issues.
The Navy's Safe Harbor program, which was established in late 2005,
was initially stood up to provide these services for those sailors
severely wounded, ill, and injured as a result of OEF/OIF operations
but would not turn any severely wounded, ill, and injured sailors away.
In January 2008 we formally acknowledged the entire population and have
expanded Safe Harbor's mission. This will increase the potential
population to about 250 sailors, with about 169 of these in the current
population. Safe Harbor Case Managers' role has also been expanded to
provide a far more active engagement to include interactions with the
new Federal Recovery Coordinators. Overall we believe these changes
will allow us to continue to provide the individualized non-clinical
care that each of these individuals and their families deserve.
Other important initiatives involve support for those individuals
who are assigned to or volunteer for a global war on terror support
assignment (individual augmentation). We improved our processes for
screening, training, and family support at our Fleet and Family Service
Centers, Navy Operational Support Centers, and Navy Mobilization
Processing Sites. Our Warrior Transition Program (for returning sailors
and their families) is just one of the many initiatives working at a
local level.
Additionally, in collaboration with other key stakeholders, we're
enhancing the Navy's Operational Stress Control continuum. Navy's
continuum serves to address the increasing challenges that military
personnel currently face caused by the immediate and cumulative effects
of the stresses of Navy life, especially the type of operational
stresses encountered in all forms of deployments. The continuum is part
of the Navy's overall psychological health construct and applies to all
sailors who serve.
The objectives of the Operational Stress Control program are to:
improve force-wide psychological health, mission readiness, and
retention; reduce stigma associated with stress and stress control;
foster cultural change; eliminate redundancy and gaps across and within
organizations; and address all aspects of psychological health, to
include substance abuse, depression, and suicide prevention.
The Navy is currently promoting and implementing a number of
initiatives to enhance the current Operational Stress Control program.
These include: (a) development of a more robust outreach, screening,
and assessment capability; (b) establishment of doctrine and a CONOPs
to promote a common understanding and build consensus among
stakeholders, including leadership, trainers, health care providers,
researchers, and other care providers; (c) a comprehensive and
integrated continuum of training and education for sailors, leadership,
communities support, and families.
Extended Child Care Initiative. In a continued effort to offer
quality child care and youth programs to Navy families, Navy launched
extended child care, youth fitness, and School Transition Service (STS)
initiatives.
Navy has begun an aggressive child care expansion plan, which
includes adding 4,000 new child care spaces within the next 18 months,
construction of 14 new Child Development Centers (including facilities
open 24/7), commercial contracts, and expanding military certified home
care. In addition, Navy is converting 3,000 existing 3-5-year-old child
care spaces into infant-2-year-old spaces to meet the greatest demand,
children under the age of 3. Combined, these initiatives will reduce
the current waiting time for child care of 6-18 months down to less
than 3 months Navy-wide with first priority given to single military
parents.
To assist parents and children with the challenges of frequent
deployments, an additional 100,000 hours of respite child care will be
provided for families of deployed servicemembers.
In efforts to combat youth obesity, the Navy implemented a new
worldwide youth fitness initiative called ``FitFactor,'' as a means to
increase youth interest and awareness in the importance of healthy
choices in life.
Navy STS is addressing the many transition/deployment issues facing
Navy children. STS consists of a variety of programs and initiatives
that provide strategies and resources for installations, school
districts, and parents to address the changes associated with
transitioning between school systems and during deployments in support
of the Navy expeditionary mission.
Family Employment Support Initiative. Navy launched a Family Member
Employment Program to create opportunities for family members to manage
their careers and achieve life goals, specifically in improving family
finances, providing spouses with improved employment opportunities and
improving their ability to pursue portable careers. We are implementing
standardized short-term employment programs to provide new military
spouses initial skills development to improve employment marketability.
Through collaboration with the Department of Labor, we are expanding
mobile career opportunities so our spouses may find jobs quicker when
their sailor executes permanent change of station moves. To promote
hiring of spouses in the private sector, we are developing a nationwide
marketing campaign to promote the military spouses' skills as solutions
to corporate demands.
Montgomery GI Bill (MGIB) Benefit Initiative. Education benefits
are a key component of the incentive package used by the military to
attract and retain quality servicemembers. From our Task Force Life
Work visits to the Fleet, education benefits, specifically the MGIB,
are viewed by sailors as akin to health benefits--as a fundamental
benefit that should be available to all sailors and transferable to
their family members.
We fully support legislation that would expand the ability of
servicemembers to transfer their Montgomery GI Bill (MGIB) to their
dependents.
Geographic Stability. Our Geographic Stability Working Group is
leading the effort to develop implementation strategies for increased
geographic stability throughout the Fleet. Improving geographic
stability during a time when the Navy is transitioning to a more sea-
centric force has its challenges; however it is a critical issue that
consistently remains at the top of the list for ``reasons why people
leave the Navy.''
While cultivating a diverse background in multiple operational
theaters will remain important to ensuring mission readiness, we also
recognize that geographic stability allows members to establish support
networks which permit sailors to be successful everyday. In a time when
dual military couples and single parenthood rates are rising at the
same time as our operational commitments, it is critical we support
healthy family dynamics--geographic stability is an important part of
this.
Part of the solution is ensuring viable shore tour opportunities in
sea-centric locations, many of which we have ``civilianized'' in recent
years. While we are attempting to ``buy back'' some of those billets,
we are also looking towards more creative solutions like the EEAP
whereby a sailor can pursue advanced education in lieu of a traditional
shore tour while also exploring the possibility of ``virtual commands''
as part of our large scale telecommuting effort which has recently
gained much popularity among the Fleet.
Sea Warrior Spiral 1. We continue to make significant progress
towards providing our sailors with an integrated and easy to use system
of Navy career tools that allow them greater personal involvement in
managing their careers.
During the past year we continued the programmatic rigor necessary
to develop Sea Warrior as a program of record for POM-10. In 2007, we
fielded the first version of the Career Management System (CMS) with
Interactive Detailing. This new system has the functionality of
allowing sailors ashore to review their personal and professional
information, view available jobs, and submit their detailing
preferences through their career counselors. The next step in this
evolution is to provide the same functionality to sailors on ships.
This portion of the system has been tested in the laboratory and is
currently in the process of being installed and tested on a selected
group of ships.
The successful development and testing of these increments of
additional functionality to the CMS system are the first steps in
achieving our vision of enabling all sailors to review available jobs
and submit their own applications for their next assignment by June
2009.
Retention of O-6s. There has been significant growth in demand for
control grade officers, particularly for our seasoned O-6s. At the same
time, we are experiencing a shortage of inventory of these senior
officers. In addition to aggressively employing existing retire/retain
authority to allow high-performing O6s to remain on active duty, we
have taken aggressive steps to understand the considerations behind
officers' decisions to stay on active duty past the 25 year point.
Recent surveys indicate that retention among URL Captains is largely
driven by 3 factors: family stability, financial concerns (a leveling
off or reduction of pay and retirement benefits compared to civilian
opportunities), and job satisfaction. We are exploring a variety of
monetary and non-monetary incentives to encourage more senior officers
to make the choice to ``stay Navy'' past the 25 year point. For
example:
To incentivize retention, we may offer a Captain a
single long tour option or a ``bundled detail'' to cover two
tours. This addresses two common concerns of those in senior
ranks: the desire for family and geographic stability to
accommodate a spouse's career and older children attending high
school or college.
For officers beyond the 25 year point, we are
developing several initiatives to address specific financial
concerns. We are exploring financial mitigation for those who
may choose a geographic bachelor tour as a way of providing
geographic stability for the family. In addition, the loss of
most career incentive pays at the 25 years of commissioned
service point makes retirement and transition to a civilian
career more attractive than continued service. Accordingly, we
will pursue specific bonuses selectively targeted to high-
demand senior officer designators. Other initiatives include
assignment to adequate, available quarters, or periodic funded
travel back to the family's location, in return for a
commitment to serve a 2-3 year geographic bachelor tour.
To leverage the power of job satisfaction as a
retention incentive, we are exploring detailing processes to
provide our senior officers with opportunities for increased
responsibility and a heightened sense of value and worth at the
executive level. We are striving to enhance our approach to
managing the careers of Captains that don't screen for Major
Command (approximately 60 percent of the cohort) and those who
are post-major command. Many highly skilled, experienced
officers who reach these career points perceive that their
upward mobility and career options have stalled, and are thus
more likely to choose to transition to the civilian sector.
Establishing a tier of billets that capitalize on a senior
Captain's experience and leadership abilities by providing
meaningful, challenging positions may serve as an incentive for
retention to the 30 year point.
Enhancing the ability of our senior Reserve component
officers to achieve Joint designation is critical to retaining
our control grade talent, and we are aggressively implementing
a plan to make this process executable and easily understood,
without compromising the spirit or integrity of Goldwater-
Nichols.
next steps
We have made great strides in enhancing Navy's military personnel
readiness over the past few years, and this committee has been
unwavering in its support for our manpower, personnel, training and
education goals.
Meeting Navy Recruiting Challenges--Health Professions
As we continue to tackle tough recruiting and retention challenges
among the health care professions, we ask for your continued strong
support for the kinds of flexible tools required to better compete with
the private sector for highly-trained medical professionals and
students. Specifically, we anticipate continuing challenges in
recruiting into clinical specialties of the Medical Service Corps; to
the Nurse Candidate program; Registered Nurses accepting a commission
as a naval officer; and in offering a sufficiently attractive loan
repayment program for Reserve component health care professionals. We
expect this challenge to be further exacerbated by enactment in the
FY08 NDAA of a moratorium on military-to-civilian conversions within
the health professions and requirement to restore certain previously
converted or deleted end strength. Compelled to move forward without
this critical force shaping tool, the number of health care
professionals we will have to recruit and retain will increase among
skill sets for which we have achieved full readiness even under the
reduced requirement made possible by military-to-civilian conversion
authority. We are fully committed to ensuring that we carry out force
shaping in the health professions in a manner which protects the
integrity of the access and quality of care for sailors and their
families and Navy retirees. We urge Congress reconsider its decision in
imposing this moratorium and the requirement to restore converted
billets that are not encumbered by civilian employees by September 30,
2008.
Outreach to Recruiting Influencers
As mentioned earlier, the Millennial Generation is motivated by
different stimuli than their predecessors. Military service is often
not considered when evaluating their career options. Today's
influencers, most of whom never served, are often not inclined to steer
the Millennials toward a military option. I ask that when you meet with
your constituents, and interest groups that play a role in influencing
the decisions of today's youth, please highlight the importance of
service and the many outstanding opportunities available through
service in the United States Navy. The impact of hearing this important
message from Members of Congress will certainly go a long way in
persuading parents, teachers, guidance counselors, coaches, and other
influencers to encourage the young men and women of the Millennial
generation to at least consider serving in the United States Armed
Forces.
conclusion
Again, on behalf of all Active and Reserve sailors and their
families, the Department of the Navy (DON) civilians, and contractors
who support the Navy--I want to thank you for your staunch support of
our policies, programs and plans, and National Defense Authorization
Act for Fiscal Year 2008.
Because of your leadership, our sailors, DON employees and
contractors are more organized, better trained and equipped than at any
time I can recall in my career. In short, they're ready to win in
battle, protect our sovereign soil and to use their skills to help
others in crisis.
Throughout my career, and especially in my role as Chief of Naval
Personnel, it's been my goal to set in place policies and programs that
reorganize our people as the principle means by which our Navy
accomplishes its mission.
Today, our training curriculums and methods of delivery ensure the
continued professional development of our people and are aligned with
fleet requirements, both in terms of the number of sailors we deliver
to the waterfront and the development of their skill sets, so that we
will achieve FIT in our smaller, more sea-centric force, today and in
the future.
We will continue to balance the requirements of our afloat commands
and those of the combatant commanders to meet both enduring Navy
missions and Joint warfighting augmentee responsibilities. A major step
forward, our GSA IA detailing process, implemented in 2007, rewards
volunteerism and instituted predictability and stability for our
sailors and their families, as well as Navy commands. Establishing this
was critical to the long-term goal of keeping our talent in the Fleet.
I'm proud to say, our process and support systems are in place and
working to meet the warfighting requirements and the personal goals of
our people.
Our pays and benefits, continue to keep pace with the civilian
sector, and I thank you for that significant and impactful investment.
With today's low unemployment rate and low-propensity to join the
military, due to the ongoing war, we must be competitive with the
civilian work environment, in order to attract 21st century leaders to
serve.
I'm confident that the policies and programs we have in place
today, and our ongoing initiatives in diversity, life-work balance,
family readiness and the continuum of medical care, will improve upon
what we know already to be a highly desirable organization in which to
work. Our goal, however, is not only to be desirable, but to be among
the best organizations--unmistakably a ``Top 50 Employer''--one that
every young Millennial, regardless of race, gender, socioeconomic or
cultural background wants to affiliate with, contribute to and defend,
because of what we recognizably value--our people.
This goal will keep our service on pace to continue to attract the
best our Nation has to offer. The professional challenges,
opportunities and rewards our sailors and DON civilians experience,
along with the quality of life and service that our sailors and their
families deserve, will retain those high-performing patriots in our
Nation's Navy, and keep us ready to ``defend against all enemies,
foreign and domestic.''
In the end, our ability to maintain this readiness and achieve our
vision is only made possible by having your support and that of the
American public, so again I thank you for that. The authorities you
afforded us along with the budget necessary to realize these plans and
initiatives, enables our people to serve confidently. On behalf of the
more than 550,000 sailors and their families, Civilians and
contractors, thank you for your leadership and confidence, upon which
we rely to achieve our vision for a Cooperative Strategy for 21st
Century Seapower.
Senator Ben Nelson. Thank you.
General Coleman?
STATEMENT OF LT. GEN. RONALD S. COLEMAN, USMC, DEPUTY
COMMANDANT FOR MANPOWER AND RESERVE AFFAIRS, UNITED STATES
MARINE CORPS
General Coleman. Thank you, sir.
Chairman Nelson, Senator Graham, and distinguished members
of the subcommittee, it is my privilege to appear before you
today to discuss Marine Corps recruiting, retention, and other
personnel issues. Today, I would like to make just a few key
points.
First, in regard to our end-strength growth, the Marine
Corps achieved unprecedented success in fiscal year 2007. We
exceeded our goal of growing to 184,000 marines, ending the
fiscal year with an Active Duty end strength of 186,492, and we
fully expect to exceed our next milestone of 189,000 during
fiscal year 2008 as we set our sights toward 202,000 without
lowering our standards. We owe our success, in large part, to
our recruiters, who met all accession goals in fiscal year
2007, while maintaining our high-quality standards. We expect
to meet this challenge again this fiscal year. Thank you for
your support of our enlistment incentives which made these
achievements possible.
Retention should also be viewed as a success. We reenlisted
3,700 more marines in 2007 than in the prior fiscal year--
again, without lowering standards. Nevertheless, retention will
continue to pose a significant challenge as our goals become
more and more aggressive. We thank you for your support of our
selective reenlistment bonus program. It is the foundation of
our retention efforts. The funds provided to us have increased
significantly in recent years and is money extremely well
spent. These funds have enabled us to increase retention in
targeted and specialized military occupational specialties so
that we maintain the leadership and experience necessary for
combat and other operational requirements, as well as for the
new units stood up in support of our 202,000 growth.
I also want to emphasize today our efforts toward Marine
Corps families. Thanks to your support, we are putting our
family readiness programs on a wartime footing, increasing
steady-state funding, and making a host of improvements. We are
establishing school liaison officer capability at every Marine
Corps installation to advocate for our marine's children. We're
also expanding our exceptional family member programs to
improve support and provide respite care to these special
families. These and other initiatives will help ensure that we
fulfill our obligation to our marine's spouses, children, and
other family members.
Lastly, but certainly not least, I want to tout our Wounded
Warrior Regiment. It is quickly becoming what you envisioned, a
comprehensive and integrated approach to caring for our
wounded, ill, and injured marines and sailors through all
phases of their recovery. We have recently implemented a 24/7
Wounded Warrior Call Center to reach out to our wounded
warriors, including those who have already left the Service,
and a job transition cell to help them find satisfying work.
We're very proud of how the regiment has progressed in such a
short time, and are thankful for the high priority you have
given it.
Overall, the commitment of Congress to supporting our
202,000 end-strength growth and to improve the quality of life
for marines and their families is central to the strength that
your Marine Corps enjoys today.
Thanks to you, your Marine Corps remains the Nation's force
in readiness, and will continue to fulfill its mission of being
the most ready when the Nation is least ready.
I look forward to answering your questions.
[The prepared statement of General Coleman follows:]
Prepared Statement by Lt. Gen. Ronald S. Coleman, USMC
Chairman Nelson, Senator Graham, and distinguished members of the
subcommittee, it is my privilege to appear before you today to provide
an overview of your Marine Corps personnel.
introduction
We remain a Corps of Marines at war with over 31,200 marines
deployed to dozens of countries around the globe. The young men and
women who fill our ranks today recognize the global, protracted, and
lethal nature of the challenges facing our Nation, and their dedicated
service and sacrifice rival that of any generation preceding them.
Thanks to you, marines know that the people of the United States
and their Government are behind them. The continued commitment of
Congress to increasing the warfighting and crisis response capabilities
of our Nation's Armed Forces and to improving the quality of life of
our marines and their families is central to the strength that your
Marine Corps enjoys today. The Nation is receiving a superb return on
its investment in the world's finest expeditionary force.
We know the future will remain challenging, but I am confident that
with your continued support, your Corps will remain the Nation's force
in readiness and will continue to fulfill its congressionally mandated
mission of being the most ready when the Nation is least ready.
right-size our marine corps
Active Component End Strength
To meet the demands of the Long War and other crises that arise,
our Corps must be sufficiently manned, trained, and equipped. To this
end, the Marine Corps plans to grow its personnel end strength to
202,000 Active component marines by fiscal year 2011. This increase
will enable your Corps to train to the full spectrum of military
operations and improve the ability of the Marine Corps to address
future challenges. This growth will also enable us to increase the
dwell time of our marines so that they are able to operate at a
``sustained rate of fire.'' Our goal is to achieve a 1:2 deployment-to-
dwell ratio for all of our Active Forces--for every 7 months a marine
is deployed, he or she will be back at home station for at least 14
months.
Our success in the first phase of this growth--184,000 marines by
the end of fiscal year 2007--is a great first step toward our ultimate
end strength goal. Overall, we ended fiscal year 2007 with an Active
component end strength of 186,492 marines. We fully expect to meet our
second goal--189,000 marines this fiscal year.
Funding
The Marine Corps greatly appreciates the increase in authorized end
strength to 189,000 recently passed in the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008. We are funding the end strength
in excess of 180,000 through supplemental appropriations. For fiscal
year 2009, we note that all costs of military personnel are included in
the baseline budget.
Compensation
The vast majority of our personnel budget is spent on entitlements,
including compensation. Compensation is a double-edged sword in that it
is a principal factor for marines both when they decide to reenlist and
when they decide not to reenlist. Private sector competition will
always seek to capitalize on the military training and education
provided to our marines. Marines are a highly desirable labor resource
for private sector organizations. Competitive compensation authorities
aid the Marine Corps in targeting specific areas and provide the
capability to access, retain, and separate as needed. The extensions of
special and incentive pay authorities have demonstrated your continued
support of the Marine Corps and its endeavor to reach our ultimate end
strength goal. We appreciate the continued support of Congress in the
creation of flexible compensation authorities which afford the Marine
Corps with tools that allow us to shape your Corps for the 21st
century.
Military-to-Civilian Conversions
Military-to-civilian conversions replace marines in non-military-
specific billets with qualified civilians, enabling the Corps to return
those marines to the operating forces. Since 2004, the Marine Corps has
returned 3,096 marines to the operating force through military-to-
civilian conversions. We will continue to pursue sensible conversions
as this will aid in our deployment-to-dwell ratio goals for the force.
Reserve Component End Strength
Our deployments in Iraq and Afghanistan have been a Total Force
effort--our Reserve Forces continue to perform with grit and
determination. Our goal is to obtain a 1:5 deployment-to-dwell ratio
within our Reserve component. As our Active Force increases in size,
our reliance on our Reserve Forces should decrease--helping us to
achieve the desired deployment-to-dwell ratio. Our authorized Reserve
component end strength remains at 39,600 selected Reserve marines. As
with every organization within the Marine Corps, we continue to review
the make-up and structure of the Marine Corps Reserve in order to
ensure the right capabilities reside within the Marine Forces Reserve
units and our Individual Mobilization Augmentee program across the
force.
recruiting
Our Recruiters continue to make their recruiting goals in all areas
in support of our total force recruiting mission. This past year, our
recruiting mission was increased as part of a series of milestones to
``grow the force'' and build an active component 21st century Marine
Corps with an end strength of 202,000. Our focus in fiscal year 2008 is
to continue to recruit quality men and women into our Corps as we
expand our ranks.
To meet the challenges of the current recruiting environment, it is
imperative that we maintain our high standards both for our recruiters
and those who volunteer to serve in our Corps. The Corps must continue
to be comprised of the best and brightest of America's youth. We must
also remain mindful that the Marine Corps needs to reflect the face of
the Nation and be representative of those we serve. Our image of a
smart, tough, elite warrior continues to resonate with young people
seeking to become marines.
The Marine Corps is unique in that all recruiting efforts (officer,
enlisted, regular, Reserve, and prior-service) fall under the direction
of the Marine Corps Recruiting Command. Operationally, this provides us
with flexibility and unity of command in order to annually meet our
objectives. In fiscal year 2007, the Marine Corps achieved 100 percent
of the enlisted (regular and Reserve) ship mission (accessions). Over
95 percent of our accessions were Tier 1 high school diploma graduates
and over 66 percent were in the I-IIIA upper mental group testing
categories. In short, we accomplished our recruiting mission achieving
the Commandant's standards and exceeding those of the Department of
Defense (DOD). To meet the Marine Corps' proposed end strength
increase, annual total force accessions missions will steadily grow
from 40,863 in fiscal year 2007 to over 46,000 in fiscal year 2010.
Fiscal year 2008 total force accessions mission is 42,202. As of 1
February 2008, we have shipped (accessed) 12,597 applicants,
representing 104 percent of our total force mission fiscal year to
date. Although recruiting is fraught with uncertainties, we expect to
meet our annual recruiting mission this fiscal year, to include our
quality goals. Additionally, we continue to achieve our contracting
goals for this fiscal year which ensures we have a population of
qualified individuals ready to ship to recruit training as we enter
fiscal year 2009. Achieving this success, as always, is dependent on
your support for our enlistment incentives. We thank you for this
support.
Our Officer Selection Teams were also successful in fiscal year
2007, accessing 1,844 second lieutenants for 101 percent of their
assigned mission. In fiscal year 2008, we are continuing efforts to
increase the population of officer candidates and commission second
lieutenants commensurate with our force structure and the growth in end
strength. To assist our Officer Selection Officers in meeting their
officer accession missions, we have implemented new programs, such as
the College Loan Repayment program, in order to attract prospective
candidates and remain competitive in this difficult recruiting
environment.
For the Reserve component, the Marine Corps achieved its fiscal
year 2007 Reserve enlisted recruiting goals with the accession of 5,287
non-prior service marines and 3,591 prior service marines. As of 1
February 2008, we have accessed 1,484 non-prior service and 1,660 prior
service marines, which reflects 36 percent of our annual mission.
Again, we expect to meet our Reserve recruiting goals this year.
Officer recruiting and retention for our Selected Marine Corps Reserve
units is traditionally our greatest challenge. The Officer Candidate
Course-Reserve introduced in 2007 is helping to address this issue, and
we anticipate commissioning 50 to 75 second lieutenants in the Reserve
this year. Under this program, individuals attend Officer Candidates
School, The Basic School, a Military Occupational Specialty school, and
return to a Reserve unit to serve. When coupled with the selected
Reserve officer affiliation bonus, we believe we have established a
valid method to address the challenge.
retention
Retention is the other important part of building and sustaining
the Marine Corps. As a strong indicator of our forces' morale, the
Marine Corps has achieved unprecedented numbers of reenlistments in
both the First Term and Career Force. When examining mental,
educational and physical components as quality measures, the Center for
Naval Analyses found that the first term force has improved steadily
over the last 8 years and the best marines continue to demonstrate a
higher propensity to reenlist than separate. The expanded reenlistment
goal, in which we sought to reenlist over 3,700 additional marines,
resulted in the reenlistment of 31 percent of our eligible first term
force and 70 percent of our eligible career force--compared to the 22
percent first term and 65 percent career force reenlistments in fiscal
year 2006. This achievement was key to reaching the first milestone in
our end strength increase--184,000 marines by the end of fiscal year
2007--while still maintaining quality standards.
For fiscal year 2008, our retention goals are even more aggressive
to achieve an end strength of 189,000, but we fully expect to meet
them. As of 15 February 2008, we have achieved 6,395 First Term
Alignment Plan reenlistments, or 69 percent of the 9,507 goal. Equally
impressive, we have achieved 7,331 Subsequent Term Alignment Plan
reenlistments, or 90 percent of the 8,124 goal. Altogether, we have
achieved 13,726 total reenlistments, or 78 percent of the combined
goals.
Our continuing retention success will be largely attributable to
several important, enduring themes. First, marines are motivated to
``stay marine'' because they are doing what they signed up to do--
fighting for and protecting our Nation. Second, they understand our
culture is one that rewards proven performance and takes care of its
own.
There is no doubt that your marines' leadership and technical
skills have rendered them extremely marketable to lucrative civilian
employment opportunities. To keep the most qualified marines, we must
maintain Selective Reenlistment Bonus (SRB) funding. In fiscal year
2007, the Marine Corps spent over $425 million in SRB and Assignment
Incentive Pay to help achieve our end strength increase. With a
reenlistment mission of 17,631 in fiscal year 2008--compared to an
historical average of 12,000--the Marine Corps expects to invest $536
million in reenlistment incentives. This aggressive SRB plan will allow
us to retain the right grades and skill sets for our growing force--
particularly among key military occupational specialties.
I am happy to report that the Marine Corps continues to achieve our
goals for officer retention. We are retaining experienced and high
quality officers. Our aggregate officer retention rate was 91 percent
for fiscal year 2007, which is above our historical average. Current
officer retention forecasts indicate healthy continuation rates for the
officer force as a whole.
Concerning our Reserve Force, we satisfied our manpower
requirements by retaining 76 percent in fiscal year 2007, the 6th
consecutive year above our pre-September 11 historic norm of 71
percent. For the current year, Reserve officer retention has thus far
remained above historical norms. Enlisted Reserve retention is
currently lower than has been seen in the last 2 years, and is being
monitored very closely. It is important to note that increased
opportunity for prior service marines to return to the Active component
is affecting Reserve retention rates. Additionally, higher planned
retention in the Active component is reducing the number of personnel
transitioning into the Selected Marine Corps Reserve. For these reasons
we appreciate the increased reenlistment incentive provided in the
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008.
marine corps reserve
This year marks the 7th year that our Reserve component has
augmented and reinforced our Active component in support of the Long
War. Thanks to strong congressional support, the Marine Corps has
staffed, trained, and equipped its Reserve to respond to crises around
the world. Our Reserve component possesses capabilities to fight across
the full spectrum of conflicts to support our Marine Air Ground Task
Forces. As of 1 February 2008, there have been 56,275 Reserve
activations since September 11.
The Marine Corps Reserve continues to recruit and retain quality
men and women willing to serve in our military and help our Nation
fight the Long War. These men and women do so while maintaining their
commitments to their families, their communities, and their civilian
careers. The development of our Long War Force Generation Model has
greatly improved our ability to provide our Reserve Marines with
advance notification of activation. More than 6,100 Reserve marines are
currently on active duty with nearly 5,000 serving in Reserve ground,
aviation and combat support units, while over 1,100 serve as individual
augments in both Marine Corps and joint commands. Eighty-four percent
of all mobilized reservists have deployed to the Central Command area
of operations. To support ongoing mission requirements for Operation
Iraqi Freedom, the Marine Corps Reserve provides approximately 18
percent of our Total Force commitment.
As previously mentioned, recruiting and retention remain a
significant interest as the Marine Corps Reserve continues its support
for the Long War. The increased flexibility and funding authorizations
you provided in the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
2008 are valuable assets to assist in our recruitment and retention
missions; they not only generate greater interest in Reserve
reenlistment, but also provide financial assistance during the critical
period of transition from active duty to Reserve service.
Health care remains an essential part of mobilization readiness for
our Reserve component. TRICARE Reserve Select has helped to ensure that
our Selected Marine Corps Reserve members, and their families, have
access to affordable health care. Increased access and flexibility to
health care for these families assists in alleviating one of the most
burdensome challenges facing families of deploying Reserve marines.
The dedication and Reserve experience provided by our cadre of
full-time support personnel has been a key to success in integrating
our Total Force. Likewise, our Marine Corps Total Force Pay and
Personnel System (MCTFS) has ensured and continues to provide a
seamless continuum of service for our Reserve marines.
The long-term success and sustainability of our Reserve Forces in
both Operational Support and Strategic Reserve roles is directly
related to our ability to prepare and employ our forces in ways that
best manage limited assets while meeting the expectations and needs of
individual marines and their families. In an effort to ensure a well-
balanced total force and address any potential challenges that may
arise, we are constantly monitoring current processes and policies, as
well as implementing adjustments to the structure and support of our
Reserve Forces.
civilian marines
Civilian marines continue to provide an invaluable service to the
Corps as an integral component of our Total Force. With a population of
over 30,000 appropriated and non appropriated funded employees and
foreign nationals, civilian marines work in true partnership with the
active duty and play an important role in supporting the mission of the
Marine Corps and the Long War. Our vision for the future not only
defines what the Marine Corps will offer to, but what it expects from,
its civilian marines.
The Marine Corps strategy for achieving this vision is detailed in
the Civilian Workforce Campaign Plan (CWCP) designed to create,
develop, acculturate, reward, and maintain an innovative and
distinctive civilian marine workforce responsible for providing
exceptional support to the Nation's premier expeditionary ``Total Force
in Readiness.'' Marine Corps Senior Executives have been charged with
overseeing implementation of the CWCP by providing developmental
opportunities and career management for assigned communities of
interest.
The Marine Corps is also committed to the successful implementation
of the National Security Personnel System (NSPS). NSPS will assist us
in achieving the goals and objectives of the CWCP by enabling us to
better support the warfighter and provide a civilian workforce that is
flexible, accountable, and better aligned to the Marine Corps mission.
The first group of Marine Corps organizations converted approximately
1,900 general schedule civilian employees to NSPS in January and
February 2007, and we just completed this month the conversion of
approximately 4,200 more employees across all remaining Marine Corps
organizations, including overseas and field activities. We are actively
participating with the Department of Defense in the development and
implementation of NSPS. Partnering with the Services, we are working to
ensure our civilians are provided opportunities for training and
support for successful transition to NSPS. Our goal is high operational
performance while supporting successful implementation of the system.
information technology
Ensuring accurate, timely pay is supported by our continued efforts
to transform our manpower processes by leveraging the benefits of the
MCTFS, the Department of Defense's only fully integrated personnel,
pay, and manpower system. MCTFS seamlessly serves our Active, Reserve,
and retired members; provides total visibility of the mobilization and
demobilization of our Reserve marines; and ensures proper and timely
payments are made throughout the process. MCTFS provides one system,
one record--regardless of an individual's duty status. According to the
most recent Defense Finance and Accounting Service's ``Bare Facts''
report, MCTFS continues to achieve a pay accuracy rate of over 99
percent for both our Active and Reserve components. MCTFS has enabled
the Marine Corps to move its pay and personnel administration to a
predominately self-service, virtually paperless, secure, web-based
environment. In fiscal year 2007, individual marines and their leaders
leveraged MCTFS' capabilities to process more than 1.6 million
paperless transactions.
taking care of our marines and our families
Marines take care of their own--period. Never has this ethos been
more relevant than during time of war. As marines continue to perform
magnificently around the globe, serving in harm's way, their dedicated
families contribute to mission success by managing the home front.
Oftentimes, with their contribution comes great sacrifice. We realize
that families are the most brittle part of the deployment equation and
it is our moral imperative to ensure marines and families are provided
the right tools to secure their family readiness.
Putting Family Readiness on a Wartime Footing
Last year, at the Commandant's direction, the Marine Corps set out
to ensure our family programs have fully transitioned to wartime
footing in order to fulfill the promises made to our families. Many of
our family and installation support programs underwent rigorous
assessments, and actions are underway to refresh, enhance, or improve
family support programs in five key areas: unit family readiness
programs and Marine Corps Family Team Building, the Exceptional Family
Member Program (EFMP), the School Liaison Officer Program, remote and
isolated support, and installation and infrastructure support.
Unit and Installation Family Readiness Programs
Through our assessments, we found that our Marine Corps Family Team
Building Program and unit family readiness program, the centerpiece of
our family support capability, were based on a peacetime model and 18-
month deployment cycle and largely depended on volunteer support. As
our deployment and tempo of operations increased, we now know that we
overburdened our dedicated volunteers. While our compassionate
volunteers performed magnificently, the Marine Corps must take action
to establish an appropriate division of labor. This will be
accomplished by increased civilian staffing within our programs and the
establishment of primary duty family readiness officers at the
regiment, group, battalion and squadron levels. We will additionally
procure technology to improve outdated processes and reduce manual
functionality.
To implement and sustain our identified family readiness program
improvements, the Marine Corps budget supports a $30 million sustained
funding increase. These improvements, currently under aggressive
implementation, include:
Formalizing the role and relationship of family
readiness process owners to ensure accountability for family
readiness;
Expanding programs to support the extended family of a
marine (spouse, child, and parents (70 percent of marines in
their first enlistment are unmarried));
Establishing primary duty billets for Family Readiness
Officers (FROs) (84 civilian FROs for Regiment/Group and higher
and 302 primary-duty military FRO billets for Battalion/
Squadron level;
Increasing Marine Corps Community Services and Marine
Corps Family Team Building installation personnel at bases and
stations (we are hiring 138 new full-time staff);
Enhancing methods of communication between
installation programs to better synergize support to individual
commands;
Refocusing and applying technological improvements to
our official communication network between commands and
families; and
Developing a standardized, high-quality volunteer
management and recognition program.
Warrior Family Support
Optimally, we would like to keep our families at the bases and
installations when their marines are deployed. We have found that
families find better support being surrounded by others who understand
the nature of deployments and the marine way of life. Accordingly, the
Marine Corps has dedicated $100 million in the fiscal year 2008 Global
War on Terror Supplemental for Warrior Family Support.
At installations across the Marine Corps, to include remote and
isolated locations, we are making quality of life program and services
upgrades to include child care availability and support, playground
equipment, youth sports equipment, fitness center equipment, bike
paths, and facility improvements. These enhancements will further
promote the sense of community required to form strong bonds among our
marine families that contribute so greatly to readiness.
Exceptional Family Member Program (Respite Care)
Parental stress can be heightened for marine families who are also
caring for one or more family member with special needs. To focus on
this specific need, the Marine Corps offers our active duty families
enrolled in the EFMP up to 40 hours of free respite care per month for
each exceptional family member. This care is intended to provide the
caregiver intermittent breaks while giving their family member(s) with
special needs a nurturing and developmentally appropriate environment.
We also seek to provide a ``continuum of care'' for our exceptional
family members. In this capacity, we are implementing EFMP improvements
to provide a continuum of care for EFMs that will ensure appropriate
access and availability to medical, educational, and financial
services. We will utilize assignment processes to stabilize the family
or marine as necessary. Finally, we will work with Federal or State
agencies to ensure a continuity of care for EFMs as they relocate and
change duty stations.
School Liaison Officers
The education of over 41,000 school age children of Marine Corps
parents is a quality of life priority. Our Marine children are as
mobile as their military parents. As they relocate from duty stations,
they encounter academic and extra curricular differences that directly
impact learning and development achievement. To address these education
challenges, we are establishing a School Liaison Officer capability at
every Marine Corps Installation to help parents and commanders interact
with local schools and help resolve education transition issues. This
issue is especially important to our EFMs. Working with commanding
officers, marines, and families, our School Liaison Officers will seek
to optimize the educational experience of elementary, middle, and high
school students.
Our intent for all family support programs is to build trust
between the Marine Corps and our families, enable and empower marines
and their families to advocate and seek help as need from support
programs available at installations and through on-line technology, and
ensure a continuum of care through the lifecycle of a marine and his
mission, career, and life events.
Remote and Isolated Support
We are additionally taking action to improve quality of life at
remote and isolated installations that need infrastructure or expanded
programs to appropriately sustain marines and their families. Actions
underway include updating programs and services to appropriately
support the needs of our Millennial Generation Marines and families who
have experienced multiple deployments. We plan to conduct focus groups
at installations across the Marine Corps to target these ``Generation
Y'' marines and families to determine their specific support
requirements, particularly in view of the tempo of operations. We will
use the results to ensure that our program transformation meets the
needs of the future leaders of your Marine Corps and generations of
marines and their families to come.
Once fully implemented, the recommendations will yield an extensive
network of revitalized family support programs to sustain marines into
the future. Moreover, the enhanced family readiness programs will
better empower marines and families to effectively meet the challenges
of and thrive in today's military lifestyle.
Combat Operational Stress Control
Marines train to fight. Their training includes preparedness that
hardens them physically and instills mental readiness for the stressors
of battle. Commanders bear primary responsibility for Combat
Operational Stress Control (COSC) in the Marine Corps. They also bear
responsibility for leading and training tough, resilient marines and
sailors, and for maintaining strong, cohesive units. We teach
commanders to detect stress problems in warfighters and family members
as early as possible, and to effectively manage these stress problems
anywhere they occur--in theater or at home.
At the center of our COSC Program is a combat/operational stress
continuum model, recommended by our Marine Expeditionary Forces
Commanding Generals, that indicates that stress responses and outcomes
occur on a continuum, from stress coping and readiness at one end of
the spectrum, to stress injuries and illnesses at the other end. These
stress responses are color-coded as green (for ``Ready''), yellow (for
``Reacting''), orange (for ``Injured''), and red (for ``Ill''). Marine
leaders promote green-zone resiliency and mental readiness in their
marines, sailors, and families, and this is done primarily through
training, leadership, and unit and family cohesion. Training and
education in COSC knowledge, skills, and attitudes is a priority not
only for units preparing to deploy, but throughout deployment cycles,
as well as in formal career schools for all marines.
We also continue our collaboration with sister Services, the
Department of Veterans Affairs' National Center for Post-Traumatic
Stress Disorder, and external agencies to determine best practices to
better support marines and their families.
Casualty Assistance
Your marines proudly assume the dangerous but necessary work of
serving our Nation. They selflessly accept their mission and perform
magnificently around the globe. Some marines have paid the ultimate
price, and we continue to honor them as heroes who contributed so much
to our country. Our casualty assistance program has and continues to
evolve to ensure the families of our fallen marines are always treated
with the utmost compassion, dignity, and honor. Our trained Casualty
Assistance Calls Officers provide the families of our fallen marines
assistance to facilitate their transition through the stages of grief.
Last year, congressional hearings and inquiries into casualty next
of kin notification processes revealed deficiencies in three key and
interrelated casualty processes: command casualty reporting, command
casualty inquiry and investigation, and next of kin notification. These
process failures were unacceptable. As soon as we discovered these
process failures, we ordered an investigation by the Inspector General
of the Marine Corps and directed remedial action to include issuing new
guidance to commanders--reemphasizing existing investigation and
reporting requirements and the importance of tight links between these
two systems to properly serve marines and their families. Additionally,
effective December 2007, the Headquarters Marine Corps Casualty Section
assumed responsibility for telephonic notification of the next of kin
of injured/ill marines from the commands. The Casualty Section is
available 24/7 to provide status updates and support to family members.
The Marine Corps will continue to monitor our processes, making every
effort to preclude any future errors and ensure marines and families
receive timely and accurate information relating to their marine's
death or injury.
wounded warrior regiment
In April 2007, the Wounded Warrior Regiment was activated to
achieve unity of command and effort in order to develop a comprehensive
and integrated approach to Wounded Warrior care. The establishment of
the Regiment reflects our deep commitment to the welfare of our
wounded, ill, and injured. The mission of the Regiment is to provide
and facilitate assistance to wounded, ill, and injured marines, sailors
attached to or in support of marine units, and their family members,
throughout all phases of recovery. The Regiment provides non-medical
case management, benefit information and assistance, and transition
support. We use ``a single process'' that supports active duty,
Reserve, and separated personnel and is all inclusive for resources,
referrals, and information.
There are two Wounded Warrior Battalions headquartered at Camp
Lejeune, NC, and Camp Pendleton, CA. The Battalions include liaison
teams at major military medical treatment facilities, Department of
Veterans Affairs Poly-trauma Centers and Marine Corps Base Naval
Hospitals. The Battalions work closely with our warfighting units to
ensure our wounded, ill, and injured are cared for and continue to
maintain the proud tradition that ``marines take care of their own.''
The Regiment is constantly assessing how to improve the services it
provides to our wounded, ill, and injured. Major initiatives of the
Regiment include a Job Transition Cell manned by marines and
representatives of the Departments of Labor and Veterans Affairs. The
Regiment has also established a Wounded Warrior Call Center for 24/7
support. The Call Center both receives incoming calls from marines and
family members who have questions and makes outreach calls to the
almost 9,000 wounded marines who have left active service. A Charitable
Organization Cell was created to facilitate linking additional wounded
warrior needs with charitable organizations that can provide support.
Additionally, the Regiment has strengthened its liaison presence at the
Department of Veterans Affairs Headquarters. These are just some of the
initiatives that reflect your Corps' enduring commitment to the well-
being of our marines and sailors suffering the physical and emotional
effects of their sacrifices for our great Nation.
Thank you for your personal and legislative support on behalf of
our wounded warriors. Your personal visits to them in the hospital
wards where they recover and the bases where they live is sincerely
appreciated by them and their families. Your new Wounded Warrior Hiring
Initiative to employ wounded warriors in the House and Senate
demonstrates your commitment to and support of their future well-being.
We are grateful to this Congress for the many wounded warrior
initiatives in the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
2008. This landmark legislation will significantly improve the quality
of their lives and demonstrates the enduring gratitude of this Nation
for their personal sacrifices. I am hopeful that future initiatives
will continue to build upon your great efforts and further benefit the
brave men and women, along with their families, who bear the burden of
defending this great country.
We are at the beginning of a sustained commitment to care and
support our wounded, ill, and injured. As our Wounded Warrior Program
matures, additional requirements will become evident. Your continued
support of new legislation is essential to ensure our Wounded Warriors
have the resources and opportunities for full and independent lives.
conclusion
As we continue to fight the Long War, our Services will be required
to meet many commitments, both at home and abroad. We must remember
that marines, sailors, airmen, and soldiers are the heart of our
Services--they are our most precious assets--and we must continue to
attract and retain the best and brightest into our ranks. Personnel
costs are a major portion of both the Department of Defense and Service
budgets, and our challenge is to effectively and properly balance
personnel, readiness, and modernization costs to provide mission
capable forces.
Marines are proud of what they do! They are proud of the ``Eagle,
Globe, and Anchor'' and what it represents to our country. It is our
job to provide for them the leadership, resources, quality of life, and
moral guidance to carry our proud Corps forward. With your support, a
vibrant Marine Corps will continue to meet our Nation's call!
Thank you for the opportunity to present this testimony.
Senator Ben Nelson. Thank you.
General Newton?
STATEMENT OF LT. GEN. RICHARD Y. NEWTON III, USAF, DEPUTY CHIEF
OF STAFF, MANPOWER AND PERSONNEL, UNITED STATES AIR FORCE
General Newton. Mr. Chairman and Ranking Member Graham,
it's noted that this is my first opportunity to testify before
this subcommittee. I can tell you that I'm honored to be here
today. I'm honored to be here today, certainly with Dr. Chu and
my teammates here on this joint team, the other Services,
military personnel teammates. I want to thank you also for this
opportunity to discuss the airmen who serve the world's most
respected airspace and cyberspace force.
Our airmen have been continuously deployed and globally
engaged in combat missions for over 17 straight years since
that first day that an F-15 touched down over in Saudi Arabia,
in August 1990, in the beginning of Operation Desert Shield.
Today, airmen are fully engaged in the interdependent joint
fight, and stand prepared for rapid response in conflict across
the globe, to provide capabilities for our joint combatant
commanders.
Our priorities are clear: winning today's fight, developing
and caring for our airmen and their families, and preparing for
tomorrow's challenges.
Today's airmen are doing amazing things to execute the Air
Force mission and certainly to meet Air Force commitments and
keep the Air Force on a vector for success against potential
future threats in a very uncertain world. Our aim is to improve
capability while maintaining the greatest combat-ready Air
Force in the world.
I look forward to accomplishing this through the lens of
five key focus areas that I'm taking on as your Air Force
Deputy Chief of Staff for Manpower and Personnel: managing end
strength efficiently to maximize capability; recruit and retain
the highest-quality airmen; maximizing the continuum of
learning throughout the airmen life cycle; continue on focusing
on quality-of-life programs for airmen and their families; and
to maximize the efficiencies through evolving smart business
solutions.
Due to increased operations, maintenance, and personnel
costs, we've been forced to self-finance a centerpiece of
future dominance, the massive and critical recapitalization and
modernization effort for our aging air and space force.
As we prepare for an uncertain future, we are transforming
the force to ensure we are the right size and shape to meet
emerging global threats with joint and battle-trained airmen.
In order to dominate in the domains of air and space and
cyberspace throughout the 21st century, we must recruit and
develop and organize America's diverse and brightest talent for
complex multinational and joint interagency operations of the
future.
Our recruiting force has met their enlisted recruiting
mission through persistence and dedication. Since 2000, the Air
Force has enlisted over 258,000 airmen, against a goal of
approximately 255,000 airmen, for nearly 101 percent mission
accomplishment.
For fiscal year 2008, the active-duty requirement is
27,800, and just over 9,000 airmen have been assessed, up to
this point, with an additional 9,500 awaiting basic military
training, down at Laughlin Air Force Base, outside of San
Antonio, TX. So, we're on track to meet our goals this year.
For fiscal year 2007, Active-Duty Air Force officer
retention finished 11 percent above the goal, while enlisted
retention fell short, about 8 percent below the goal. The Air
Force Reserve fell short of its enlisted retention goal by 3
percent, but was less than one-half percent shy of the officer
retention goal. The Air National Guard met their overall
officer and enlisted retention goals for fiscal year 2007.
Even with these successes, some enlisted specialties in the
active Air Force did not achieve their overall retention goal,
including air traffic control and Mid-East crypto-linguists,
structural civilian engineering, pavement and construction
equipment, vehicle operations, and contracting. As part of our
ongoing Air Force transformation, we are reviewing and
synchronizing our development efforts to realize efficiencies
in how well we put into play developmental tools--education,
training, and experiential--to produce our stellar airmen, our
military and civilian, our officer and enlisted, our Active and
Reserve components.
We're dedicating resources to ensure our most important
weapon system, our airmen, are prepared to deliver airspace and
cyberspace power wherever and whenever it's needed.
I'm excited that my new duties as your Air Force A-1 enable
me to also be the quality-of-life champion for the Air Force.
Quality of life is not necessarily a list of programs and
services; it's the way we take care of our airmen through these
programs, and how they know that we're supporting them and
their families, who, every day, make the sacrifices for
America. We know airmen focus more on their mission when they
have a positive way to rejuvenate from stress, when they have
the knowledge that their families are in good hands, and when
they are comfortable, and also confident, in being part of the
larger Air Force team.
To achieve the Secretary of Defense's objective to shift
resources from bureaucracy to battlefield, we are overhauling
Air Force personnel services. Our total force personnel
services delivery initiative modernizes the processes, the
organizations, takes advantage of new technologies through
which we are able to support our airmen and their commanders.
Our goal is to deliver higher-quality personnel services with
greater access, speed, accuracy, reliability, and efficiency.
The Air Force plans to program the resulting manpower
savings to other compelling needs over the next 6 years. This
initiative enhances our ability to acquire, train, educate,
deliver, employ, and empower airmen with the needed skills and
knowledge and experience to accomplish the diverse set of Air
Force missions.
In conclusion, your Air Force is often the first to the
fight, and the last to leave. We give unique options to all
Joint Force Commanders. The Air Force must safeguard our
ability to see anything on the face of the Earth, range it,
observe it, or hold it at risk; supply, rescue, support, or
destroy it; assess the effects and exercise global command and
control over all of these activities.
Rising to the 21st century challenge is not a choice, it's
our responsibility to bequeath a dominant Air Force to
America's joint team that will follow us in service to the
Nation.
Again, we appreciate your unfailing support to the United
States Air Force. I'm honored to be here this afternoon, and I
look forward to your questions and discussion.
[The prepared statement of General Newton follows:]
Prepared Statement by Lt. Gen. Richard Y. Newton III, USAF
introduction
Mr. Chairman, members of the committee, thank you for this
opportunity to discuss the airmen who serve in the world's most
respected air, space, and cyberspace force. Our airmen have been
continuously deployed and globally engaged in combat missions for over
17 straight years--since the first F-15 touched down in Saudi Arabia in
August 1990. Today, airmen are fully engaged in the interdependent
joint fight and stand prepared for rapid response and conflict across
the globe as our Nation's sword and shield.
Our priorities are clear: winning today's fight; developing and
caring for our airmen and their families; preparing for tomorrow's
challenges. Today's confluence of global trends already foreshadows
significant challenges to our organization, systems, concepts, and
doctrine. We are at an historic turning point demanding and equally
comprehensive revolution. The future strategic environment will be
shaped by the interaction of globalization, economic disparities and
competition for resources; diffusion of technology and information
networks whose very nature allows unprecedented ability to harm, and
potentially, paralyze advanced nations; and systemic upheavals
impacting state and non-state actors, and thereby, international
institutions and the world order.
Due to increased operations, maintenance, and personnel costs, we
have been forced to self-finance the centerpiece of future dominance--a
massive and critical recapitalization and modernization effort for our
aging air and space force. Budgetary pressures forced difficult choices
to ensure that the Air Force would maintain the right balance across
our personnel, infrastructure, readiness, and investment portfolios.
The Air Force undertook significant personnel reductions to
generate billions of dollars to reprogram towards recapitalizing and
modernizing essential air, space, and cyber systems, congruent with our
three key mission priorities. The impact on our warfighting airmen has
been significant. We have been compelled to make some very difficult
choices with respect to our people. Fewer platforms that require fewer
operators and maintainers are part of the equation. We are taking a
hard look at all our processes and streamlining our organizations. At
the same time, we want to improve the training and professional
development of our airmen.
However, maintaining a Required Force of 86 modern Combat Wings
will also be significantly impacted by current programmed reductions in
Air Force end strength. The Air Force has submitted a report to
congressional defense committees on Total Force end strength
requirements due to new and emerging missions. This report identifies
our Total Force end strength requirement of 681,900 in fiscal year 2009
growing to 688,500 by fiscal year 2015 to operate, maintain, and
support a required force of 86 modern combat wings and how the Air
Force will fund these requirements.
force shaping
We are working to tailor our personnel mix to the new security
environment by using a variety of force shaping tools across the
personnel inventory. In fiscal year 2007 we used a variety of voluntary
and involuntary initiatives to reduce our end strength in very specific
areas. We deliberately took greater risk in the home-station and
support career fields to minimize risk in the combat arena. We are
pleased with the results of our fiscal year 2007 Force Shaping efforts.
However, we will not be looking for any significant force reductions
beyond normal separation and retirements in fiscal year 2008. We intend
for fiscal year 2008 to be a ``strategic pause'' as we evaluate the
effects of our force shaping efforts on the field. This is the time for
people and organizations to ``settle'' and we will use the feedback
from the field to make any necessary course corrections in fiscal year
2009. The fiscal year 2008 Force Shaping program has been structured to
achieve approximately 650 officer separations and retirements over and
above normal attrition. The program will offer Voluntary Separation
Pay; Limited Active Duty Service Commitment waivers; Lieutenant Colonel
and Colonel Time in Grade waivers for retirement; Officer 8-year Total
Active Federal Commissioned Service retirement (vice the normal 10 year
requirement); and continuation of the officer and enlisted Blue to
Green Interservice Transfer program. We have cancelled the fiscal year
2008 Force Shaping Board because we are confident we will meet our end
strength without needing to involuntarily reduce our officer corps.
There are currently no enlisted Force Shaping programs in fiscal year
2008 except for the voluntary Blue-to-Green Interservice Transfer
program.
personnel services delivery
To achieve the Secretary of Defense's objective to shift resources
``from bureaucracy to battlefield,'' we are overhauling Air Force
personnel services. Our Total Force (Active Duty, Air Force Reserve
(AFRES), Air National Guard (ANG), and Civilian) Personnel Services
Delivery initiative modernizes the processes, organizations, and
technologies through which the Air Force supports our airmen and their
commanders.
Our goal is to deliver higher-quality personnel services with
greater access, speed, accuracy, reliability and efficiency. The Air
Force plans to program the resulting manpower savings to other
compelling needs over the next 6 years. This initiative enhances our
ability to acquire, train, educate, deliver, employ, and empower airmen
with the needed skills, knowledge and experience to accomplish Air
Force missions.
Our front line airmen at base-level are key. They are the experts
on the day-to-day workings of the Air Force. Just a few months ago, our
base-level airmen at Grand Forks Air Force Base (AFB) presented us a
technological innovation. It's a locally developed software application
that brings mass quantities of Personnel data right to each commander
in a consolidated, meaningful ``dashboard'' of information. All of this
happens with minimal intervention of the Personnel ``middleman''
thereby freeing the Personnelists up to work on other tasks. We are
very excited by this homegrown ``Base-Level Service delivery Model''
and are actively working to incorporate it across the Air Force in
fiscal year 2008. We will let the bases incorporate it into their
programs and procedures and see how we can adapt it to different
organizations and environments. We plan to adapt it continually and
make improvements as we get inputs from the field.
national security personnel system
Our civilian workforce is undergoing a significant transformation
with implementation of the Department of Defense (DOD) National
Security Personnel System (NSPS). NSPS is a simplified, more flexible
civilian personnel management system that improves the way we hire,
assign, compensate, and reward our civilian employees. This modern
management system enhances the Air Force's responsiveness to the
national security environment, preserves employee protections and
benefits, and maintains the core values of the civil service.
NSPS design and development has been a broadbased, participative
process that included employees, supervisors and managers, unions,
employee advocacy groups and various public interest groups. Almost 100
percent of eligible employees have converted to NSPS--over 39,000. NSPS
is the most comprehensive new Federal personnel management system in
more than 50 years, and it's a key component in the DOD's achievement
of a performance-based, results-oriented Total Force.
recruiting
As we prepare for an uncertain future, we are transforming the
force to ensure we are the right size and shape to meet emerging global
threats with joint and battle trained airmen. We are becoming a smaller
force, with a critical need for specific skills. In order to dominate
in the domains of Air, Space, and Cyberspace throughout the 21st
century, we must recruit, develop, and organize America's diverse and
brightest talent for the complex, multinational, and interagency
operations of the future.
Our recruiting force has met their enlisted recruiting mission
through persistence and dedication. Since 2000, the Air Force has
enlisted 258,166 airmen against a goal of 254,753 for 101 percent
mission accomplishment. For fiscal year 2008, the active-duty
requirement is 27,800 and 9,258 new airman have accessed up to this
point with 9,461 waiting to enter Basic Military Training. We're on
track to meet our goals. To date for fiscal year 2008, we've accessed
100 percent of our active duty goal, and accessed 100 percent and 114
percent of our Reserve and Guard accession goals, respectively.
The United States Air Force Recruiting Service (AFRS) continues to
find the right person, for the right job, at the right time and this is
clearly evident in our most critical skills. Recruiting Service has
filled every requirement for Combat Controller, Pararescue, Tactical
Air Control Party, Survival, Evasion, Resistance, and Escape, Fuels
Systems, Security Forces, Armament Systems, Munitions Systems,
Utilities and Linguists since 2001. This has been accomplished through
hard work and the significant assistance of the U.S. Congress. Recruits
who choose to enter these career fields are offered an Initial
Enlistment Bonus ranging from $1.5K to $13K, depending on the job and
length of enlistment. No other enlistment bonuses are offered.
The AFRESs exceeded its recruiting goals for the 7th consecutive
year in fiscal year 2007. However, the Base Realignment and Closure
(BRAC), Total Force Initiative and PBD 720 cuts will pose significant
challenges in 2008. Aggressive measures will be needed to stand up new
missions at Pope, MacDill, and Elmendorf AFBs. While we've benefited
from active duty Force Shaping initiatives we anticipate tougher days
ahead as the prior service recruiting pool will be smaller forcing us
to rely more heavily on non-prior service (NPS) individuals. Competing
for the NPS pool against other Reserve and Active Duty components that
may have more attractive bonus packages will add to recruiting
challenges. Funding for advertising and bonuses will play a key role in
meeting manning requirements.
The majority of our officer programs have also met with mission
success, with the exception of medical recruiting. Last year the Air
Force recruited just under half of its target for fully qualified
healthcare professionals. Broken down by specialty, we recruited 68
doctors (17.4 percent of target), 45 dentists (25.5 percent), 222
nurses (62.5 percent), 125 biomedical scientists (62.8 percent), and 34
medical administrators (97 percent). Currently, the Air Force's
Medical, Dental, and Nurse corps have significant manning challenges
that are a directly attributable to recruiting and retaining these
personnel. These challenges are made all the greater because the Air
Force has deployed over 8,000 medical officers in support of the global
war on terror since 2001. Since September 11, AFRS and Air Force
Medical Service have been working together to implement innovative ways
to address our shortfalls in medical recruiting, to include increasing
the number of available health professions scholarships and developing
a ``Career Field Champions'' network of medical professionals to assist
with our recruiting effort.
retention
In fiscal year 2007, we continued to manage and shape the force
across and within skills. Maintaining acceptable retention levels
through targeted programs continues to be critical to this effort.
Force shaping ensured active duty end strength met our longer term
requirements.
For fiscal year 2007, active duty Air Force officer retention
finished 11 percent above goal (excluding force shaping losses), while
enlisted retention fell below goal (92.7 percent of goal), still within
acceptable margins. The AFRES fell short of its enlisted retention goal
by 3 percent, attaining 97 percent and was .2 percent shy of the
officer retention goal, attaining 99.8 percent. The ANG met their
overall officer and enlisted retention goals for fiscal year 2007. Even
with these successes, some enlisted specialties in the active Air Force
did not achieve their overall retention goal, including Air Traffic
Control, Mid East Crypto Linguist, Structural Civil Engineering, and
Pavement and Construction Equipment Vehicle Operations, and
Contracting.
Our most critical warfighting skills require a special focus on
retention to maintain combat capability due to critical manning and the
demands of increased operations tempo placed on career fields including
Pararescue, Combat Control, and Explosive Ordnance Disposal. Budget
support for retention programs is critical to effectively manage the
force and preserve needed warfighting capability. These programs are
judiciously and effectively targeted to provide the most return-on-
investment in both dollars and capability.
Retention rate in the AFRESs is also becoming a concern although we
missed our goal in fiscal year 2007 by only a slight margin (99.8
percent). However, this marked the second year in a row that we didn't
reach our AFRES retention targets. We've seen an increase in the
turnover rate via gradual decreases in First Term and Career Airmen
reenlistments over the last 3 years with reenlistments dropping nearly
10 points. We believe this is partly due to fallout from BRAC and PBD
720, but will monitor closely to identify opportunities to influence
our airmen's behavior as they reach key career decision points.
The Air Force's ability to retain experienced health care personnel
past their initial commitment has declined--compounding our recruiting
challenges. The retention at the 10-year point is 26 percent for
physicians, 18 percent for dentists, 34 percent for nurses, 36
percent for biomedical sciences officers, and 52 percent for
administrators. The Air Force continues to develop both accession and
retention incentives to ensure the right mix of health professionals.
Our warfighting airmen are committed to serving, including those
experiencing high deployment rates. Combatant Commander (COCOM)
requirements and the global war on terror levy a high demand for
pilots, navigators, intelligence, civil engineers, and security forces
officers as well as enlisted airmen in aircrew, special operations,
intelligence, vehicle operators, civil engineering, and security
forces. Despite an increased operations tempo and deployment rate, the
Air Force continues to achieve acceptable retention levels across the
officer and enlisted force.
Finally, we understand that support to families is a critical part
of retention. Working together with their spouses and families, airmen
make a decision to stay in the Air Force based on many factors, one of
which is the quality of life they and their families deserve. With a
strategic plan that highlights the importance of ``Taking Care of
People'', Air Force recognizes that families are vital to retention.
force development
As part of our Air Force Transformation, we are reviewing and
synchronizing our development efforts to realize efficiencies in how we
utilize developmental tools--educational, training or experiential--to
produce airmen (military and civilian; officer and enlisted; Active and
Reserve). We're dedicating resources to ensure our ``most important
weapon system'' is prepared to deliver Air, Space, and Cyberspace power
wherever and whenever it is needed. Synchronized, deliberate
development relies on a common language, a common framework and
enduring processes. We are finalizing this common language and
framework by publishing our Institutional Competency List and Continuum
of Learning framework. Next, we must review our developmental processes
to ensure they describe requirements, align programs, and link
investments with outcomes. As an example, we eliminated redundancies in
legacy ancillary training reducing training time to 90 minutes per
airman ultimately saving 8 hours, per year, per airman, for a total of
over 6 million Air Force work-hours per year.
We are synchronizing processes to meet requirements for the skills
airmen need in an expeditionary environment. Starting in 2011 we'll
send select airmen to the Common Battlefield Airman Training course to
enhance the expeditionary skills they learned in Basic Military
Training. We are teaching airmen self aid and buddy care so they can
take care of each other when their bases take mortar fire or when teams
come under fire while performing their duties ``outside the wire.''
We've established a Center of Excellence for Expeditionary Ground
Combat to ensure our pre-deployment training is responsive to the
changing tactics and techniques used by our enemies in the AOR. We are
extending Basic Military Training to 8.5 weeks, to teach airmen skills
to defend an Air Base and to operate in the expeditionary environment
of the 21st century.
We established the Air Force Culture and Language Center at Maxwell
AFB, AL, unique in its mission to develop expeditionary airmen by
synchronizing education and training across our Professional Military
Education Schools and deployment training venues. We are teaching
language training and enhancing regional studies at our Air Command and
Staff College and Air War College. We've also implemented regional
studies at our Senior Noncommissioned Officer (NCO) Academy, NCO
Academy, and Airmen Leadership Schools. We are consolidating Air Force
Specialty codes to provide broader skill sets and enabling flexibility
in global war on terror and support of COCOM missions.
We have also placed a great focus on culture and language training
at our officer accession sources, with the objective of developing
officers with acute cultural understandings, able to forge partnerships
and alliances. A majority of Air Force Academy and Reserve Officer
Training Corps (ROTC) Cadets are enrolled in foreign language education
and are now able to participate in study abroad programs, not only at
foreign military academies but also local universities. One force
development strategy is to target foreign language speakers, primarily
focusing on Air Force ROTC detachments that sponsor foreign language
programs. Currently, we have 54 cadets enrolled as Language Majors,
with another 629 scholarship cadets majoring in technical degrees and
taking languages as an elective. Another 100 cadets annually
participate in foreign culture and language immersions in countries of
strategic importance. Beginning with cadets contracted in August 2006,
Air Force ROTC scholarship cadets majoring in nontechnical degrees must
now complete 12 semester hours of foreign languages. Further, USAFA
cadets who are technical majors are taking 6 semester hours in a
foreign language and non-technical majors are taking 12 semester hours
in a foreign language.
caring for airmen
I'm excited that my role as Air Force A1 enables me to be the
Quality of Life champion for the Air Force. Quality of life is not
merely a list of programs and services; it's the way we take care of
our airmen through those programs, and how they know we're supporting
them and their families who sacrifice for America. We know airmen focus
more on their mission when they have positive ways to rejuvenate from
stress, when they have the knowledge that their families are in good
hands, and when they feel good about being part of the larger Air Force
team.
The Air Force is shifting a portion of funding from manpower and
base operating support to address our critical recapitalization
requirements. However, we understand that to maintain combat capability
we must continue to balance our modernization of our weapons systems
with development of airmen who are ready, willing, and able to employ
them. To that end, we are finding innovative ways to transform our
community support services and programs while avoiding unnecessary
impacts to services delivered. One way we are transforming is through
the headquarters realignment of Air Force Services from Logistics to
Manpower and Personnel. This transition opens the door to increased
efficiencies and a more seamless approach to customer service. It also
allows for a single point of oversight across the entire ``people
enterprise'' and tightly linking the personnel, manpower, and services
functions. We remain committed to ensure the needs of our airmen and
their families are met.
Taking care of our seriously wounded, injured, or ill airmen is a
top priority. We continue to expand the Air Force Wounded Warrior
Program in an effort to provide the best possible care to these brave
airmen and their families. The heart of the Air Force Wounded Warrior
Program is the Family Liaison Officer (FLO) who is assigned to each
patient for the duration of their need. The FLO serves as a single
point of contact between the airman and the numerous helping agencies.
Our FLOs provide a critical resource to deal with the unfamiliar
routine of the recovery process and prevents the airman from being lost
in the bureaucracy.
Similarly, the Air Force assigns a Community Readiness Coordinator
(CRC) when a servicemember casualty notification is made. The CRC works
closely with the FLO to ensure the combat related injured or ill
servicemember and their family receives complete information and
entitlements. Later, if the member is not returned to active duty, we
assist with Federal employment, entitlements and benefits information,
financial resources, family support, and more. The member is tracked
monthly for 5 years after separation or retirement.
Our Fit to Fight program and food service operations are
cornerstones of combat capability. Airmen who are well-fed and
physically fit are healthier, think more clearly, handle more stress,
and are better able to complete the mission despite reduced sleep and
extended hours. This translates directly to increased combat capability
from our most important weapon system--our people.
child development programs
Child care is the number 1 quality of life issue for our airmen and
their families. We are focused on providing quality, available and
affordable child and youth development programs to airmen and their
families through an extensive system of programs and services both on
and off Air Force installations. A recent national study highlighted
the DOD child care program as leading the Nation in quality standards
and effective oversight. We recognize that readily available, quality,
and affordable child care and youth programs are a workforce issue with
direct impact on mission readiness. We are proud of the Air Force's
contribution to this program and believe our child care program is a
critical factor in helping airmen remain focused on the mission.
Airmen must balance the competing demands of parenting and military
service, particularly challenging in today's environment of higher
operations tempo, increased mobilization, and longer periods of time
away from home. We are committed to serving these airmen and their
families by redoubling our efforts to reach out and assist all members
of the total force through robust child and youth programs wherever the
member resides, when they need care. Traditional child care is provided
in on-base Child Development Centers (CDCs), School Age Programs housed
in Youth Centers, and Family Child Care (FCC) Homes. The Air Force
requires that CDCs be accredited by the National Association for the
Education of Young Children and school age programs be accredited by
the National After-school Alliance, and the National Association of
Family Child Care also offers accreditation to FCC providers. A diverse
array of approaches to provide airmen and their families with
nontraditional child care are available to support our families outside
of typical duty schedules, or in geographically separated areas.
The Air Force Extended Duty Child Care (EDC) Program provides
18,000 hours of extended child care each month in FCC homes at no-cost
to the military member. The EDC initiative enables airmen and their
families to obtain high-quality child care from Air Force licensed or
affiliated providers at or near their base when parental workloads
increase due to longer duty hours and exceed their typical 50-hours per
week child care arrangements. Child care is provided for nontraditional
hours, such as evenings and weekends at no additional costs to parents.
This initiative also helps parents with ``child care emergencies'' when
their regular source of child care is not available, and care is
provided for spouses of deployed or TDY airmen needing child care
created in part by absence of spouse. The EDC program is available to
Active Duty, ANG, and AFRES members.
The Air Force Returning Home Care (RHC) Program supports airmen
returning home from deployments lasting 30 or more days and for airmen
who routinely deploy on a short-term basis (cumulative of 30 days in a
6-month period) in support of contingency operations. Airmen receive 16
hours of free child care upon their return to their home station and
their family. The care is provided in one of the Extended Duty FCC
homes on base that is currently under contract as part of an Air Force
Services initiative to support airmen required to work extended hours.
The RHC Program supports post-deployment by providing child care while
airmen and spouses reconnect.
Our Airman and Family Readiness professionals are helping airmen
and their families adapt to the realities of life in an Expeditionary
Air Force. They do this through personal and family readiness
counseling, personal financial management, Air Force Aid assistance,
spouse career planning, and transition and relocation assistance.
Experts in the Equal Opportunity and Sexual Assault Prevention and
Response arenas help every Airman exercise positive and productive
interpersonal relationships, in both professional and personal
interactions. The Air Force is a family, and our clubs and recreation
programs foster and strengthen those community bonds, and promote high
morale and an esprit de corps vital to all our endeavors.
I'm also excited to serve as Chairman of the Board of Directors for
the Army and Air Force Exchange Service. These exchanges exist in one
form or another at every installation where soldiers, airmen, and their
families need support, both at home station and in contingency or
deployed environments. The Board acts on behalf of the Secretaries and
Chiefs of Staff of the Army and the Air Force in directing the
operations of this $8.7 billion per year retail operation that serves
the needs of soldiers and airmen wherever they are stationed, providing
goods and services and generating dividends to support morale, welfare,
and recreation benefits. They do more than consistently provide
affordable products for soldiers and airmen; they bring a sense of
community and familiarity to the larger military family, and that
carries over outside United States borders where exchanges also bring a
sense of home to a deployed soldier or airman. Just recently, the Board
approved 17 major construction and image update projects for a total of
$169 million, all in an effort to ensure the highest levels of service
and quality to our soldiers, airmen, and their families. Growing up in
a military family, I've been a lifelong customer of both, and I'm
dedicated to supporting both of them fully for our soldiers, airmen and
their families.
Additionally, we are equally committed to ensuring that all airmen
are well trained and provided with modern, safe and efficient equipment
and facilities to complete their mission. We provide life-sustaining
support, such as food service and lodging, to our troops in the field
and essential community programs to our airmen and their families back
home. Through innovative systems and programs and the hard work of our
dedicated personnel we continue to provide critical mission capability
for our commanders and vital support for our members and their
families.
conclusion
Today's airmen are doing amazing things to execute the Air Force
mission, meet Air Force commitments, and keep the Air Force on a vector
for success against potential future threats in an uncertain world. We
are ready and engaged today, but we must continue to invest to ensure
tomorrow's air, space, and cyberspace dominance. Our aim is to improve
capability while maintaining the greatest combat-ready force in the
world. We will accomplish this through dedication to my five focus
areas: Manage end strength efficiently to maximize capability; Recruit
and retain the highest quality airmen; Maximize continuum of learning
throughout airman life cycle; Continue focus on quality of life
programs for airmen and their families; and Maximize efficiencies of
business processes through evolving IT solutions.
The Air Force is often first to the fight and last to leave. We
give unique options to all Joint Force Commanders. The Air Force must
safeguard our ability to: see anything on the face of the Earth; range
it; observe or hold it at risk; supply, rescue, support or destroy it;
assess the effects; and exercise global command and control of all
these activities. Rising to the 21st century challenge is not a choice.
It is our responsibility to bequeath a dominant Air Force to America's
joint team that will follow us in service to the Nation.
We appreciate your unfailing support to the men and women of our
Air Force, and I look forward to your questions.
Senator Ben Nelson. Thank you.
Secretary Chu, we've spent time showing concern and looking
for solutions to the sexual assault issues in the armed
services today, because preventing those assaults in the
military remains a high priority in Congress, and I'm sure it
is with the military as well, and Congress is going to continue
to monitor the DOD actions on this issue.
In that regard, in the Ronald Reagan National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2005, Congress required the
Secretary of Defense to expand the mission of the Task Force on
Sexual Harassment and Violence at the Military Service
Academies to examine sexual-assault matters throughout the
entire Armed Forces, and to report findings and recommendations
to the Secretary of Defense within 12 months of its initial
meeting. The Secretary of Defense is then required to report to
Congress.
In the statement of managers accompanying this legislative
requirement, the conferees stated, ``Given the urgency of the
need for effective action to prevent and resolve sexual-assault
offenses against military members, the conferees expect the
task force will provide an independent assessment of the
effectiveness of policies and programs developed by the
Department, as well as the success of the military Services at
all levels, in achieving their implementation.''
What's the status of the task force, at this point?
Dr. Chu. Sir, thank you for that question. It is a very
important issue. We agree with your presumption, that the first
priority is prevention, not simply reaction after a terrible
event has occurred.
The task force has been appointed. We are in the process of
putting in place a more senior executive director to give it
greater heft within the Department. It has held its first
administrative meeting, which I believe, advised by lawyers,
doesn't count as the ``clock starting'' that you mentioned.
I do think the task force at this time is helpful, because
we've had time for the policies to be implemented across the
force, as a whole, time to begin to assess their effects to
see, are we in the right place? Are we doing the right things?
What further steps should we pursue?
We have, of course, conducted the surveys that are required
by statute. We have transmitted to you the academy surveys,
specifically. I have spent some time perusing the focus-group
report, which is part of the package we have sent you, at the
military academies, in which the interviewers have sat down
with the young men and women at those institutions.
I am encouraged by what those cadets/midshipmen have told
us. It's a very different picture from what was true 3 or 4
years ago, when I think there was considerable fear in some
quarters, and distrust. They may not use all the fancy
bureaucratic terms that we employ, but they know we've put
counselors in place, they know the procedures for reporting
incidents. I'm particularly struck by the comments of the women
at these academies; at least in my judgment, they feel that we
have created a safe environment for them with our various
policies. They're not all the same--there are some amusing
differences across the Services, about how they've addressed
this issue, but I do believe substantial progress has been
made.
Senator Ben Nelson. Do you have any idea of when we might
expect a report from the group?
Dr. Chu. From the task force?
Senator Ben Nelson. Yes.
Dr. Chu. Since it's just getting started, I do think it's
going to be toward the end of this year before we'll see
substantive material.
Senator Ben Nelson. Will that report include more than the
Service Academies?
Dr. Chu. Yes, sir, absolutely. As directed, it is to be an
across-the-board look at all our policies. We have put, as I
know you appreciate, a great deal of training emphasis on this
issue, starting with basic training for both officers and
enlisted personnel.
Senator Ben Nelson. Thank you.
In terms of suicide prevention, I know the Army has
recently experienced an increase in the number of suicides, and
some are holding up the Air Force suicide program as a
successful model for the Army and other Services to emulate.
General Newton, can you briefly describe the Air Force's
suicide prevention policy and your assessment of its success to
date? I realize you're new into it, but you may have some
thoughts about it at this point.
General Newton. Yes, sir. Thank you for that question, and
I'll be brief. But from a standpoint of where it starts in the
Air Force, it starts down at the base level, down at the unit
level. Other programs, much like the suicide programs that
we've had in the past, or other similar programs, that's where
we find a lot of success, down at the unit level; rather than
being a top-down, it's a bottom-up, point one.
The second point is how we communicate. How do we convey
to, not only our airmen--and, by the way, it's Active Duty,
Guard, and Reserve, but also to our civilians, as well--
communication showing that, not only at the unit-commander
level, but again, now top-down, that we as a Service put a lot
of great value. Again, I think the fact that we are able to
communicate to people, to have them actually understand that we
can discuss things that perhaps have been held back in years
gone by, particularly in a very high operations-tempo
environment, and with the expeditionary nature of Air Force
today.
My last point on this is that we have discovered that, not
only does it work in garrison or on base, in a traditional
sense, but it also fits an expeditionary model.
Senator Ben Nelson. General Rochelle and General Coleman
and Admiral Harvey, can you give us some idea of what your
experience is with the programs you have in each of your
Services, and how effective you think that they are at the
present time?
General Rochelle. Happy to do that, Chairman Nelson.
First of all, I should mention that it's clear that the
increase in suicide, as well as other measures that we track
very, very closely, are a reflection of the amount of stress
that's on the force. There has been a task force--Suicide
Prevention Task Force--in existence for quite some time. But,
what the Secretary and the Chief have directed is greater
Surgeon General, chaplain, Army G-1, Provost Marshal, and other
specialist oversight and steerage of that effort, focused on
four things:
First is removal of the stigma that is associated with
seeking mental health counseling and support. Our most recent
Military Health Advisory Team trip into theater has borne out
some very good results of the elimination of that stigma--the
reduction of that stigma.
The second is exactly what General Newton spoke to,
sensitizing our junior-most leaders, not only of how to
identify and respond to soldiers who are in danger, but, more
importantly, reemphasizing that this is a part of our Army
values, it's one of the tenets of our Army values, never
leaving a fallen or falling comrade behind.
Third is increasing the mental health professionals in
direct support of our soldiers.
Finally, providing commanders, at every level, actionable
intelligence when prevention measures fail--with intelligence
that they can use to then prevent--and ideally prevent the next
one.
Senator Ben Nelson. Do you have any data that would
establish the tracking of high tempo of operations (OPTEMPO)
with the increase? In other words, are there any statistics,
Dr. Chu, that would establish that there is some correlation
between the high ops tempo and the increased suicide rate?
Dr. Chu. I do.
We have looked at suicide rates for all four, sir. We have
tracked them for years, actually. The chairman has testified to
the quality of DOD suicide prevention programs, which I think
have been recognized in the civil sector, recently with some
awards.
I do think it is still speculative to ascribe causality to
``Why has the Army rate started to rise?'' because the Marine
Corps rate has not risen. So, it's not quite the same in each
Service.
Also, the majority of the suicides really are here at home.
Of those today, the majority of people are on their first
deployment. So, it's a more complex picture. I would be very
hesitant to ascribe to any one cause. We do know a fair amount
about precipitating factors. Failed relationships are a key
factor across the board. Financial difficulty is a key factor
across the board. But, I think I would be careful about drawing
any immediate conclusions about, ``Why has the Army rate gone
up?'' and, ``Why at this particular time?''
Senator Ben Nelson. My time is up, but, maybe, Admiral and
General Coleman, you might briefly--General Coleman, I'll give
you a chance to go first, because your numbers apparently are
not increasing, at some level, even with a high OPTEMPO.
General Coleman. Yes, sir. That is correct, sir. Again,
thanks for allowing me to answer the question.
Since about 2001, our numbers have remained relatively low;
meaning, they did not increase. We do not see a correlation
between OPTEMPO and suicide rate. Obviously, one suicide is one
too many. Our ethos is a small unit--at the small unit level,
and emphasizing that it's not weak to seek help or to seek
assistance. But, our main focus is on that small unit, small
unit leader, the buddy system. We see no correlation between
deployments. Whether a marine who committed suicide had been to
the fight or had not been, there's no increase in the numbers
since 2001, sir.
Thank you, sir.
Senator Ben Nelson. Thank you.
Admiral?
Admiral Harvey. Yes, sir. Our suicide rate is--for details,
since 2004, is about 10.3 or so per 100,000, down to about 9.5
per 100,000 now. So, fairly steady, with a robust operations
tempo throughout that period of time. Our focus has been on
unit training. Interestingly enough, if you look at the
demographics of, sadly, those who are the most likely to take
their own life, it is a relatively senior individual, not the
young kid, the one who's been around for a while. It's that
mid-grade petty officer, that chief petty officer, who are in
positions of authority, which makes this a little more unique,
because the traditional ``looking after your people''--who's
looking after those who's looking after the people? So, it's a
matter of unit training on awareness, unit training on the
ability to intervene, the concept of a shipmate as someone who
will step forward at the right time in order to prevent
something from happening, and not just react to something
that's happening. It's intense training on this part,
understanding the demographics, and making sure we're ready to
put forward with the mental health professionals available to
us to help guide those efforts.
Senator Ben Nelson. Thank you.
Dr. Chu. Mr. Chairman, could I add just one comment? It is,
I think, useful to underscore that, although each one of these
is a tragedy, our rate in the military is, and has been, at or
below the gender and age-adjusted rate for American society, as
a whole. We've also seen in civil society that's been reported
in news media, where--in some ways, this parallels with Admiral
Harvey--older suicide rates have been rising in civil society.
So, again, I do not think we fully understand the causality of
all these troubles. We are concerned by the fact that the
Army's rate has been rising. Let me underscore that point.
Senator Ben Nelson. Thank you.
Senator Graham.
Senator Graham. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Dr. Chu, I think you're pretty well aware of the fact that,
last year, this committee and Congress as a whole passed a
provision that would promote the Judge Advocates General to
three-star rank, Lieutenant General or Vice Admiral, and I
think that was effective January 28. Do you know the status of
attempts to comply with that legislation? Are there any
problems that I need to be made aware of?
Dr. Chu. No, sir, I don't believe there are any problems.
We are very much aware of the provision. It has the Secretary's
personal interest, and he is asking the Department to act in a
unified way, since it affects all three Services.
Senator Graham. Thank you very much. If you have any
problems, please let me know.
Now, pharmacy costs. We've been trying to deal with ways to
lower our pharmacy costs without hurting quality, and actually
improving access. Can you tell me where we stand now with
trying to come up with a new pharmaceutical system?
Dr. Chu. We will, of course, implement the statutory
provisions that you have enacted. We are looking at, again, the
question, and we very much hope for partnership with Congress
of, how do we address the overall TRICARE structure, as you
signaled in your opening comments.
We do believe that the report of the task force that
Congress required that we constitute does provide a roadmap for
the way ahead. We can change the specifics, obviously, and that
needs to be a constant process, and we're very glad that you
have agreed to receive that briefing, because I do think it
provides us with a set of guidelines as to how to think about
other issues.
Senator Graham. Thank you very much.
Admiral Harvey, one of the issues facing, I think, all
Services is health care professionals. You're competing in a
very tough market out there. Maybe just very briefly, each of
you, starting with the Navy, could you tell me what your
biggest challenge is, in terms of your health care costs and
obligations in your health care professionals, of recruiting
and retaining those professionals? Is there anything we can do?
Admiral Harvey. Sir, I'm very pleased to tell you that this
committee and this Congress have done an awful lot in the 2007
and 2008 authorization bills that have enabled us to, I
believe, turn the corner, for the first time in 5 years, and
put ourselves on a path to success in recruiting in every area
for our medical professionals. Let me just give you a quick hit
on what's come out of those bills that gave us the tools that
we needed to have in what is a very, very tough market.
Our 4-year active nurse corps accession bonus has gone from
$15,000 in 2005 to $25,000 in 2007. I'm going to make nurse
corps accession goals this year.
Critical wartime specialty accession bonuses for medical
corps, dental corps officers, up to $400,000; general surgeons,
$300,000; psychiatrists, $175,000; emergency medicine,
$175,000. I am 40 percent ahead of where I was last year on
medical corps accessions. We have 80 accepted and 92 in
process, against a goal of 358.
The dental officer accession bonus has increased to
$75,000. I expect to make our goal of 141 for dental corps
accessions this year.
The Health Professions Scholarship Program increased to a
maximum amount of $30,000 per year, and the Health Professions
Loan Repayment Program, critical action that you all put into
the bills, increased to $60,000 a year.
So, I see that these tools are being received very well. We
have made medical recruiting the number-one priority in our
recruiting command, and it's my number-one priority in my job,
as Chief of Naval Personnel. We have the Surgeon General and
his team onboard. Doctors are helping us recruit doctors.
Nurses are helping us recruit nurses. Our medical service corps
are helping us recruit those health care professionals.
So, I'm not declaring victory, sir, but I am saying after 4
to 5 years of missing every goal in every year, I believe we
have turned the corner on this one, and I'm really looking
forward to when we get the results of medical school decisions
here, in the next 2 months, that we'll be able to come back and
tell you, yes, we are definitely on the path to success.
Senator Graham. That's great. One of the unsung heroes of
this war, that our men and women in uniform and, I guess, some
contractors, but primarily men and women in uniform, who are
handling combat casualties, it's just an amazing story.
General Rochelle?
General Rochelle. Senator Graham, I thank you for that
question. I would like to echo Admiral Harvey's comments about
the increases in incentives. But, I would take a slightly
different tack with respect to where Congress has been most
helpful, in terms of our medical recruiting, and that is,
echoing Dr. Chu's comments about authorities, giving us the
flexibility--the Army, in particular, in 2005--to pilot
inventive and innovative programs that would allow us to be
able to stretch out and do things in quite a different way.
Two examples--we are about to launch, in the Army, a
program to grow our own nurses--registered nurses, bachelor of
science in nursing graduates--in partnership with universities.
The second is, we will soon launch, as part of our pilot
authorities granted by this committee, by Congress, a waiver of
the military service obligation that accrues to every
commissioned officer in the Army--as a pilot. We think this
will give us a huge increase, in terms of the challenges in the
marketplace.
So, I would echo everything that Admiral Harvey has said;
most especially, the Health Professions Scholarship Program and
the increase in those incentives; but, the authorities, by far,
have been the most effective.
Senator Graham. I'll be very brief, here. I know Senator
Webb has questions.
General Coleman, we're growing the Marine Corps; it seems
to be we're on track to grow the numbers we need.
General Coleman. Yes, sir.
Senator Graham. The quality is being maintained. Is there
any major deviation in quality, here, as we try to grow our
numbers?
General Coleman. Thank you, sir. Sir, we have not lowered
our standards one bit. Our goal, last year, was 184,000 end
strength. I believe we came in at 186,000-plus, and we have not
lowered our standards in any way, shape, form, or fashion.
Senator Graham. Is the Marine Corps generally in good
shape, here?
General Coleman. The Marine Corps is in great shape, sir.
Senator Graham. Personnel wise?
General Coleman. Yes, sir, great shape.
Senator Graham. All right. Anything we can do for you, let
us know.
General Newton, the Air Force has a sort of dilemma here.
We're, I think, 5 percent short of where we need to be, in
terms of personnel. Tell me your dilemma and what we can do to
help you, here.
General Newton. Yes, sir. We made a conscious decision, as
we look at striving to recapitalize our force and modernize our
force, the average aircraft age--I'm sure you heard reported--
is over 24\1/2\ years old. So, we've made the conscious
decision, as we look at our program force, of decreasing end
strength by 40,000. So, we're on a glide slope, by the end of
fiscal year 2009, to get down to about 316,600--the number for
Active Duty end strength.
Senator Graham. Is that wise, given the OPTEMPO?
General Newton. Sir, it's a balance between cost and risk.
I'll tell you that we submitted a report to Congress, just
several weeks ago, with regard to what--as I just indicated,
the program force is, versus the required force. The required
force, in order to meet our global commitments, with new
emerging missions, with the growth of end strength, the United
States Army and the United States Marine Corps, appears to be
about 330,000 if you look at the Program Objective Memorandum
starting around fiscal year 2010 and through 2015. If you're
asking me the question, ``Are we incurring more risk by staying
on glide path to a reduced end strength for program force down
to 316,000?'' I would say, yes, sir, we are. But, again, it
comes down to the challenge between the costs of--so forth
and--as well as the overarching need at this juncture to
recapitalize and modernize.
Senator Graham. So, you're having to cut your personnel
cost to pay for your capital needs, is that the deal, here?
General Newton. Sir, if you think of it in terms of the
number of banks we went to, in this case we made the decision
in Program Budget Decision 720 back in November 2005 to make
that very tough recapitalization call and went into the
personnel account.
Again, the backdrop of that is, with new emerging
missions--I didn't mention, but we have a new combatant command
standing up in U.S. Africa Command--not only are we striving to
dominate in air and space, by cyberspace, as well, with our
plans to stand up a new cyberspace command. But, if you look at
the QDR report that came out around that same time period,
which reports that the Air Force is to maintain 86 modern
combat wings, it's the difference between, obviously the cost
and the risk, but also the difference between where we are,
programmatically, but also in terms of requirements.
Senator Graham. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Ben Nelson. Senator Webb.
Senator Webb. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Gentlemen, first, I would like to just start by saying--
listening to the reactions on the question about suicide
prevention and your programs and the information that you have,
I've been watching this for 6 years now, through three
different family relationships, from the enlisted infantry
company level, looking up, and I don't have the service-wide
data that you have, but I do have a serious concern about this.
The things that I have seen are admittedly anecdotal, but they
kind of contravene all of the things you're just saying, in
terms of age and OPTEMPO and these sorts of things. Because
they are personal in nature, and because they're anecdotal, I
don't think it's appropriate for me to go into it in a hearing,
but I would like the opportunity to have you come and sit in my
office for about 10 minutes and explain some of the concerns
that I have. I don't believe I'd be doing my job if I didn't
say this. We really have a responsibility to make sure we
examine the potential as it exists. Sometimes, as data filters
up to the top--having spent 5 years in the Pentagon, 4 of them
with Dr. Chu, I know how that can go. So, at some point, I
would enjoy being able to sit down and talk to you all about
that.
Dr. Chu. Delighted, Senator.
Senator Webb. One statistic that jumps out at me, David,
from all the years that I've been involved in this, is this
notion that fewer than 3 out of 10 of America's youth are
deemed fully qualified to serve in the military. That just
astounds me because when you look back, for instance, at the
Vietnam era, one out of every three males in the age group
actually served and there were many more who would have been
physically qualified. To what do you attribute this number?
Dr. Chu. I think there are two principal factors, in my
judgment. One is, in the military, we have set far higher
standards, particularly for educational achievement than was
true before and far higher standards than we set in the force
in the early days of the volunteer force, when Congress rebuked
us, as you recall, in the 1970s, for the low fraction of high
school diploma graduates and the weak performance on the Armed
Forces Qualification Test. So, we really have set ourselves to
be Lake Woebegone. We have set a standard that 90 percent
should be high school diploma graduates. The estimates--and
they are only estimates--of the high school diploma graduation
in the country hover between 70 and 80 percent. Everybody in
the military, as I know you appreciate, is a high school
graduate, either through diploma or General Equivalency
Diploma. That didn't used to be true. Similarly, in the AFQT,
we aim to have 60 percent or more--and three of the four
Services are really in the 70 percent range--of scores above
average. We limit mental category IV to 4 percent of
accessions, for example, whereas Project 100,000 in the 1960s
deliberately took mental category IV individuals, in the hopes
that--often high school dropouts--we could rehabilitate them
and put them on a more productive track.
Senator Webb. Right, but just to recall the history of that
30 years ago, during the Carter administration, we redefined
what category IV was. We created category IIIA and then
category IIIB, and a whole lot of the IIIBs were category IVs
previously.
Dr. Chu. Let me double check, but I think the category
limits were kept more or less the same.
[The information referred to follows:]
The Armed Forces Qualifications Test (AFQT) Category definitions
have remained the same since the inception of the Joint-Service
enlistment test battery in the mid-1970s. However, in the late 1970s,
we experienced a miscalibration (scaling error) of test scores when new
forms of the enlistment test were implemented. The result, often called
the ``misnorming,'' was that AFQT scores ranging from 21 through 49
were particularly inflated. For example, a recruit with a reported
score of 50 should have received a score of 41. When the error was
discovered, the scores were adjusted and by 1980, new norms were
implemented. But with all that going on, the AFQT Category definitions
remained unchanged: an AFQT percentile score of 50 or better was, and
remains, defined as AFQT Category I-IIIA: AFQT Category III is for
scores from 31 through 64. with AFQT Category IIIA defined as scores of
50 to 64 and AFQT Category IIIB for scores from 31 through 49; AFQT
Category IV is for scores of 10 through 30; and AFQT Category V
includes scores 9 or lower.
Dr. Chu. The other big factor, I think--and this is
something that is a national challenge--is the issue of
physical fitness, and particularly obesity. A large fraction of
the loss of the cohort that is described in this study that has
been done is because they're not medically qualified. This is
not the draft-era failing the physical issue; these are recent
standards for physical fitness and obesity that are
sufficiently tight that large numbers of young Americans can't
comply.
It doesn't necessarily mean--and this is one of the
internal issues that we are examining (the Army is examining in
pilot)--that we're necessarily in the right place on some of
those standards. The Army does have a so-called ARMS
experiment, where we're--instead of looking at the indicators,
we ask the person to actually perform for us--do a step test, I
think as one of the key ingredients. If they can do that well,
even if they might be a larger girth than the rules would
otherwise argue should be the case----
Senator Webb. It would seem to me--I have a very limited
amount of time here, and I know where you're going on this--
that if you take, for instance, truly disqualifying conditions,
such as disease or systemic disorders and those sorts of
things, you still have a pretty large group of people that
you're potentially missing out on, here. The Marine Corps used
to have what we called ``Fat Boy Platoons,'' where they would
take people who were overweight, and run them through a pre-
boot-camp conditioning program, and then in-process them. In
terms of high school graduates, I've always been of a mind that
if you take someone with a higher mental category on their
testing, who happens to be a non-high-school grad, you can make
very fine military people out of them, and help them redirect
their life.
Walter Anderson, who's the CEO of Parade Magazine
Enterprises, was a high school dropout who enlisted in the
Marine Corps and became valedictorian of his college class
after he got out.
I want to ask another question, here, so I don't lose all
my time on this, but I would hope that you could find ways to
expand the potential recruitment base and take advantage of
that.
Dr. Chu. We agree, sir. And, just very quickly to say, the
Army is running another pilot--so-called Tier Two Attrition
Screen--where we are looking at other indicators--and,
specifically, some combination of test scores and other
attributes, to say, could they substitute for the diploma as a
predictor of success in the military? So, we agree; we want to
enlarge that pool.
Senator Webb. General Rochelle, I'm interested in this
notion that--and, actually, for Dr. Chu, as well, potentially--
of transferability with the educational benefits. First of all,
has that been costed? Has anybody put a cost on this?
Dr. Chu. If I may answer that part, sir--the specifics of
the program are still being debated within the administration,
issues of, ``Should you have served a certain number of years
before you can do this?'' So the cost estimates depend on that
set of answers.
Senator Webb. So, we have a program that the President
mentioned in his State of the Union Address, and Secretary
Gates mentioned when he testified, that we really don't have a
cost for. Is that correct?
Dr. Chu. No, we do have a cost for it, sir.
Senator Webb. You do have? What's the projected cost?
Dr. Chu. It depends on the parameters of the program.
Senator Webb. What's the low and the high?
Dr. Chu. The low ranges from $0.5 billion a year to above
$1 billion a year, depending again on the parameter choices
that you're making.
Senator Webb. Just for the transferability.
Dr. Chu. Transferability, yes, sir.
Senator Webb. Okay. Let me make two suggestions to you,
here. Number one, having served on the House Veterans Committee
for 4 years, there was a lot of wisdom over there when this
idea came up, 30 years ago, that you have to be very careful
because you're taking a benefit away from a veteran. There's
one point in your life you may want to transfer this off to a
family member and 9 years later you're divorced and you're out
on the economy, and you want to get an education and your
benefit's gone, then what do you do? That's point number one.
Point number two is, I've been working really hard to try
to get the right kind of a GI Bill, instead of this Montgomery
GI Bill, that would actually allow you to expand your potential
recruitment base in an area where you're not really able to
recruit that individual who has a propensity to come into the
military, for family tradition, because they love their
country, but not necessarily because they want to become a part
of a career force, when they know they're going to get a full
boat out of it, the same way that people in World War II got,
if they get on the other end of it. That total cost is about--
we're trying to get a firm estimate, but it's about $2 billion,
to dramatically change the GI Bill and really help recruitment,
here.
Dr. Chu. Sir, you raise two very important issues. Let me
respond very briefly.
First, on your concern with the irrevocable nature of it
and perhaps having deep regret at some later point, yes, that
is one of the issues that we are, likewise, concerned with. We
want to structure this so that we protect the servicemember
from what might not always be a decision that he or she would
sustain over time.
Senator Webb. How do you do that?
Dr. Chu. I'd rather not comment yet, sir, if I may.
[Laughter.]
But, we do have some ideas on that point.
Second, on the cost estimates, VA did testify last year
when your bill was first introduced that, at least as then
structured, it was more like $7.5 billion a year--$75 billion
over a 10-year period, 2008 to----
Senator Webb. What, my bill? S. 22?----
Dr. Chu. They also testified that it would be technically
complex to carry out, when people did it in 1944 on the back of
a memo pad----
Senator Webb. The best estimate we have now from the
Congressional Budget Office (CBO) is $2 billion.
Dr. Chu. Then, I believe you've revised the parameters, but
I defer to CBO.
Senator Webb. Okay. Well, we haven't an official estimate
out anywhere. I don't know where the DVA got $7.5 billion,
other than the fact that the administration opposes the program
because they're saying that DOD believes it will affect
retention.
Dr. Chu. I have looked at the VA's estimates for the bill,
as then drafted. I understand you've made some proposed changes
to it. I do think the $75 billion number over 10 years is in
the ballpark, so to speak. Now, one could structure a less
expensive proposal, that's absolutely true.
Senator Graham. Senator Webb, I don't mean to interrupt,
but could you tell me what your bill does? I apologize, but I
don't know.
Senator Webb. The bill basically gives a mirror benefit to
the people who have been serving since September 11 as those
people who came back from World War II received. It pays
tuition, buys their books, and gives them a monthly stipend.
The bill, as originally introduced--and, Dr. Chu, you're
correct on this--had a room-and-board provision in it, and also
had a provision where all private schools would give a full
tuition. We've modified it on that but I don't think that would
in any way bring the bill to the cost that people say that it
has.
I would just strongly urge you to take a look at what that
might do, in terms of your potential recruitment pool.
My time's way up; thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Ben Nelson. Thank you, Senator Webb.
I have a question from Senator McCaskill who had planned to
attend, but she is presiding over the Senate from 3:00 to 5:00
today, and so she's asked that I ask the question on her
behalf, which I'm happy to do.
This is her question: ``I want to address the issue of
administrative personality disorder discharges in DOD.'' My
colleagues, Senators McCaskill and Lieberman, have taken
particular leadership on these issues. They have raised
concerns with the propriety of use of these discharges, which
lead to a discharge of a servicemember for what is deemed a
`pre-existing' personality disorder. ``The discharge, unlike a
medical discharge, is not accompanied by a medical or a
monetary compensation, and in some ways, may be viewed as a
black mark on the servicemember's permanent military discharge
file. In the case of combat veterans, it seems that a post-
combat finding that a servicemember's mental health problems
are not combat-related, but rather pre-existed service, may be
suspect.
``In July 2007, Dr. Sally Satel, a resident scholar at the
American Enterprise Institute, noted in her testimony before
the House Veterans Affairs Committee that `The controversy
surrounding Chapter 5-13 discharges would suggest the need for
a reevaluation of screening protocols currently used by DOD.
Misapplication of the Chapter 5-13 discharge sets up the kind
of Catch 22 for the DOD. First, the military deems a recruit
sufficiently mentally fit to be sent into training and then
into a war zone, but then when psychiatric problems arise, it
turns around and claims that those problems were there all
along, problems that should have shown up earlier in their tour
of duty.
``Further, the summer 2007 report of the Mental Health Task
Force found that servicemembers may be being pressured to
accept personality disorder discharges instead of awaiting more
thorough medical diagnoses and gaining compensation through the
MEB and PEB process.''
``Finally, it's my understanding that the DOD instruction
on personality disorder charges has not been updated since
1982.
``Secretary Chu, are you concerned that the administrative
personality disorder discharges are being misused in the DOD?''
Dr. Chu. The short answer, sir, is no. But, let me first
underscore two points that I know you're familiar with. One,
these are only reached upon the advice of fairly senior
clinicians; this is not something cavalierly adopted. Second,
it's basically a no-fault discharge for the individual. In a
number of these cases, discharge could be on another basis, but
it might not--but, it's an honorable discharge.
Senator Ben Nelson. It is, but doesn't it carry a stigma?
Dr. Chu. I'm not so sure. It depends whether people can
read the codes and so on, so forth. I don't think that's the
big issue.
That all said, we are looking at whether it would be wise
to require yet more significant review before such a discharge
is employed, and whether some of that review should be
triggered if the person has served in a combat theater.
So, we agree it's an area we ought to relook at. We are
engaged in that with our colleagues in the military
departments. I would urge we be careful not to rule out the use
of this discharge because in some cases for the individual it
is actually a better basis for discharge than some of the
alternatives.
Senator Ben Nelson. I don't think that there would be any
expectation to rule it out altogether, just perhaps updating
the 1982 approach.
Dr. Chu. We are in the process of doing that, yes, sir.
That's appropriate to ask.
Senator Ben Nelson. Thank you.
There was a recent series in the Denver Post relating to
deploying medically unfit soldiers. This would be to you,
General Rochelle. Those articles reported that 79 soldiers, who
were determined to be medical no-goes, were knowingly deployed
to Iraq. The most recent article described the soldier being
pulled out of a hospital, where he was being treated for
bipolar disorder and alcohol abuse, so that he could be
deployed to Kuwait. Thirty-one days later, he was returned to
Fort Carson because health care professionals in Kuwait
determined that he shouldn't have been sent there in the first
place. These articles quote an e-mail from Fort Carson's 3rd
Brigade Combat Team as saying, ``We've been having issues
reaching deployable strength, and thus, have been taking along
some borderline soldiers who we would otherwise have left
behind for continued treatment.''
I suspect that catches all of us a little bit flatfooted,
that that kind of a situation could be occurring. Have you been
able to look into that? Because I'm sure it's been brought to
your attention, since it was reported so widely in the papers.
General Rochelle. It has, Mr. Chairman. I am familiar with
the incident. Let me say that that particular incident is under
review--the Fort Carson case. Therefore, it would be
inappropriate for me to comment on it.
But from a policy perspective, I will say two things that
are significant.
First, every soldier who has a questionable deployability
status, medical or otherwise, is reviewed not only by--
certainly, medical is reviewed by a clinician and then that
review, subject to the review also of the chain of command. We
would not knowingly deploy a soldier into combat who should not
be deployed.
Senator Ben Nelson. Excuse me. What about borderline? I
mean, that was the from the combat team who had some borderline
soldiers.
General Rochelle. ``Borderline'' may very well, in this
case, mean an area of judgment within a range. But, I say
again, sir, with absolute affirmation, that I have confidence
that commanders would not knowingly deploy a soldier who would
be dangerous to himself, to the unit, or the mission.
Senator Ben Nelson. As you complete the investigation and
review of this current situation, could you get in touch with
us to let us know what you found out?
General Rochelle. Yes, sir.
Senator Ben Nelson. I would imagine that the question would
apply to all the other Services, as well. This might have been
an example, citing the Army, but we'd want to make sure that
there wouldn't be any situation like this for any of the
Services. So, if we can be sure of that, that would be helpful.
General Coleman, during Secretary Gates' recent trip
abroad, he made comments regarding NATO forces not being able
to combat a guerrilla insurgency. The Marine Corps is now
preparing to send an additional 3,200 marines to Afghanistan.
Is the Marine Corps' end strength sufficient to send an
additional 3,200 marines to Afghanistan--asking you the
question without expecting to get crosswise with the Secretary
of Defense, but you are here to give us your opinion.
[Laughter.]
General Coleman. Thank you, sir.
Yes, sir, we are well prepared. Certainly, the plan has
been done. Last week, I was in both Iraq and Afghanistan. We
looked at some of the areas where our forces may go. There was
a number of areas that we could not visit because of weather,
but our 3,200, plus or minus, marines are ready--prepared and
ready to go. They will be combat ready and 100 percent up round
when it is time to deploy.
Senator Ben Nelson. That ``combat ready'' would mean that
they would have the equipment, including body armor or whatever
is required, to qualify them as combat ready. Is that correct?
General Coleman. That's correct, sir. We would say they
were a full-up round, which means they were 100 percent
prepared, sir.
Senator Ben Nelson. Do you have any thought on what the
impact could be, of this deployment, on recruiting and
retaining--the recruitment in the Marine Corps?
General Coleman. Sir, we're doing better than expected in
our recruiting. We're not having--our goal is 189,000 at the
end of September 30 for this year. We have every reason to
believe that we will exceed 189,000 end strength, and that will
be without lowering our standards. So, yes, sir, there are no
concerns about how this will affect recruitment and retention.
Now, I would venture to say that there was a planned end
date to this deployment. If that end date were extended, and
other things weren't adjusted, then that may cause some
concerns. But, as it stands right now with this mission, we're
fully capable and fully ready to take it on, sir.
Senator Ben Nelson. Yesterday General Casey, in testifying
before the Senate Armed Services full committee, stated that
one of the top five areas that Army families expressed concern
about was access to quality health care. He said that soldiers
and their families are dealing with an inundated health care
system, and those stationed in more remote areas may not have
access to as many providers as they would consider adequate.
Maybe Dr. Chu and General Rochelle, can you tell us a bit
more about the problems that the Army families are having with
health care coverage? Senator Graham made some reference to,
maybe, splitting off the programs into different programs for
retirees versus Active members and their families, but perhaps
you could just tell us a little bit more, because this is
obviously something very important, and General Casey has now
raised it to attention, where maybe there's something we can do
about it.
Dr. Chu. Yes, sir. Thank you for raising that issue.
We do poll our people repeatedly about their satisfaction
with the health care that they receive. Generally, the system
gets quite good grades.
It is the case, interestingly, that the Active Duty
members, the younger members in the patient population, tend to
be more critical. The retired population tends to be much more
satisfied, even though it doesn't have quite the same access
rights as the Active Duty population. There's an interesting
relationship here as to how you perceive the world.
There is an issue, in some areas, with the ease of access
to specialty care. I think, in general, access to primary care
is quite good. The Services set high standards, in terms of
primary care availability, and generally meet those standards.
We will be looking at those posts where General Casey, and the
Army, have identified issues as to whether we have enough
uniformed providers in that area. Do we have a strong enough
network for the TRICARE program, where we go to the civil
sector--and that's particularly true for the specialty care--to
support that?
Certainly, there have been issues in the past about
reimbursement rates from the government under TRICARE. We're
prepared to address those.
I have heard, more recently from Secretary Geren, that some
providers in some areas of the country are distrustful of the
government. So whatever the rates may be, that's not the issue;
it's alleged that some providers simply don't want too many
government patients in their practice for fear that a future
set of decisionmakers will be less generous, I presume. I don't
know what it might be. If that's true, we need, together, to
advocate to the Nation's clinicians that this is a national
responsibility. You shouldn't be here. Several of your
colleagues have been very gracious in doing that in their home
States. We're prepared to work with the Governors through the
National Governors Association, if that proves to be an
important issue.
Senator Ben Nelson. General?
General Rochelle. Yes, sir. Please allow me to add just
three fine points to that.
First of all, I'm pleased to report that the Secretary of
the Army and General Casey have added, in fiscal year 2007,
$1.4 billion, double what we submitted in the past to our Army
Family Action Plan, recognizing that the resiliency of our
families is not without limits. In the 2009 budget which is
currently before Congress--$1.2 billion to address family well-
being needs.
Social work services is the number-one area in which
General Casey and Mrs. Casey, as they traveled about, and
Secretary Geren, as he travels now, as well, hear about, with
respect to the pressures of deployment on children. We are
aggressively, with the resources Congress has given us,
increasing social work services coverage in and around our
military installations, most especially with the schools that
are attended by military youth.
The third and final point, the network, especially in
specialty-care services, is sorely in need of some beefing up,
and that's what our families tell us, sir.
Senator Ben Nelson. Admiral, do you have any particular
points you'd like to make on family health care?
Admiral Harvey. Yes, sir. The particular issue for us, in
terms of this point, is the medical support to the Marine Corps
bases that we routinely provide. So part of what I talked about
in the medical recruiting, we've really gone after the
psychiatrists, psychologists, social workers, et cetera. I'm
pleased to see we're getting the same results there.
The issue for us has been keeping them once we get them. We
saw over the last 3 years a higher loss rate than we'd like,
and particularly in the areas that impact Camps Pendleton and
Lejeune, with the tempo and the fight that they're sustaining
in CENTCOM. So, I think we see the movement. We're getting in
the right direction and getting them in there. We know where we
have to get them to. We have some end strength issues that
we're working through right now, in terms of the shape of the
medical corps, the talent that we have in there, and the talent
we need to keep. I think we have some road ahead on that. So
I'm confident that we're going to improve in this area, but
clearly we have improvements to make.
Senator Ben Nelson. General Coleman, here's your chance.
The Navy doing well for you, or not?
General Coleman. The Navy truly is doing an outstanding
job. But, a lot of that is because of the budgetary help that
they're receiving. So, yes, sir, they're doing a fantastic job.
Senator Ben Nelson. Thank you.
General Newton?
General Newton. Mr. Chairman, in terms of medical
recruiting and so forth, as well as retention, we have some
challenges. I know the Navy mentioned that they're going to be
pretty much on track, in terms of recruitment. Recruitment,
overall in the United States Air Force, is in good shape. So is
retention. But, if you look into our health professionals, we
have some challenges with regard to both recruiting, as well as
retention, the same issues that were just raised in the Navy.
So, that's a prime focus for us.
I would also add the fact that we are, again, a very high
operations tempo Air Force; we're also an expeditionary force.
To go back to the mental health discussion we had, perhaps what
would have been thought of in the past, in terms of the health
environment or the health professionals, now needs to be added,
certainly with our psychiatrists and psychologists, as well as
our social workers.
What affects our airmen--Active Duty, Guard, and Reserve--
to a degree, our civilians, but principally those in uniform
affects our family members, as well. So the stresses that our
airmen have can obviously have a dramatic impact, perhaps that
we've not seen before.
I'll close on this point--we still have to continue to
strive for and create an environment, either at our bases, at
home or deployed, whereby mental health becomes something that
is no longer the stigma, but it's something that we can all
understand and relate to.
Senator Ben Nelson. I guess I'd ask this of all of you. If
we are able to even out the time at home and the deployment, in
terms of the number of months, so that there's less time
deployed, more time at home, will that help some of the mental
stress that we're seeing on the families, as well as on the
servicemembers? Obviously, it's going to help some, but will we
see anything appreciable coming from that?
Dr. Chu?
Dr. Chu. First, I should emphasize that again, we survey
the military person about his or her perception of a family's
support for that military career choice. We also do survey the
spouses about their outlook. Those indicators have held up
remarkably well across this period of time. Now, that's not to
say there isn't stress there. I don't want to suggest that.
But, when you take into account the kind of energy that, for
example, General Rochelle described the Army is putting in some
of these support programs, the military family is reasonably
satisfied with where it stands.
Certainly, they would like to see the military person spend
more time at home. That is a constant complaint.
I would not, however, overemphasize that attitude to the
exclusion of what I think is an equally important factor, and
that's predictability. I think the whole issue of expectations
is a central element here. What do we promise--or what do we
lead people to believe will be the compact between us and them?
What do we deliver? I would hope that we'd pay equal attention
to that issue. We ask our military persons, properly, to do a
lot of tough, demanding things, spend a lot of time away from
home. The military is there to be deployed, in the end. I don't
think we want to shrink from that reality. We want to be honest
with our families about it. But, we want to be constant, so
much as world events permit us, in honoring whatever
expectation we set. I think that's really the issue out there.
Can we set a reasonable set of expectations? Can we honor those
expectations? Can we avoid breaking our word to our people?
That, I think, above all, is the most important thing.
Senator Ben Nelson. I'm trying to remember whether it was
April, where the extension was put in place, and that many of
the servicemembers in the war zone found out about it, because
it came through the news back here at home, and they found out
about it from their families.
Dr. Chu. Yes, and if you're going to have bad news, you're
obviously right, sir, you want to communicate it to the
affected parties first. We have tightened up those procedures.
It is tough, given the time-zone differences, given
notification requirements here on the Hill, to tell everybody
first. That is a challenging assignment, I would acknowledge.
General Rochelle. If I may, Mr. Chairman, we were
particularly displeased with the way that announcement went,
the way it occurred. We're striving very, very aggressively to
make sure that never happens again, in terms of notifying
families. That's leader responsibility, and that's exactly how
we view it.
To your question, predictability is key. Predictability for
the soldier, predictability for the family. I would not want us
to perceive the lack of predictability as anything other than a
stressor, in and of itself. So, the answer to your question is
yes.
Senator Ben Nelson. Thank you.
In terms of the wounded warrior issues, Secretary Chu, the
committee recently received a letter signed by your principal
deputy, Secretary Dominguez, and Secretary Cooper, from the VA,
saying that they couldn't meet the February 1 statutory
requirement for an interim report on the policy, as required by
the Wounded Warrior Act, and stating that the interim report
would be submitted by February 15. I'm not going to quarrel
over a few days, but can you tell us--since the 15th has
passed, whether there's another extension that you're going to
talk about, or you could tell us that there might be a date
that we might expect it?
Dr. Chu. Let me go back and check why we're late against
the late date. That's not excusable.
[The information referred to follows:]
The Interim Report to Congress on the Policy on Improvements to
Care, Management, and Transition of Recovering Servicemembers was
delivered to the Senate and House Armed Services Committees on February
27, 2008.
Senator Ben Nelson. Okay.
The President, in his State of the Union speech, referred
to the importance of implementing the recommendations of the
Dole-Shalala Commission to improve the care and treatment of
our wounded warriors. I believe that the Wounded Warrior Act,
included in the National Defense Authorization Act that the
President signed into law on January 28, addresses all but one
of the recommendations of that Commission. The recommendation
that the Wounded Warrior Act does not address is the
recommendation to restructure the VA disability payments into
three payments: transition payments, earnings lost payments,
and quality of life payments. The VA Committees of the House
and the Senate are holding hearings to address this
recommendation.
First let me ask you, do you agree that the Wounded Warrior
Act addresses all but one of the recommendations of the
Commission? We have to establish some groundwork, first of all.
Is there only remaining that hasn't been addressed?
Dr. Chu. I think the way I would see it, sir, is that the
central proposition of Dole-Shalala was not addressed. That is
this big issue, what should the annuity and disability system
look like? As you have summarized, there would be several
changes for VA. VA has launched the studies, even though
Congress did not adopt the recommendation. Likewise, the other
provision is that we would vastly simplify the medical
retirement decision in Defense. If you're not fit for duty and
you're medically retired, you get a much smaller annuity, but
it would not be subject to concurrent receipt; you would
actually receive it, and we would end a lot of the quarreling
that goes on about what your status is. I do think the
Department's view of this is, this is the central provision,
this is the heart of the other Dole-Shalala proposition. We
hope Congress would enact it. We also recognize that one of its
benefits is that it sets up a sharper division of labor between
DOD and VA. Our job then becomes focused on, is this medical
condition unfitting for military service? If the answer is yes,
``Thank you for your service,'' you move over to the VA, and
they deal with the remaining issues.
So, I do hope that Congress will act on this important
issue.
Senator Ben Nelson. Of course, we're all going to call that
``seamless,'' because it's going to happen automatically.
Dr. Chu. I do think part of the advantage of what Dole-
Shalala has recommended is that it's a much simpler sort of
decision, as far as DOD is concerned. There is some controversy
about this, I would acknowledge--but, basically it removes DOD
from the rehabilitation business. I think that's part of where
some of the current issues arise.
Senator Ben Nelson. Your determination by DOD, versus VA,
was, in many instances, for different reasons. We understand.
Dr. Chu. Yes, sir.
That's statutory in its foundation. Therefore, we need your
action to clarify the roles.
Senator Ben Nelson. Now, as that legislation gets
introduced, should I assume that the funding for it is already
included in the DOD budget?
Dr. Chu. The way it would affect the DOD budget is through
the normal cost percentage for the retirement account, which
would change. That requires, under the laws that affect that
account, the actuaries to pronounce--and I believe the
situation is, until it's enacted, they won't actually make that
change.
Senator Ben Nelson. Would they have some idea of what the
net cost would be?
Dr. Chu. Yes, sir, we do have estimates of what the net
cost would be.
Senator Ben Nelson. Okay.
Dr. Chu. Not necessarily sanctioned by the actuaries, I
emphasize. This is what we have done.
Senator Ben Nelson. Question about the fiscal year 2009
budget of the Departments that includes 2,036 military-to-
civilian conversions for medical military billets. It appears
inconsistent with section 721 of the conference report for the
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008, which
expressly prohibits the Department from converting any
additional military medical and dental positions to civilian
positions until September 30, 2012. Are we misreading this, or
is this actually happening?
Dr. Chu. Sir, we, of course, will obey the law, as it's
written. The budget was prepared before the enactment of the
authorization bill, which didn't come until January, as you are
well aware. We will also be submitting a legislative proposal
to change back to the prior regime. Obviously, that would be
ultimately your decision. So, we recognize that, unless the law
changes, we can't actually make the conversions, but we would
like to be able to pursue some of those conversions in the
future.
Senator Ben Nelson. So, we won't have the conversions in
the future unless we have the actual authorization, and have it
handled by legislation.
Dr. Chu. We will be sending you a legislative proposal to
reverse the action just taken. If it should receive favorable
action by Congress, then we would be able to make some of these
conversions.
Admiral Harvey. Dr. Chu, may I add something on that?
Senator Ben Nelson. Oh, sure.
Admiral Harvey. Yes, sir. We certainly got the message.
It's been received and acknowledged, and we will carry out the
law.
One thing I would just put on the table for you, sir, is
that the appropriations to support the end strength that we're
going to have to carry are not there. So in the short-term,
we're going to do what we have to do to provide medical care
across-the-board to where we have to do it, but in the long-
term, we do have an issue here, in that the appropriations that
we have do not match what is now going to be the end strength
we need to carry with the current force structure. So,
something either changes in our operational force structure, in
terms of end strength to support the increased military end
strength we'll carry, or we have to find some other means here.
But, it is a significant issue for us, as we carry out the law.
General Rochelle. If I may, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Ben Nelson. Sure.
General Rochelle. Another nuance, not at all insignificant,
to piggyback on my colleagues' comments, we may also require,
in addition to the appropriations to accompany the reversal
back military spaces, standard-of-grade relief, just to
highlight something, because as we bring the military structure
back in, we're going to bump--inside the same end-strength
structure--against standard-of-grade ceilings. So, I mention
that, if you please, for the record.
Senator Ben Nelson. Sure. Okay, thank you.
I was hoping that we didn't have the situation develop,
where we now had a fourth branch of government. When I was
Governor, I always knew we had three branches of government--
executive, legislative, and judiciary--and then the fourth
branch, the Department of Roads. [Laughter.]
They did whatever they felt they wanted to do. So, I didn't
think we had that developing here. We'll find a way to smooth
that out, to the best extent possible.
In terms of respite care, General Coleman, in your written
statement, you said that the Marine Corps offers Active Duty
families enrolled in the Exceptional Family Member Program up
to 40 hours of free respite care per month to enable caregivers
to get breaks while still nurturing the needs of family members
with special needs. This sounds like a very important program
for these families with special needs. Can you give us a little
bit more about it and who it covers and how you are able to
fund it?
General Coleman. Yes, sir. This is a great success and news
story. The Commandant was able to procure some funds for this,
and some given from the Office of the Secretary of Defense,
some from within the Marine Corps, that allows these special
needs to give the caregivers--to give the homemaker some time
away. One of my dearest friends, his son has autism, and his
wife is there all the time. A thing like this allows her some
downtime, some alone time, some ``Let me get myself together''
time. I believe it's in the 36- to 40-hours-a-month time, where
she can get away and get some well-needed rest. It's a great
program.
We stole it from the Army, because we weren't as involved
in it as the Army was. Mrs. Conway, the Commandant's wife, read
an article, where the Army was all over this, and she said,
``Hey, Marine Corps, we need some of this, too.'' So, it's a
great news story, sir.
Senator Ben Nelson. It certainly is family-friendly and in
recognition of reality for people with families with those
special needs. So maybe the other two Services--well, you stole
it from the Army, so maybe you can give it to the Navy and give
it to the Air Force. [Laughter.]
General Rochelle. I'd like to thank my colleague for the
acknowledgment. [Laughter.]
Senator Ben Nelson. There is nothing better than to find
good programs on what you would call the exceptional programs
that are there. I am one of those; I commented about yesterday
with Secretary Geren, and that is maternity leave, after
delivering the baby, for the mother not to be deployed sooner
than 12 months, I think is the Navy's standard; 6 months, the
Marines; and, I think, 4 months for the Army and the Air Force,
at the moment, and suggested that that be reviewed because of a
variety of different reasons, all of which makes some sense. If
we want to be a family-friendly force, the last thing we need
to do is let a situation develop, or continue to be there, that
might cause a choice between having a family and not having a
family. That's the objective. We don't want to train people and
then have those kinds of roadblocks or those kinds of
hindrances that would cause people to say, ``At some point, I
guess I'll just have to hang it up, because I want to have a
family, and 4 months is not enough in between deployments,''
not knowing what future deployments may be.
Dr. Chu, would you have some thoughts on that?
Dr. Chu. Let me comment on that, sir. I'd like to make
several points. First of all, 4 months is a minimum. Services
are free to adopt more. You've noted some have. Second, the
Services--and I've spoken to both the Army and Air Force
Assistant Secretaries for Manpower on this matter--will use
waivers to deal with individual situations. I do think we need
to be a little careful that we don't damage the standing of
women as a key element of the force, in saying that they should
not share their part of the overall force burdens, in terms of
how we utilize them. That's the reason the Department has
looked at it in the past, and I think in the end judges we
should look at again, the notion of a sabbatic period, which I
think may be a superior alternative for those who would like
room within which to develop a family. The Navy has expressed
interest in this before. The Department has never really come
to a good conclusion about this. It would require statutory
assistance, in my judgment, in order to have a successful
program, so people could step out of their military role,
maintain some degree of benefit support during that period of
time--perhaps most important, health care--but not be part of
the Active component for a period of 1 or 2 years. That may
really be the solution, for those who need more time off,
whether it's to care for a relative or to start a family or for
other purposes.
Senator Ben Nelson. That was going to be my next question.
If you're going to have maternity leave, is it possible,
without absolutely adversely affecting the possibility of a
deployment of a person, other conditions where you might grant
a waiver to keep them in the military; otherwise, they have a
choice.
Dr. Chu. Right, and we don't want to lose the trained
personnel.
Senator Ben Nelson. Right
Dr. Chu. On the other hand, I do think we have to remember,
the military is there as a deployable force. That is its
primary mission.
I should add, also into the record, that mothers all
receive 6 weeks maternity leave.
Senator Ben Nelson. Yes.
Dr. Chu. It's a separate matter.
Senator Ben Nelson. We worked on that, so now I believe we
have something for adoptive parents, as well, recognizing that
it's not just the biological situation that we're recognizing,
but also the family relationship that's developing and bonding
that's required. Otherwise, we run into other issues. I was
glad to find that particular situation that we could cite as a
reason to change the policy.
General?
General Rochelle. Mr. Chairman, may I simply state, for the
record, that at the direction of Secretary Geren and General
Casey, our policy is actively under review.
Admiral Harvey. Sir, this is a not a small issue. Seventeen
percent of the Navy right now is made up of women, and our
incoming classes in Reserve Officers' Training Corps and the
Naval Academy is about 22-23 percent. I expect that the
percentage of women in the Navy will grow steadily over the
next few years. So, they'll be picking up a larger and larger
contribution of our overall effort.
We have to be able to come up with the means and the manner
in which we will also get the retention of this group that is
equivalent to the male sailors that we now enjoy. The sad fact
is that female retention in our surface warfare and aviation
communities is about one-third of their male counterparts. So,
we run up against this issue every day, and we have to keep
pushing forward on this aspect of our service, and the nature
of our service, to ensure that we reach all the talent we have
to deliver the capabilities we must, and find a way to keep
that talent with us, regardless of gender.
So, this is a very big issue, and I think it's going to get
bigger for us over time.
Senator Ben Nelson. If we don't get it right, we lose our
investment in personnel, the cost of training, and then we're
faced with replacing those trained personnel. We don't have to
perform miracles, we just have to figure out what works and
what will keep us in the mix as they make decisions about
family. If we have those things that are roadblocks or
inhibitors, we're obviously going to pay the price of the loss
in retention.
Admiral Harvey. I think we can do this in a way to express
the concern, that Dr. Chu so rightly expressed, that we can
never forget, we are an expeditionary force. We are routinely
forward deployed. We are expected to go forward and do hard
things in hard places. That's never going to change. That's the
core element of who we are and what we do. But, I do believe
that we can find a way to bring these two issues together that
will result in the kind of outcomes we need to sustain this
force in the future with the demographics that simply are
before us.
Senator Ben Nelson. General Newton, I think you might have
been at Strategic Command at the time that we found out about
the Air Force couple that served as the example for why we were
able to get this policy changed.
General Newton. Yes, sir. We constantly survey throughout
our force, both Active Duty, Guard, and Reserve, to make sure
that we are certainly in touch with the realities that our
airmen and their families face. We also stand tall and not take
for granted the fact that it's an All-Volunteer Force, and that
it's just unique circumstances we have. So constantly, it's
under review and assessment to make sure that we're on the
mark.
Senator Ben Nelson. Thank you.
Those are generally the questions that I have. Would there
be any comments that anybody would like to make before we
adjourn the hearing?
Now, I would say thank you for what you do, day in and day
out. Thank you for the members of your Service, for what they
do.
Thank you, Dr. Chu, for what you, at the Pentagon, do to
keep our country safe, to keep our military functioning as an
expeditionary force and ready to go and deploy as the need
requires.
I appreciate the fact that we don't ignore reality just to
try to stay ready to go. There are other considerations about
how we can go about doing it that will not get in the way.
Moving toward programs of transferability of education, of
other opportunities, just simply to enhance the ability of the
military to stay an All-Volunteer Force. Competition is such
that you're up against the corporate world, against the
government, and others for the same young people, and to retain
the ones you have. So, it just behooves us all to continue to
work together to try to find ways to make it that much more
friendly.
It's easy to say that in a hostile world, but that's what
we have to do. We have to have this military-friendly demeanor
for the people so we can protect ourselves from a hostile
world.
Dr. Chu. Mr. Chairman, thank you for the actions you and
your subcommittee members have taken in support of the military
forces, the partnership that has allowed us, I think, to
sustain this fine force over the course of the last 7 years.
Senator Ben Nelson. Thank you.
General?
General Coleman. Sir, I would like to jump onto your kind
nature there, and also Senator Graham when you asked if there's
anything you can do. My mother used to say, ``If you want
something fixed, you go to the people that can fix it.'' So, if
I may, back in December, the Commandant, General Conway,
discussed with me, in a one-way discussion where I was
listening, that the Army--and I've already vetted this with my
good friend and colleague, Lieutenant General Rochelle, so
there's no hard feelings here--is having a little bit of
concern with their company-grade officers staying on Active
Duty. There's a couple of programs where they give upwards of
$30,000, depending on the specialty, so that they stay. We, in
the Marine Corps, aren't having that problem--knock on wood--
but, the Commandant, in December, said, ``Ron, I'd like to
reward our company-grade officers. Is there some way that I can
say to those officers, to all the company-grade officers that
are staying, `Hey, here's $2,000; here's $3,000, go do
something. Thank you for staying. No commitment.' ''
Senator Ben Nelson. A reward, as opposed to, perhaps, an
incentive?
General Coleman. Yes, sir. Or, sir, what it reminds me of,
when I returned from Vietnam in 1970, the great State of
Pennsylvania gave me a whopping $300 and said, ``Thanks for
your service.'' So, we vetted that, and we've come up against
quite a few roadblocks. We were told that we could do that if
we made them sign on for another 1, 2, or 3 years. That's not
what we want to do. We don't--they're already staying for the 1
or 2 or 3 years that we want. All the Commandant would like to
do is say, ``Thank you for your service.'' So, if you could
give us a hand there, sir, in either pointing me in the right
direction or at least acknowledging to the Commandant that I
said that, so I don't have any more one-way conversations, I
certainly would appreciate it, sir. [Laughter.]
Senator Ben Nelson. I suspect he's going to know, by the
end of the day. [Laughter.]
That is a worthy consideration, because we talk about
incentives, but we ought to also think about it in terms of
``thank you'' recognition, as well. A pat on the back is
helpful, but very often there are other things that you could
do to make it even better. So, we will take that under
consideration, under advisement, clearly.
Once again, thank you, everybody, for being here. I
appreciate, so much, your input. As my colleague and I clearly
indicated this is a bipartisan effort here. There's nothing
partisan about making sure that our men and women in uniform
are receiving the best and having the best opportunity to do
their job, and to be able to do it well, and also for us to be
able to say ``thank you'' in a number of different ways, all of
which, I hope, are helpful and express our appreciation for
what they do and what you do.
So, with that, unless there's anything else, this hearing
is adjourned.
[Questions for the record with answers supplied follow:]
Questions Submitted by Senator Evan Bayh
national security education program
1. Senator Bayh. Secretary Chu, please describe the activities of
the National Security Education Program's (NSEP) Flagship Program in
2007 and your projected activities in 2008 and 2009.
Secretary Chu. The Language Flagship is a cornerstone of the
Department's Language Transformation Plan and the President's National
Security Language Initiative (NSLI). The Flagship effort, since its
inception, has had a major impact on the way many higher education
institutions, as well as K-12 programs, organize and develop their
approaches to language education. The central goal of Flagship is to
reach a minimum of 2,000 students by the end of the decade. This effort
provides the Department of Defense (DOD), as well as the entire
national security community, with an opportunity to recruit from a more
globally proficient pool of candidates. We are pleased to report that
we are well on our way to meeting or exceeding this goal.
In 2007, Language Flagship provided funding primarily in the form
of core institutional grants to domestic and overseas Flagship Centers
and partners. During 2007, Flagship continued its major effort to
transition its focus from post-graduate to primarily United States
undergraduate education. In moving toward this goal, Flagship has
endeavored to include more institutions in the movement through the
launch of a Promoting the Diffusion of Innovation grant program. This
grant program was held as an open national competition designed to
increase collaboration within the Flagship framework while increasing
the number of institutions, language programs, degree programs, and
students involved in Flagship efforts. Through the grant program, the
Language Flagship encourages individuals and organizations to work with
currently funded Flagship Centers to propose ways of increasing the
effectiveness and scope of the Language Flagship. Partners may include
academic institutions, public sector and nonprofit sector agencies,
school districts, businesses, or private sector organizations.
In October 2007, three new projects were funded under the Promoting
the Diffusion of Innovation grant program: the Arizona State University
Chinese Flagship Partner Program, which increased the scale and scope
of Chinese offerings by teaming up with the Chinese Flagship Center at
the University of Oregon; the Flagship ``My China'' project (also at
the University of Oregon), which creates a virtual Flagship presence in
the online world of ``Second Life''; and, the American Councils for
International Education's Flagship Online Russian Proficiency Test and
Assessment, which provides online assessment tools for evaluating
individual student performance. In addition to the institutional
grants, the Language Flagship, through the Institute of International
Education (IIE), provided significant funding to support students in
the form of student scholarships, fellowships, and stipends.
The Diffusion of Innovation effort continues with a 2008
competition initiated in December 2007 with proposals due by March 14,
2008. The Diffusion of Innovation solicitation, managed by our
nonprofit partner, IIE, was announced through all major communication
channels. As in 2007, the grant program intends to provide funds to
additional institutions of higher education who demonstrate a strong
commitment to support innovative approaches to language education,
including the diffusion of proven and effective practices. We expect to
expand the reach of Flagship to as many as 10 to 15 more institutions
through this innovative diffusion model.
In 2007, Language Flagship also introduced special initiatives as
part of its overall approach to changing the way Americans learn
languages. Flagship special initiatives provide a larger venue for
discourse and action in areas that are important to language learning
and that complement the core activities of Language Flagship. In June
2007, regional Language Summits were hosted by three Flagship Centers:
Ohio State University, University of Oregon, and University of Texas at
Austin. The summits resulted in highly innovative and ``first of their
kind'' State Language Roadmaps for Ohio, Oregon, and Texas. With
funding provided by Congress, the projects were overseen by NSEP with
co-sponsorship from the Departments of Defense, Commerce, and Labor.
The Language Roadmaps were instrumental in identifying State and
local needs for language learning and enhancing the capabilities of
Flagship Centers to address the goals of the Language Flagship. They
also introduced language education as an important element of the
public policy debate, asking State policymakers and business leaders to
examine their priorities and seek ways to identify the needs for a
workforce with language and culture skills. The engagement of State and
local government decision makers and the business community served as
an important and necessary step in moving the national language agenda
forward. Flagship Centers will continue to explore efforts to address
key components of these Roadmaps and to facilitate opportunities for
additional States to develop their own Roadmaps. Recently, Language
Flagship announced a competition for an African Languages Flagship
Center with a due date of May 2, 2008. This effort responds to the
urgent need for a pipeline of students with increased knowledge and
expertise in African language and culture. NSEP expects to make this
award by early summer.
During 2009, Language Flagship will consolidate its efforts with
its core Flagship Centers and its diffusion partners. Our focus will
remain on transforming language learning in United States higher
education so that, in the coming years, DOD, our colleagues in the
entire Federal sector as well as business, will be able to identify and
hire a new generation of global professionals.
2. Senator Bayh. Secretary Chu, please list the current Language
Flagship Programs and the universities which have been identified as
the lead institutions for those Flagship Programs.
Secretary Chu. The current Language Flagship Programs and
universities identified as lead institutions are:
Arabic Flagship Centers
Michigan State University*
Dearborn Public Schools K-12 Flagship Program
University of Texas, Austin*
University of Maryland, College Park*
Alexandria University, Egypt
Damascus University, Syria
Central Asian Turkic Language Consortium
American Councils for International Education*
Indiana University
University of Chicago
Chinese
Arizona State University Flagship Partner Program
Brigham Young University*
Ohio State University*
Ohio Public Schools K-12 Flagship Program
University of Mississippi*
University of Oregon
Portland Public School K-12 Flagship Program
Nanjing University, China
Qingdao University, China
Eurasian Languages
American Councils for International Education*
Bryn Mawr College
Middlebury College
University of California, Los Angeles
University of Maryland, College Park
St. Petersburg University, Russia
Hindi/Urdu
University of Texas, Austin*
American Institute for Indian Studies, Jaipur, India (Hindi)
American Institute for Indian Studies, Lucknow, India (Urdu)
Korean
University of Hawaii, Manoa*
Korea University, South Korea
Persian/Farsi
University of Maryland, College Park *
Tajik State National University, Tajikistan
* Lead Institution
3. Senator Bayh. Secretary Chu, how were the institutions which
have been identified as the lead for each Language Flagship Program
selected?
Secretary Chu. Institutions designated as lead Flagship Language
Centers have been chosen through open competition. For Flagship
programs that focus on a more diverse set of language groups and which,
typically, rely more on overseas immersion than domestic study (e.g.,
Eurasian and Central Asian Turkic Languages), a nonuniversity umbrella
organization with extensive experience in the region, American Councils
for International Education, has taken primary responsibility for the
overseas effort while promoting and facilitating partnerships among
academic institutions. Partner institutions have been actively
encouraged to expand their programming and offerings through an annual
competition, Promoting the Diffusion of Innovation grant program, which
provides funding at the institutional level. A Diffusion of Innovation
solicitation for 2008 was announced in December 2007 with proposals due
by March 14, 2008.
4. Senator Bayh. Secretary Chu, did NSEP hold a competition for
these designations? Please explain.
Secretary Chu. Competitions have been held for all Flagship grant
awards since the inception of the program in 2000-2003 when the program
was operated as a pilot under the NSEP institutional grants umbrella.
Since 2003, when Flagship was formally established, all awards have
been made through open national competitions administered by the NSEP
nonprofit contractor, the Institute of International Education. The
most recent solicitation is for an African Flagship Program. During
2003-2007, open competitions were held for the establishment of
programs in Arabic, Chinese, Hindi/Urdu, and Persian/Farsi. In
addition, through its Diffusion of Innovation process, NSEP has also
held open competitions for new partner programs in all of these
languages as well as Eurasian and Central Asian.
5. Senator Bayh. Secretary Chu, NSEP has been working with U.S.
universities to provide critical language training to Reserve Officers'
Training Corps (ROTC) cadets. What are your plans to continue this
program in 2009 and beyond?
Secretary Chu. The DOD plans to continue the ROTC Language and
Culture Project in 2009. This program was funded from fiscal year 2007
through 2013.
This project was developed based on guidance contained in the 2006
Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR), which charged the Department to
increase investments focused on developing and maintaining appropriate
language, cultural and skills relevant to the challenges of the 21st
century. The QDR directs that the Department will, ``Require language
training for Service Academy and Reserve Officer Training Corps
scholarship students, and expand immersion programs, semester abroad
study opportunities.''
The goal of the project is to provide cadets and midshipmen with
opportunities to study languages and cultures of world regions critical
to United States national security. We are beginning the review for the
2009 ROTC Language and Culture Project now.
6. Senator Bayh. Secretary Chu, not all of the Service Academies
work in conjunction with their respective ROTC scholarship programs to
ensure that applicants who are rejected from the academy have the
opportunity to apply for an ROTC scholarship. Has DOD investigated
whether to institute such a program? If not, why not? If so, how is the
DOD looking to implement those programs?
Secretary Chu. While not all service applicant information exchange
processes are formalized, all Service Academies exercise recruiting
partnerships with their respective ROTC programs. Candidates are
encouraged to apply to both the Service Academy and the corresponding
Service ROTC. Oftentimes, applicants will apply to all Service
Academies and ROTC scholarship programs with many highly qualified
candidates receiving multiple acceptances and offers.
In recent years, the United States Military Academy (USMA) has
created a more robust partnership with the United States Army Cadet
Command (USACC) to formalize their procedures for exchanging applicant
data. From September through January, they share candidate information
on a monthly basis. In 2007, USACC conducted a centralized board to
review USMA applicants who did not receive a USMA nomination. Forty-two
percent of the 892 candidates considered will receive 4-year Army ROTC
scholarship offers. USACC will conduct a similar board this month.
Since there is considerable crosstalk between the Service Academies
and their respective ROTC programs, there is currently no DOD plan to
institute a formal program for their partnerships.
______
Questions Submitted by Senator Claire McCaskill
paternity leave policy
7. Senator McCaskill. Secretary Chu, I understand that most of the
Services have indicated that they support instituting a paternity leave
policy that would permit unit commanders to provide military members
administrative paternity leave at the commander's discretion. It
strikes me that such a policy would be supportive of military families,
would be consistent with policies in the civilian sector, and would
send a strong message to servicemembers about the respect their
Services have for their personal lives. It also seems to me that such a
policy can only prove helpful in retention efforts.
However, I have since been informed that the Department may have
ordered that work on paternity leave policies be terminated and that
the issue not be considered for a DOD-wide personnel policy initiative.
Can you discuss what consideration was given by the Office of the
Secretary of Defense (OSD) of paternity leave issues and what decisions
have been reached by OSD on instituting a Department-wide policy?
Secretary Chu. This legislative proposal is being worked within the
Department. It would allow spouses up to 21 days of discretionary
administrative absence after the birth of a child. The Department is
weighing the proposal against operational readiness, cost, and equity
factors. We anticipate a decision on proceeding with the present
proposal by end of March 2008.
8. Senator McCaskill. Secretary Chu, has OSD directed the Services
to cease work on instituting or considering paternity leave policies,
and if so, why?
Secretary Chu. No. This legislative proposal is being worked within
the Department. It would allow spouses up to 21 days of discretionary
administration absence after the birth of a child. The Department is
weighing the proposal against operational readiness, cost, and equity
factors. We anticipate a decision on proceeding with the present
proposal by end of March 2008.
9. Senator McCaskill. Lieutenant General Rochelle, Vice Admiral
Harvey, Lieutenant General Coleman, and Lieutenant General Newton, what
is your Service's current policy on paternity leave?
General Rochelle. The Army does not have paternity leave policy.
However, soldiers may take up to 30 days of annual leave on the birth
of a child.
Admiral Harvey. Under current DOD guidance, Navy authorizes regular
leave for paternity purposes, approved by each servicemember's
commanding officer. DOD Instruction 1327.6, governing leave and liberty
procedures, prohibits the use of administrative leave following the
birth of a child.
General Coleman. Commanders may authorize up to 10-days
administrative absence (Permissive TAD) for a married male marine when
his spouse gives birth, dependent on the unit's mission, specific
operational circumstances, and the marine's billet.
General Newton. The Air Force does not have a specific category of
administrative absence (i.e., leave) that is designated for paternity.
Military members accrue 30 days of leave annually (2.5 days/month).
Military fathers may use this leave to assist mothers and newborns.
10. Senator McCaskill. Lieutenant General Rochelle, Vice Admiral
Harvey, Lieutenant General Coleman, and Lieutenant General Newton, have
you considered, at any time, instituting a formal paternity leave
policy, and if so, when and what was considered and what was done?
General Rochelle. The Army has explored implementation of
nonchargeable paternity leave for soldiers, through the Army Family
Action Plan program. However, since paternity leave is another form of
nonchargeable absence from duty like other forms of permissive
temporary duty, implementation would require the support of the other
Services and OSD.
Admiral Harvey. In August 2007, Navy submitted a proposal to amend
title 10, U.S.C., to authorize Military Department Secretaries to grant
up to 21 days permissive temporary duty in connection with the birth of
a new dependent. This initiative was intended to align the Department's
policy for natural fathers with policy applicable to adoptive parents,
as provided for in the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal
Year 2006.
Based on a subsequent dialogue, it is my understanding that a
paternity leave authority may be accomplished through policy without
the need for new legislative authority. The issue is currently pending
before the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness but a
final decision has not been reached.
General Coleman. The Marine Corps implemented an official
Permissive TAD policy for Paternity on 4 October 1995. We implemented
it based on the guidance in the Presidential Memorandum on Supporting
the Role of Fathers in Families, 16 June 1995, to promote family values
and encourage fathers to be active and committed to their families.
General Newton. Yes, the Air Force considered a paternity leave
policy after the Navy raised the issue of 21 days of paternity leave in
fall of 2007. I have not implemented specific guidelines since the
current leave authority (30 days/year) provides adequate leave for
military fathers. However, we are still analyzing the various options
available to us.
11. Senator McCaskill. Lieutenant General Rochelle, Vice Admiral
Harvey, Lieutenant General Coleman, and Lieutenant General Newton, does
your Service currently support instituting a paternity leave policy? If
so, what are you considering? If not, please explain why not?
General Rochelle. The Army supports the DOD proposal to amend title
10, U.S.C., section 702, authorizing up to 21 days of permissive
temporary duty (TDY) for servicemembers paternity leave in conjunction
with the birth of a new child. The legislative proposal is consistent
with recent congressional change to section 701 authorizing up to 21
days of administrative leave for a servicemember adopting a child.
Paternity leave, as with all other leave categories, would be granted
on an individual basis dependent on the unit's mission and operational
circumstances.
Admiral Harvey. Navy supports establishing a paternity leave policy
that provides Service Secretaries discretionary authority to grant up
to 21 days permissive TDY to be used in connection with the birth of a
servicemember's natural child. Requests for paternity leave would be
considered on a case-by-case basis, and approved when possible;
consistent with unit mission, operational circumstances, and each
servicemember's billet.
General Coleman. The Marine Corps supports and implemented a
paternity leave policy, under the authority of administrative absence,
on 4 October 1995.
General Newton. Military members accrue 30 days of leave annually
and the use of ordinary leave for military fathers to take time-off to
be with the mothers and newborns is effective and meets the needs of
families and the mission. Moreover, the average leave balance at the
end of fiscal year 2007 was 34.75 days (enlisted) and 42.4 days
(officer). The Air Force continues to study a policy proposed by the
Navy for 21 days of paternity leave. We understand the rationale, but
with over 15,000 new dependents born to Air Force families yearly we
are considering the impacts of having those fathers out for 21 days
each. We will continue to analyze all options.
maternity leave policy
12. Senator McCaskill. Lieutenant General Rochelle, Vice Admiral
Harvey, Lieutenant General Coleman, and Lieutenant General Newton, I
want to address the current post-maternity deferment from deployment
policy for Active Duty military mothers and the disparity between the
Services on the length of this deferment. I recently wrote to Secretary
Gates about this matter and ask that my letter be entered into the
record of this hearing. Further, I ask Secretary Chu to ensure that
Secretary Gates' response to my letter also be submitted to this
committee and entered into the record of this hearing.
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
I would like each of you to briefly comment on your Service's
deferment policy and to explain why the Service has followed such a
policy. Please be specific about any medical considerations that have
been taken into consideration in establishing and following the policy.
General Rochelle. Current Army policy requires a 4-month Postpartum
Operational Deferment period for a female soldier after the birth of a
child. The Army Postpartum Operational Deferment policy is based on and
matches the designated guidelines established by OSD.
The Army recognizes the merit in lengthening the Postpartum
Operational Deferment period, and intends to lengthen that period to 6
months once Active Army units return to a 12-month deployment rotation
policy from the 15-month deployment rotation policy that is currently
in place.
Admiral Harvey. Following a 2-year medical readiness review, Navy
modified its postpartum operational deferment policy from 4 to 12
months in OPNAVINST 6001.1C, and has received overwhelming positive
feedback from the fleet. Our decision was based on extensive review of
medical research on postpartum depression, Shaken Baby Syndrome (SBS),
and the long-term benefits of breastfeeding. Our review informed that:
20 percent of postpartum women experience depression at some
point in the year following delivery. Longer deferment resulted
in fewer cases requiring personnel replacement as a result of
late-onset depression in theater.
30 percent of SBS cases identified within DOD between 2004-
2005 occurred in Navy or Marine Corps families. SBS cases were
often the result of parental stress and lack of sleep in the
early stages of infant development. By extending operational
deferment, the risk of SBS is lowered because frequent training
schedules necessitating time away from home and inconsistent
sleep patterns are no longer factors.
The American Academy of Pediatrics, American Academy of
Family Physicians, Department of Health and Human Services, and
the Surgeon General of the United States recommend
breastfeeding infants exclusively for 6 months and continuing
to breastfeed for 12 months while incorporating complimentary
foods for the health and wellness of mother and child. In
addition, a 2005 Navy Pregnancy and Parenthood Survey
identified the 4-month deferment period as a key deterrent to
continue breastfeeding. We believe that a 12-month deferment
period will increase breastfeeding continuation rates and
workplace productivity, thereby decreasing health care costs
over time.
With respect to changing Navy demographics, the following is
offered for consideration:
In the last 15 years, the percentage of women serving in the
Navy has risen from 10 to 15 percent of the total force. Women
now account for 22 percent of the U.S. Naval Academy's freshman
class and 25 percent of freshmen participating in the Naval
Reserve Officers Training Corps Program. The proportion of
women in each program is expected to reach 30 percent by 2018.
As Navy becomes an increasingly technical force, retaining
women in critical skill sets, such as surface warfare, aviation
warfare, and health professions, is essential.
According to Navy's 2008 Pregnancy & Parenthood Survey, a 12-
month deployment deferment policy positively influences the
retention decisions of women by 47 percent and those of men by
10 percent.
In summary, the 12-month deferment policy is based on a
preponderance of medical evidence and the impact of changing Navy
demographics on operational readiness. In order to assess the impact of
this policy change, the Navy will continue to monitor retention rates
as well as the physical and mental health and well-being of female
sailors over the next several years.
General Coleman. Pregnant marines will not normally be transferred
to deploying units from the time of pregnancy confirmation up to 6
months after the date of delivery. Pregnant marines are afforded a 6-
month deferment from deployment after the date of delivery. The
deferment option is provided to the marine, not the commander. The
marine may waive the deployment deferment period. Commanders have the
option of extending this deferment if, in consultation with the Health
Care Provider (HCP), it is deemed necessary for the health of the
mother or child. On 12 June 2007, we reduced the deferment period, from
12 months to 6 months, after extensively reviewing the former policy.
Marine Corps policies are constantly reviewed to ensure their
applicability to the force, and this review was no different. During
the review and staffing process it was determined a 6-month deferment
provided the best balance between ensuring the health of the mother and
child and the requirements of a naval career. This change complies with
DOD Instruction 1342.19 (Family Care Plans), which states ``Military
mothers of newborns shall receive a 4-month deferment from duty away
from the home station for the period immediately following the birth of
a child.''
General Newton. Our Air Force Instruction guidance allowing a 4-
month post pregnancy deferment for deployments is consistent with
deferments for assignment. In fact, the guidance in our deployment
instruction (10-403, Attachment 2, table A2.1, Note 6) references our
assignments instruction stating that ``members are deferred from
deployments for 4 months after birth of baby'' (extensions approved at
unit/CC discretion) per AFI 36-2110, para 2.39.4 and Table 2.2 Rule 1.
Both AFIs are based on DOD Directive 1315.7, in Aug 91 that established
a ``4-month deferment after childbirth to duty away from the home
station.'' We are unaware of what medical considerations may have been
taken into consideration when DOD Directive 1315.7 was published.
______
Question Submitted by Senator Lindsey O. Graham
nominations
13. Senator Graham. Secretary Chu, I was pleased to hear you do not
anticipate any problems with implementation of the provision requiring
The Judge Advocates General (TJAG) of the Army, Navy, and Air Force to
serve in the rank of lieutenant general or vice admiral. In order to
ensure the maximum effectiveness of the TJAGs, I believe this needs to
be implemented quickly. Do you have an indication of when the
nominations will be forwarded to the Senate for confirmation?
Secretary Chu. At this time, we do not have a clear indication of
when the nominations will be forwarded to the Senate. The Department
will immediately attend to these nominations upon receipt from the
Secretaries of the Military Departments.
______
Questions Submitted by Senator Saxby Chambliss
base realignment and closure
14. Senator Chambliss. Secretary Chu and Lieutenant General
Rochelle, as you are well aware, both Fort Stewart and Fort Benning in
the State of Georgia are in the process of growing as a result of the
Grow the Army plan and the Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) process,
and we welcome that growth and look forward to having more Army
soldiers and their families residing in the State of Georgia.
This growth does bring challenges, and one specific challenge that
I've been aware of and working to address for several years now is the
growth in the number of students at local school districts resulting
from an influx of military-connected children. No school district is
going to turn away additional students, and I know that the folks in
Muscogee County, Chattahoochee County, and Liberty County are eager to
accommodate new Army families and their children into their school
districts--and they will do so.
I have had a very difficult time getting accurate estimates from
the Army regarding how many soldiers and, consequently, how many
school-aged children will be relocating to Georgia bases. The estimates
have varied widely and have made it very difficult for local school
districts to predict and plan how to accommodate this growth. However,
everyone agrees that, at least at Fort Benning, they will experience a
growth of several thousand students. But this is not just a Georgia
issue. Bases and communities in Virginia, North Carolina, Kentucky, and
Kansas will be affected as well.
As you can well-understand, any additional facilities and teachers
required to accommodate additional students will need to be funded in
advance of the students arriving. Local communities are challenged to
pay for these expenses, especially when the tax base for doing so does
not exist, or will likely be made up of nonresidents who may not be
paying income and property tax.
I would appreciate your comments on what policies the Army and DOD
have established to address this issue and how you are partnering with
communities around bases experiencing this growth. I would also
appreciate your assurances that making sure this transition is seamless
and doing everything you can to help local communities prepare for this
growth will remain a priority for DOD and the Army.
Secretary Chu. DOD clearly recognizes the importance of quality
educational opportunities for all military families. We are working in
close collaboration with all key stakeholders to engage affected
communities and assist them in finding viable solutions to the
projected school growth. Understanding that in order to prepare
adequately, a community must first have reliable growth projections,
the military Services have carefully identified the school-age growth
projections for each community. Dialogue is continuous between the
installation commanders and local educational agencies about timing,
projected growth, and the dynamic nature of the challenge.
These projections will be provided to Congress in the very near
future as directed in section 574 (c) of the John Warner National
Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for Fiscal Year 2007. In addition, the
Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness
(Military Community and Family Policy), in coordination with the Army,
the Department of Education's Offices of Elementary and Secondary
Education and Management, and the Department of Defense Office of
Economic Adjustment, has conducted site visits to a representative
sample (Fort Benning, Fort Bliss, Fort Drum, and Fort Riley) of growth
locations to provide program stakeholders (Federal, State, and local)
with on-the-ground knowledge of issues surrounding mission growth,
improve communications among all partners, identify gaps/lags in
capacities, and to more extensively document the specific requests for
Federal action to assist communities and States responding to student
migration.
Of note, the visit to El Paso and Fort Bliss, TX, highlights the
strong set of partnerships in place to support Fort Bliss's mission,
soldiers, and families. There is close cooperation between Fort Bliss
and the surrounding community and the nine independent school
districts. Representatives from the installation, community, and school
districts meet regularly to discuss the impact of growth. An example of
the consolidated planning process is the El Paso Independent School
District. The voters of the most heavily affected of the region's
school districts voted in favor of a $230 million bond, of which $101
million will go to support growth at Fort Bliss. Additionally, Texas
has two State programs for funding construction: (1) an instructional
facilities allotment that all Local Education Authorities (LEAs) are
eligible to receive, and (2) an interest allotment for the lowest
income LEAs that have the lowest (tax) bases.
Besides reporting school-age growth projections, the report to
Congress will include recommendations from the Office of Economic
Adjustment for means of assisting affected local educational agencies
in accommodating increases in enrollment of military students as well
as the DOD plan for outreach regarding information on the assistance to
be provided to local educational agencies (LEAs) that experience growth
in the enrollment of military students.
In order to effectively focus the DOD outreach effort, we have
leveraged the expanded authority that DOD received in the NDAA for
Fiscal Year 2007. The Secretary of Defense can now use funds of the DOD
Education Activity (DODEA) to share its expertise and experience with
LEAs as military dependent students transition from DOD schools to
LEAs, including transitions resulting from the closure or realignment
of military installations under a base closure law, global rebasing,
and force restructuring. Under this expanded authority, DODEA is in the
process of creating educational partnerships with LEAs who educate
military students. Launched October 1, 2007, the DODEA Educational
Partnership Directorate (EPD) promotes quality education and seamless
transitions for military students. More specifically, EPD:
1. Develops partnerships with military-connected schools and
districts that focus on research-based educational programs and
best practices, seamless transitions, and deployment support
services,
2. Facilitate agreements at the local and State levels to
positively impact military children's education and wellbeing,
and
3. Extend opportunities for student learning via online and
other research-based models.
Finally, to support the transition of children impacted by
permanent change of station moves, as well as moves promulgated by BRAC
and force realignment, the Department has partnered with the Council of
State Governments to develop an Interstate Compact designed to mitigate
the difficulties children in military families experience when
transitioning between school systems. Legislatures in 14 States are
currently considering the Compact. Once adopted by 10 States, the
Compact will be enforced.
General Rochelle. The Army and DOD are partnering with local
communities to deal with community needs, such as schools, housing, and
community activities, associated with Army stationing and growth.
Garrison commanders and staff regularly engage with community leaders
and have school liaison officers who facilitate communication with
local education agencies to help communities deal with stationing and
growth. The DOD, Office of Economic Adjustment regularly provides
funding and planning support to communities experiencing growth from
Defense actions. The planning connection between the installation,
local education agency and the U.S. Department of Education for
financial Impact Aid Assistance continues to be our most effective
means to support seamless growth in communities around our
installations.
15. Senator Chambliss. Secretary Chu, in last year's National
Defense Authorization Act we established the Yellow Ribbon
Reintegration Program which I worked on with several other Senators.
This is an extremely important program for the National Guard and
Reserve and provides continuous support to our deploying servicemembers
by creating a national combat veteran reintegration program to provide
servicemembers and their families support services during their entire
deployment cycle. I was pleased to see in your written statement that
DOD is fully committed to implementing this program and that you are
moving quickly to stand up an interim Office for Reintegration
Programs.
Please provide additional detail on how this program is proceeding,
the resources that you believe will be necessary to fully implement the
program, and whether DOD has those resources and if you are requesting
specific resources to carry out this program in the fiscal year 2009
budget.
Secretary Chu. We will have the Office for Reintegration Programs
established by the end of March, with the Deputy Assistant Secretary of
Defense for Reserve Affairs (Manpower and Personnel) designated as the
director of that office. For interim staffing until we can establish
the permanent manpower requirements, we have asked the Reserve
components to assist by providing one person each. The NDAA for Fiscal
Year 2008 also provides for an Advisory Board and a Center of
Excellence. These organizations will be operational soon.
To support National Guard and Reserve members, and their families
throughout the deployment cycle, we already have pilot programs in 15
States that provide services and support to Reserve component members
and their families. We plan to expand the program to all 54 States and
territories.
The Department is developing the funding requirements for the 2010
budget and future budget submissions. Since funding for this program
was not included in the Defense appropriations for 2008 or in the
President's budget submission for 2009, we must seek supplemental
funding as a bridge to support this program. We do not have funds
available in 2008 or the President's budget to fully implement the
program without obtaining supplemental funding.
[Whereupon, at 4:57 p.m., the subcommittee adjourned.]
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION FOR APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR
2009
----------
WEDNESDAY, APRIL 16, 2008
U.S. Senate,
Subcommittee on Personnel,
Committee on Armed Services,
Washington, DC.
TESTIMONY OF MILITARY BENEFICIARY ORGANIZATIONS REGARDING THE QUALITY
OF LIFE OF ACTIVE, RESERVE, AND RETIRED MILITARY PERSONNEL AND THEIR
FAMILY MEMBERS
The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:37 p.m. in
room SR-232A, Russell Senate Office Building, Senator E.
Benjamin Nelson (chairman of the subcommittee) presiding.
Committee members present: Senators Ben Nelson and Graham.
Committee staff member present: Leah C. Brewer, nominations
and hearings clerk.
Majority staff members present: Jonathan D. Clark, counsel;
Gabriella Eisen, counsel; and Gerald J. Leeling, counsel.
Minority staff members present: Diana G. Tabler,
professional staff member; and Richard F. Walsh, minority
counsel.
Staff assistants present: Ali Z. Pasha and Brian F. Sebold.
Committee members' assistants present: Andrew R.
Vanlandingham, assistant to Senator Ben Nelson; Jennifer Cave,
assistant to Senator Warner; Lenwood Landrum, assistant to
Senator Sessions; Mark J. Winter, assistant to Senator Collins;
and Andrew King, assistant to Senator Graham.
OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR E. BENJAMIN NELSON, CHAIRMAN
Senator Ben Nelson. Good afternoon. This Personnel
Subcommittee hearing will come to order.
The subcommittee meets today to receive testimony from
military beneficiary organizations regarding the quality of
life of Active, Reserve, and retired military personnel and
their family members in review of the National Defense
Authorization Requet for Fiscal Year 2009 and the Future Years
Defense Program.
This subcommittee is responsible for the most important
aspect of the United States military system: our men and women
and their families. These great Americans have volunteered to
serve our Nation, so we have a special responsibility to
provide for their quality of life.
The repeated and extended deployments and the intensity of
the conflicts in Iraq and in Afghanistan are taking a toll on
the health of our troops and their families. This hearing will
help us to learn about the concerns and needs of our military
members and their families from the beneficiary organizations
that stay in constant contact with them and represent their
interests.
It's been an honor to be able to work with my ranking
member, Senator Graham, in this effort. We have exchanged
positions a time or two, but, we, along with the rest of the
subcommittee, aim to do everything we can to ensure that our
servicemembers and their families have a quality of life
commensurate with the sacrifices they make on a daily basis.
I'd like to express my personal appreciation to the many
organizations that assist and represent the interests of our
military personnel and their families. You do a great service
to our Nation, and you deserve to be recognized for what you
do.
Although it would be ideal to hear the testimony of each of
the organizations, that's not possible. That's why we reach out
to The Military Coalition (TMC), a consortium of 33 service and
veterans organizations, to present the collective views of the
organizations.
We're pleased to welcome our witnesses here this afternoon:
Colonel Steve Strobridge, U.S. Air Force (Ret.), and Master
Chief Petty Officer Joseph L. Barnes, U.S. Navy (Ret.). They
are the co-chairman of TMC. Colonel Strobridge is the Director
of Government Relations for the Military Officers Association
of America, and Master Chief Barnes is the National Executive
Director of the Fleet Reserve Association.
We also welcome Kathleen Moakler, Director of Government
Relations for the National Military Family Association. She
also serves as the co-chair of the Survivor Committee of TMC.
Michael Cline is the Executive Director of the Enlisted
Association of the National Guard of the United States
(EANGUS). He serves as the co-chair of the Guard and Reserve
Committee of TMC. Ms. Meredith Beck is the National Policy
Director of the Wounded Warrior Project, an organization
devoted to the care and treatment of our wounded warriors.
We look forward to learning from our witnesses about the
needs and concerns of our military personnel, their families,
and their employers. I, again, want to thank all of the
organizations that serve our military personnel and their
families for your continuing support, especially the support to
our wounded warriors and their families.
Senator Graham, it's been a pleasure to work with you over
these years, and I look forward to being able to continue to do
that. We serve as bipartisan as any group can serve, and, with
that, maybe you have an opening statement you'd like to make.
STATEMENT OF SENATOR LINDSEY O. GRAHAM
Senator Graham. Very briefly. What you said is absolutely
true, it's been a pleasure working with you and your staff. I
think the subcommittee has the right spirit about the way we
should approach our job when it comes to the military
community, and you've really been a pleasure and joy to work
with.
I want to recognize Meredith. She did my defense work
before she went on to bigger and better things, and has done a
good job with the Wounded Warrior Project.
Thank you all for coming. Thank you all, all of you, for
what you do every day.
I'm ready to listen and learn.
Senator Ben Nelson. Before we proceed to opening
statements, we've received prepared statements from TMC, the
Fleet Reserve Association, the National Military Family
Association, EANGUS, the Wounded Warrior Project, and the
Reserve Officers Association. Without objection, all of these
statements will be included in the record.
Ms. Beck, would you like to begin the process today?
STATEMENT OF MEREDITH M. BECK, NATIONAL POLICY DIRECTOR,
WOUNDED WARRIOR PROJECT
Ms. Beck. Yes, sir. Thank you.
Sir, before I begin, I'd like to recognize two people who
are in the audience: Sarah and Ted Wade. Ted was injured in
Iraq on February 14, 2004, and the two of them together have
overcome just about every obstacle, and have created a success
out of the program. So they have brought a tremendous amount of
knowledge, expertise, experience, emotion, and devotion to
this, and information to the Wounded Warrior Project, and I'd
like to acknowledge them.
Senator Ben Nelson. Thank you.
Ms. Beck. Mr. Chairman, thank you for the opportunity to
testify before you today regarding the needs of our Nation's
most recent generation of wounded servicemembers. My name is
Meredith Beck. I'm the policy director for the Wounded Warrior
Project. As a result of our direct and daily contact with this
most recent generation of wounded warriors, we have a unique
perspective on their needs and the obstacles they face as they
attempt to reintegrate into their communities.
With respect to case management, many of our families state
that they need a case manager to manage their case managers.
Therefore, Wounded Warrior Project (WWP) was pleased that the
Senior Oversight Committee (SOC) charged with resolving these
issues created the Federal Recovery Coordinator (FRC) Program.
However, with the limited number of individuals serving as
FRCs, we must use our resources wisely and effectively.
Currently, the FRCs seem to be focused on those in the
hospitals, yet it is important to remember that this program
was created as a result of the study of the Walter Reed
scandal, and we must not only serve those who are injured
tomorrow, but also those who were injured during the previous
years of the conflict.
There's a common and dangerous misperception that if you
are injured earlier on, then all of your problems have been
solved. I can only tell you from personal experience, those
families are often the ones in need of the most help. They are
the bow wave, often finding the problems and facing them alone.
WWP understands that the SOC is reviewing a range of options to
address this look-back issue, and we encourage the swift
implementation of such a plan.
In addition, the FRC can only be successful if he or she
has the authority to break through the current barriers of both
agencies. Part of that authority would have to include the
overlap of benefits and services, which, to a certain extent,
was included in last year's defense authorization bill. A
successful overlap would allow the recovery coordinator or case
manager concurrent access to the Department of Defense (DOD)
and Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) benefits necessary for
the care and rehabilitation of severely injured servicemembers.
In other words, the provision rightfully recognizes that an
individual's care should be based on his medical condition and
not on his status as Active Duty or retired. However, WWP is
concerned that the regulations prescribed in accordance with
the law will miss the spirit with which the provision was
drafted. For example, the provision authorizes the Secretary to
offer severely injured veterans the same medical care and
benefits as those on Active Duty if they are, ``not reasonably
available to such a member in the VA.'' The VA offers excellent
services for many, but, due to insufficient funding,
inconsistency in service, and differences in generational
needs, what is offered on paper may not, in some cases, be
sufficient to meet the needs of our severely injured
population. Therefore, we encourage strong oversight of the
implementation of this provision to ensure its success, not
only in policy, but also in practice.
Finally, with respect to case management, it is imperative
that we take steps to promote the visibility of all of these
case managers. Currently, there is a myriad of case managers
both within DOD and VA that many times they're either
overburdened or unused because the injured don't know where to
begin. Without visibility, the servicemembers are lost and
organizations like WWP, the Military Officers Association of
America, the National Military Family Association (NMFA), and
others are unable to plug those we find back into the system
quickly and effectively.
With respect to deferment, unlike burn patients and
amputees, those with severe brain injuries appear to be boarded
out of the military very quickly, some within days or even
weeks of their devastating injury. While this process has
implications for all, for traumatic brain injury (TBI) patients
the availability of options in their medical care is at stake.
While they do have access to the VA in many cases, private
therapies for which they were eligible while on Active Duty
become unavailable once retired. Unfortunately, even though
TBIs are considered the signature injury of the recent
conflicts, once medically retired, TRICARE no longer covers
cognitive rehabilitation, as it is considered unproven. While
WWP is familiar with a number of families who disagree with
such a characterization, following the successful
rehabilitation of their loved ones--the Wades are a prime
example--and strongly encourage the coverage of cognitive
therapy, we must take steps in the short-term to facilitate the
transition of our most severely injured. Therefore, WWP is
seeking legislation to establish a 1-year deferment for the
Marine Expeditionary Brigade (MEB)/Physical Evaluation Board
(PEB) process, unless initiated by the family, for severe TBI
patients.
Severe TBI is a devastating and life-altering wound that
causes uncertainty and anguish to the affected servicemembers
and their families. Delaying the MEB/PEB will allow the
patient's condition to stabilize, provide a standard period of
time for coverage under TRICARE, and allow the family to fully
understand their options before being removed from the familiar
military environment. It is the moral thing to do.
With respect to TRICARE eligibility for parents and next of
kin, most agree that, due to the advances in medicine, we are
able to save those we otherwise would not have been able to
save in previous generations. However, we must now provide them
with the most appropriate and best quality of care. In some
cases, the most appropriate care at home includes parents and
spouses who leave their jobs to become full-time caregivers.
Family caregivers offer the severely injured love, continuity,
flexibility, and dignity that cannot be found through a
contract agency. Unfortunately, however, when family members
leave their jobs, they often lose their health insurance.
Fortunately, spouses are eligible for TRICARE through their
injured servicemembers, but parents and next of kin are not
included in this coverage; therefore, we are requesting
legislation allowing the parents and next of kin to be fully
eligible for TRICARE if they are providing those services.
It's our responsibility to ensure that the family members
providing the care have the tools to maintain their health,
giving the servicemember the best chance of recovery.
Lastly, with respect to DOD-VA collaboration, while there
are still many issues to address, we've been very impressed
with the level of involvement of the leadership of both
agencies. However, with all of the legislative proposals and
policy revisions, it is imperative that a joint permanent
structure be in place within both agencies to evaluate the
changes, monitor the systems, and make further recommendations
for process improvement. It must be structured in a way not to
be bogged down in bureaucracy, and must have a clearly defined
mission with the appropriate authority to make changes and
recommendations, as warranted.
These issues have received much attention over the past
several months, but will likely fade from the national stage
over time. Without such a joint structure in place, other
issues will arise, and we may, though well-intentioned, find
ourselves in the same situation, 3 to 5 years from now.
Finally, while the agencies share joint responsibility for
resolving this problem, WWP strongly believes that Congress
must also re-evaluate its current means of addressing these
issues. Due to the committee's jurisdictional boundaries, it is
often difficult to address issues facing these injured and
transitioning servicemembers. For example, under the Traumatic
Servicemembers Group Life Insurance, a small portion of the
servicemember's paycheck goes into the DOD and, if required, is
paid out through the VA. Without overlapping jurisdiction,
these injured brave men and women will continue to be stuck in
limbo, because there's no mechanism to resolve problems.
Therefore, WWP is proposing the creation of a Joint Select
Subcommittee on Transition between both the Armed Services and
Veterans Affairs Committees in both the House and the Senate.
This subcommittee would not require additional members, simply
the shared jurisdiction and participation of those already in
place. Such an action would signify to injured servicemembers
and their families that Congress understands their needs and is
willing to take the difficult steps to resolve their problems.
Thank you, and I'll look forward to your questions.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Beck follows:]
Prepared Statement by Meredith M. Beck
Mr. Chairman, Senator Graham, and members of the committee, thank
you for the opportunity to testify before you today regarding the needs
of our Nation's most recent generation of wounded servicemembers. My
name is Meredith Beck, and I am the National Policy Director for the
Wounded Warrior Project (WWP). As a result of our direct, daily contact
with this most recent generation of wounded warriors, we have a unique
perspective on their needs and the obstacles they face as they attempt
to reintegrate into their communities.
case management
As many of our families state that they need a case manager to
manage their case managers, WWP was pleased that the Senior Oversight
Committee (SOC) charged with resolving these issues followed the
recommendation of the Dole-Shalala Commission to improve the case
management process through the creation of a Federal recovery
coordinator (FRC). The FRC's serve as long-term oversight for the
development and implementation of the individual's recovery plan, and
we are pleased to report that most of the families who have come into
contact with an FRC are very excited about the program.
However, with a limited number of individuals serving as FRC's, we
must use our resources wisely and effectively. Currently, the FRC's
seem to be focused on those in the hospitals. Yet, it is important to
remember that this program was created as a result of the study of the
Walter Reed scandal, and we must not only serve those who are injured
tomorrow, but also those who were injured during the earlier days of
the current conflicts.
There is a common and dangerous misperception that if you were
injured earlier on, then all of your problems have been solved. I can
only tell you from personal experience, those families are often the
ones in need of the most help--they are the bow wave, often finding the
problems and facing them alone. WWP understands that the SOC is
reviewing a range of options to address this ``lookback'' issue, and we
encourage the swift implementation of such a plan.
In addition, the FRC can only be successful if he/she has the
authority to break through the current barriers within both agencies.
Part of that authority would have to include the overlap of benefits
and services which, to a certain extent, was included in section 1631
of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008. A
successful overlap would allow the recovery coordinator or case manager
concurrent access to the Department of Defense (DOD) and Department of
Veterans Affairs (VA) benefits necessary for the care and
rehabilitation of severely injured servicemembers. In other words, the
provision rightfully recognizes that a severely injured servicemember's
care should be based on his medical condition and not on his status as
active duty or retired.
However, WWP is concerned that the regulations proscribed in
accordance with the law will miss the spirit with which the provision
was drafted. For example, the provision authorizes the Secretary to
offer severely injured veterans the same medical care and benefits as
those on active duty if they are, ``not reasonably available to such
former member in the VA.'' The VA offers excellent services for many,
but, due to insufficient funding, inconsistency in service, and
differences in generational needs, what is offered on paper may not, in
some cases, be sufficient to meet the needs of our severely injured
population. Therefore, we encourage strong oversight of the
implementation of this provision to ensure its success not only in
policy, but also in practice.
Finally, with respect to case management, it is imperative that we
take steps to promote visibility of all the case managers who provide
services to injured servicemembers. Currently, there is such a myriad
of case managers both within DOD and VA that, many times, they are
either overburdened or unused because the injured don't know where to
begin. For example, the FRCs are VA employees who are based in Military
Treatment Facilities. In addition, active duty servicemembers are being
treated in VA facilities. Without visibility, the servicemembers are
lost and organizations like WWP, MOAA, NMFA and others are unable to
plug those we find back into the system quickly and effectively.
deferment
Unlike burn patients and amputees, those with severe brain injuries
appear to be ``boarded out'' of the military very quickly, some within
days or weeks of their devastating injury. While this process has many
implications for all, for traumatic brain injury (TBI) patients, the
availability of options in their medical care is at stake.
While they do have access to the VA, in many cases, private
therapies for which they were eligible while on active duty become
unavailable once retired. Unfortunately, even though traumatic brain
injuries are considered by many to be the ``signature injury'' of the
recent conflicts, once medically retired, TRICARE does not cover
cognitive rehabilitation, as it is considered unproven. While WWP is
familiar with a number of families who disagree with such a
characterization following the successful rehabilitation of their loved
ones and strongly encourage the coverage of cognitive therapy, we must
take steps in the short term to facilitate the transition of our most
severely injured. Therefore, the WWP is seeking legislation to
establish a 1 year deferment for the Marine Expeditionary Brigade
(MEB)/Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) process unless initiated by the
family for severe TBI patients.
A severe traumatic brain injury is a devastating and life-altering
wound that causes uncertainty and anguish for the affected
servicemember and his/her family. Delaying the individual MEB/PEB will
allow the patient's condition to stabilize, provide a standard period
of time for coverage under TRICARE, and allow the family to fully
understand their options before being removed from the familiar
military environment. In addition, this step will allow the VA to
follow a path already initiated by the DOD to confer with private
facilities, learn from successful models, and further enhance their
services. Furthermore, allowing the family and the injured individual a
period of time to adjust to their new, often tragically different
situation, shows compassion, reflects the sacrifice of the most
severely injured, and will result in a more positive environment for
the entire family.
tricare eligibility for parents/next of kin
Most agree that, due to advances in medicine, we are able to save
those we otherwise may not have been able to save in previous
generations. However, we must now provide them with the most
appropriate and best quality of care. In some cases, the most
appropriate care at home includes parents and spouses who leave their
jobs to become full-time caregivers. Family caregivers offer the
severely injured love, continuity, flexibility, and dignity that cannot
be found through a contract agency.
Unfortunately, however, when family members leave their jobs, they
often lose their health insurance. Fortunately, spouses are eligible
for TRICARE through their injured servicemembers, but, parents/next of
kin are not included in this coverage. Therefore, WWP is requesting
legislation allowing parents/next of kin to be fully eligible for
TRICARE if they are providing full-time caregiving services. It is our
responsibility to ensure that family members providing this care have
the tools to maintain their own health, giving the servicemember the
best chance at recovery.
dod/va collaboration
With respect to DOD/VA collaboration, while there are still many
issues to address, WWP has been very impressed with the level of
involvement of the leadership of both DOD and the VA in the previously
mentioned SOC. However, with all of the legislative proposals and
policy revisions, it is imperative, consistent with the recommendation
of the Veterans Disability Benefits Commission that a joint, permanent
structure be in place within the agencies to evaluate the changes,
monitor the systems, and make further recommendations for process
improvement. This office must be structured in a way so as to not get
bogged down in bureaucracy and must have a clearly defined mission with
the appropriate authority to make necessary changes or recommendations
as warranted. In addition, to facilitate coordination, the office
should absorb the functions of the other smaller offices that have
arisen within both agencies over time. While the SOC has recently been
working diligently on these issues there is no guarantee that this will
continue to be the case as administrations and leadership changes.
These issues have received much attention over the past several months,
but will likely fade from the national stage over time. Without such a
joint structure in place, other issues will arise, and we may, though
well-intentioned, find ourselves in the same situation 3 or 5 years
from now.
It is not only DOD and VA who need to collaborate more fully.
Others such as the Social Security Administration, Medicare, the
Department of Labor, and private entities need to be included in these
discussions. For example, an injured servicemember recently contacted
WWP because he was understandably confused. He had been rated as
unemployable by the VA but was told he did not qualify for Social
Security Disability benefits because he was able to work. In addition,
the Social Security Administration has had a difficult time getting
medical records necessary for evaluation from DOD. These agencies must
work together to resolve, where possible, inconsistencies in their
policies or the goal of ``seamless transition'' will never be achieved.
While the agencies share joint responsibility for resolving these
problems, WWP believes that Congress must also re-evaluate its current
means of addressing these issues. Due to the committee's jurisdictional
boundaries, it is often difficult to address the issues facing these
injured and transitioning servicemembers. For example, under the
Traumatic Servicemembers Group Life Insurance, a small portion of a
servicemembers paycheck is designated each month for the fund. If an
individual is injured, that insurance money is then paid through the
VA, often while the servicemember is still on active duty. If a problem
arises with the program, of which several have, which Congressional
committee is charged with resolving it? Without overlapping
jurisdiction, these injured brave men and women will continue to be
stuck in limbo. Therefore, WWP is proposing the creation of a Joint
Select Subcommittee on Transition Issues between both the Armed
Services and Veterans Affairs Committees in both the House and Senate.
This subcommittee would not require additional members, simply the
shared jurisdiction and participation of those already in place. Such
an action would signify to injured servicemembers and their families
that Congress understands their needs and is willing to take the
difficult steps to resolve their problems.
Mr. Chairman, thank you again for the opportunity to testify before
you today, and I look forward to answering your questions.
Senator Ben Nelson. Thank you.
Master Chief Barnes?
STATEMENT OF MASTER CHIEF PETTY OFFICER JOSEPH L. BARNES, USN
(RET.), NATIONAL EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, FLEET RESERVE ASSOCIATION
Master Chief Barnes. Mr. Chairman, Senator Graham, thank
you for this opportunity to present the concerns of TMC.
The extensive Coalition statement reflects the consensus of
TMC organizations and extensive work by eight legislative
committees, each comprised of representatives from the
Coalition's nearly three dozen military and veterans
organizations. I will briefly address key Active Duty and
retiree recommendations, and my colleagues will then address
other issues.
But first, I wish to thank you and the entire subcommittee
for the steadfast and strong support of our military personnel,
retirees, veterans, and their families and survivors, and
particularly for recently enacted Wounded Warrior enhancements.
Sustaining adequate Active, Guard, and Reserve end
strengths to effectively prosecute the war effort and other
demanding operational commitments is vital to our national
security, and TMC urges strong support for Army and Marine
Corps end-strength increases in fiscal year 2009. Wearing down
the force contributes to serious morale, readiness, and
retention challenges.
Restoring military pay comparability remains a top
priority, and TMC urges this distinguished subcommittee to
authorize at least a 3.9 percent pay hike. We appreciate your
leadership, authorizing past higher than the increase in the
Economic Cost Index (ECI) Active Duty pay hikes. Despite
significant progress on compensation levels, there's a
significant lag between ECI data collection and the
implementation date, and a 3.4 percent pay gap remains.
Housing standards determine local housing allowance rates,
which need to be revised to more appropriately reflect where
servicemembers are living. For example, only E-9s, which
comprise 1 and one-quarter percent of the enlisted force, are
eligible for Basic Allowance for Housing (BAH) for single-
family detached homes. TMC supports integrating the Guard and
Reserve Montgomery GI Bill (MGIB) and the Active Duty MGIB laws
under title 38, along with other MGIB reform initiatives.
In considering the transfer of education benefits to
spouses, it's important to not forget the approximately 20,000
currently serving Veterans Education Assistance Program (VEAP)-
era personnel who are not authorized to enroll in the MGIB.
The Coalition appreciates the extension of the combat-
related special compensation to disabled retirees who were
forced to retire before attaining 20 years of service, and for
those rated unemployable by the VA. However, major inequities
remain, and TMC urges this distinguished subcommittee to act on
recommendations of the Veterans Disability Benefits Commission
and implement a plan to eliminate the reduction of VA
disability compensation for military retired pay for all
disabled retirees.
Finally, the Coalition remains committed to adequate
funding to ensure access to the commissary benefit for all
beneficiaries, and moral, welfare, and recreation programs must
be adequately funded, accordingly.
Providing adequate programs, facilities, and support
services for personnel impacted by Base Realignment and Closure
(BRAC) actions, rebasing initiatives, and global repositioning
is very important, particularly during wartime, which alone
results in significant stress on servicemembers and their
families due to demanding operational commitments, repeated
deployments, and other service requirements.
Thank you, again, for the opportunity to present our
recommendations. Kathy Moakler will now discuss family
readiness, military spouse, and survivor issues.
[The prepared statement of Master Chief Petty Officer
Barnes follows:]
Prepared Statement by Master Chief Petty Officer Joseph L. Barnes, USN
(Ret.)
introduction
Mr. Chairman, the Fleet Reserve Association (FRA) salutes you,
members of the subcommittee, and your staff for the strong and
unwavering support of programs essential to active duty, Reserve
component, and retired members of the uniformed Services, their
families, and survivors. The subcommittee's work has greatly enhanced
care and support for our wounded warriors, improved military pay,
eliminated out-of-pocket housing expenses, improved health care, and
enhanced other personnel, retirement and survivor programs. This
support is critical to maintaining readiness and is invaluable to our
uniformed services engaged throughout the world fighting the global war
on terror, sustaining other operational commitments and fulfilling
commitments to those who've served in the past.
FRA's 2008 priorities include full funding for Department of
Defense (DOD) and Veterans Administration (VA) health care, annual
active duty pay increases that are at least a half percent above the
Employment Cost Index, to help close the pay gap between active duty
and private sector pay, full concurrent receipt of military retired pay
and VA disability compensation, and enhanced family readiness via
improved communications and awareness initiatives related to benefits
and quality of life programs.
Additional issues include the introduction and enactment of
legislation to eliminate inequities in the Uniformed Service Former
Spouses Protection Act (USFSPA), streamlining the voting process for
overseas military personnel, additional reform of the Montgomery GI
Bill (MGIB) to provide adequate funding to keep pace with rising
college costs to improve benefits for reservists and push for an open
enrollment for those who did not enroll in the Veterans Education
Assistance Program (VEAP) or the MGIB. In addition to the Navy and
Marine Corps, FRA also proudly represents the U.S. Coast Guard and
closely monitors benefits and quality of life programs to ensure parity
for Coast Guard personnel.
Excluding supplemental appropriations, the United States spent less
than 4 percent of its GDP on national defense in 2008. From 1961-1963,
the military consumed 9.1 percent of GDP annually. The active duty
military has been stretched to the limit since September 11, and has
expanded by only 30,000 personnel. FRA strongly supports funding to
support the anticipated increased end strengths in fiscal year 2009 and
beyond since the current end strength is not adequate to meet the
demands of fighting the War on Terror and sustaining other operational
commitment throughout the world. ``Measuring governmental costs against
the economy as a whole is a good proxy for how much of the Nation's
wealth is being diverted to a particular enterprise.'' \1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ John Cranford, CQ Weekly, February 10, 2007; ``Political
Economy: High, and Low, Cost of War''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Over the past several years, the Pentagon has been constrained in
its budget even as it has been confronted with rising personnel costs,
aging weapon systems, worn out equipment, and dilapidated facilities.
For these reasons, FRA strongly supports H.J. Res. 26 sponsored by
Representative Trent Franks, and S.J. Res. 67 sponsored by Senator
Elizabeth Dole which would ensure that annual defense spending is
maintained at a minimum of 4 percent of GDP.
This statement lists the concerns of our members, keeping in mind
that the Association's primary goal is to endorse any positive safety
programs, rewards, quality of life improvements that support members of
the uniformed services, particularly those serving in hostile areas,
and their families and survivors.
wounded warriors improvements
FRA is especially grateful for the inclusion of the Wounded Warrior
assistance provisions as part of the National Defense Authorization Act
(NDAA) for Fiscal Year 2008. Key elements of the House and Senate-
passed versions of the act, plus elements of the Dole-Shalala
Commission recommendations establish new requirements to provide the
people, training and oversight mechanisms needed to restore confidence
in the quality of care and service received by our wounded warriors and
their families. Maintaining an effective delivery system between DOD
and VA to ensure seamless transition and quality services for wounded
personnel, particularly those suffering from Post-Traumatic Stress
Disorder and Traumatic Brain Injuries is very important to our
membership.
FRA recommends that this distinguished subcommittee monitor the
implementation of these wounded warrior programs to include periodic
oversight hearings to ensure the creation and full implementation of a
joint electronic health record that will help ensure a seamless
transition from DOD to VA for wounded warriors, and establishment and
operation of the Wounded Warriors Resource Center as a single point of
contact for servicemembers, their family members, and primary care
givers.
Unfortunately, legislation has been enacted addressing many of
these issues during the past 20 plus years, and it took a major news
organization's coverage last year to help advance these important
support programs for our Nation's heroes. Authorization is one thing--
full implementation is another. Regarding this--our members continue to
ask what are the government's priorities?
health care
The Task Force on the Future of Military Health Care recently
issued its final report with recommendations that urged Congress to
shift higher health care costs to retirees, including TRICARE-for-Life
beneficiaries, through higher fees, deductibles, and pharmacy co-pays
that would be adjusted regularly to cover the cost of health care
inflation. The initial TFL annual enrollment fee proposed is $120. The
reference to ``fairness to the American taxpayer'' elicited bitter
reaction by some of our older members who served before the recent and
significant pay and benefit enhancements were enacted and receive
significantly less retired pay than those serving and retiring in the
same pay grade with the same years of service today. They clearly
recall promises made to them about the benefit of health care for life
in return for a career in the military with low pay and demanding duty
assignments. Many believe they are entitled to free health care for
life based on the government's past commitments and are angered by
reference to taxpayer fairness given their sacrifices in service to our
Nation. (The same ``fairness'' sentiment can be easily understood in
conjunction with how our wounded warriors have been treated.)
FRA reiterates TMC's appreciation to this distinguished
subcommittee for refusing to allow the implementation of the Department
of Defense's drastic health care fee increases during the past 2 years.
As stated in FRA's testimony to the Task Force on March 7, 2007:
DOD, Congress and FRA all have reason to be concerned about the
rising cost of military health care. But it is important to recognize
that the problem is a national one, not military-specific. It's also
important, in these times of focusing on benefit costs, to keep in
perspective that military service is much different than work in the
corporate world and the government's unique responsibility to provide
health care and other benefits for a military force that serves and has
served under extraordinarily arduous conditions to protect and preserve
our freedoms and security.
Adequately funding health care benefits for all beneficiaries is
part of the cost of defending our Nation.
health care survey responses
FRA launched a web survey in March 2006, and obtained more than 800
responses. From these the Association learned that there is a strong
opposition to the proposed fee increases within the senior enlisted and
retiree communities.
Over 90 percent of respondents opposed the
administration's TRICARE fee increases.
More than 84 percent would participate in a mail-order
prescription program if it meant they did not have to pay a co-
payment.
More than 75 percent said that health care benefits
influenced their decision to remain in the military.
More than 57 percent said that health care benefits
influenced their decision to join the military.
One active duty survey respondent reflects these
sentiments: ``I am third generation Navy, and after 30 years of
service, I am extremely concerned about the erosion of medical,
as well as other benefits. I have a very unique historical view
of how much benefits that were believed to be everlasting for
both active and retired servicemembers have been decreased or
terminated. The medical coverage was fundamental for my
continued service after my initial enlistment. This once again
is simply a break in the faith. This philosophy needs to be
suspended and the faith reaffirmed for past present and future
military generations.''
A retiree stated: ``My spouse and I have relied on the
Navy and the Military Health Care System to provide us with all
our medical needs. We expect health care to continue without
monetary increase, throughout our remaining years. We both
provided our country with a valuable service in the defense
posture of this country. We stood ready at the call without
complaint. We now expect the high quality of care that we were
led to believe would be available at no cost throughout our
remaining years if we used the Military Health Care System and
facilities. I do not expect to absorb increasing cost for
health care, when my retired pay does not increase with the
cost of health care increases.''
troop morale
The proposed health care fee increases are a morale issue within
the senior enlisted active duty communities who view this as reducing
the value of their future retiree benefits. They are aware of the
government's failures to honor past commitments and sensitive to
threats to their retiree benefits. Eroding benefits for career service
can only undermine long-term retention/readiness.
Today's sailors, marines, and coast guardsmen are very much aware
of Congress' actions toward those who preceded them in service. Strong
support for the enactment of TRICARE for Life was based in part on the
fact that inadequate retiree health care was affecting attitudes and
career decisions among active duty troops. Today, despite the
significant progress in restoring retiree benefits, arguing that
funding for retiree health care and other promised benefits negatively
impacts military readiness is fueling resentment and anger in retiree
communities and raising concerns within the senior career enlisted
force about their future benefits.
The 8 percent increase in TRICARE Reserve Select premiums imposed
within a short period after implementation of the program prompted
similar reaction within Reserve communities and FRA appreciates
attention to addressing the cost projection formula for adjusting
annual fees to ensure that future adjustments are based on more
realistic actual cost data for this benefit.
legislative proposals
FRA strongly supports ``The Military Health Care Protection Act''
(S. 604) sponsored by Senators Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ) and Chuck Hagel
(R-NB) that would limit annual TRICARE fee increases to the amount of
the Consumer Price Index and ``The Military Retiree Health Care
Protection Act'' (H.R. 579) sponsored by Representatives Chet Edwards
(D-TX) and Walter Jones (R-NC).
concurrent receipt
FRA continues its unwavering support for the full concurrent
receipt of military retired pay and veterans' disability compensation
for all disabled retirees. Provisions of the NDAA for Fiscal Year 2008
reflect progress toward this goal. FRA's membership appreciates the
support of this distinguished subcommittee in addressing the
elimination of the Concurrent Retirement and Disability Pay phase-in
for retirees rated less than 100 percent IU (retroactive to 1 January
2005) which will be effective on 1 October 2008, and expanding the
Combat Related Special Compensation for Chapter 61 retirees that took
effect when the bill became law and will be retroactive to 1 January
2008. As stated in the TMC statement, major inequities remain that
require the subcommittee's attention.
basic allowance for housing improvements
FRA's January 2007 online survey of enlisted active duty personnel
indicates that 68.8 percent believe Basic Allowance for Housing (BAH)
rates are inadequate, and housing allowances were rated second only to
pay in order of importance of quality of life programs. The need to
update the standards used to establish BAH rates is clear since only
married E-9s now qualify for BAH based on single family housing costs
and the Association continues to advocate for legislation authorizing
more realistic housing standards, particularly for career senior
enlisted personnel.
mgib improvements
A priority concern for senior enlisted leaders is ensuring that
many senior enlisted personnel who entered service during the VEAP era
(1977-1985), have an opportunity to sign up for the MGIB. Understanding
the challenges of split jurisdiction over active and Reserve benefits,
FRA urges authorization of an open enrollment period affording enlisted
leaders the opportunity to sign up for MGIB benefits. FRA supports Rep.
Tim Walberg's legislation, ``The Montgomery GI Bill Enhancement Act'',
(H.R. 4130), which would allow retirees and active duty personnel who
were on active duty before 1985 and did not participate in VEAP to
sign-up for the more generous MGIB.
In 1976, Congress created the VEAP as a recruitment and retention
tool for the post-Vietnam era. Congress greatly expanded education
benefits in 1984 and allowed individuals with VEAP accounts to transfer
their benefits to the new MGIB in 1996 (P.L. 104-275). Individuals who
were on active duty before 1985 and did not participate in VEAP were
not eligible to sign-up for MGIB, leaving a gap in available coverage
for certain career military personnel. Congress has voted several times
in the last decade to allow VEAP participants opportunities to transfer
to MGIB. Yet, there has never been an opportunity for those who did not
have VEAP accounts to sign up for the new program, excluding them from
taking advantage of these improved educational benefits.
According to 2007 data, over 5,000 marines that were then on active
duty were affected by this inequity.
FRA is also supporting ``The Post-September 11 Veterans Educational
Assistance Act'' (S. 22), and salutes Senator James Webb for his
leadership on this issue. The legislation would provide servicemembers
who have served since 11 September 2001 with improved educational
benefits similar to those provided to World War II-era veterans. Among
other improvements, Senator Webb's bill would provide 4 years of full-
time college benefits after personnel serve 36 months or more on active
duty and eliminate the $1,200 enrollment fee. FRA believes this bill is
a step in the right direction but is concerned about creating an
entirely new MGIB program rather than making reforms in the current
programs.
Other much needed education reform include in-State tuition
eligibility for servicemembers and their families; integrating MGIB
laws under title 38; and restoring Reserve MGIB rates to the intended
levels.
voting
Only 47.6 percent of overseas military voters who requested an
absentee ballot actually had their votes counted in 2006 according to a
recent report of the U.S. Election Assistance Commission (September
2007). Despite efforts to remedy past problems, voting from overseas is
a long and cumbersome process and paper ballots from military personnel
are frequently contested because they arrive late and often without
postage or a postmark date.
FRA is concerned about these statistics, since according to the New
York Times, the Department of Defense has spent more than $30 million
over the last 6 years to find an efficient way for servicemembers
living abroad to cast their votes.
The Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Voting Act of 1986 and the Help
America Vote Act of 2002 address voting rights of active duty military
personnel and all citizens that are outside the country during an
election. Despite these efforts serious challenges still exist that
include interfacing and lack of uniformity with state and local
election officials.
If electronic communications are secure enough for our Nation's
most sensitive secrets and for transferring huge sums of money, then
FRA asks why is it not possible to develop and implement a system for
the military and Federal employees who are stationed overseas to vote
by secure electronic means?
FRA appreciates the introduction of ``The Military Voting
Protection Act'' (H.R. 5673) by Congressman Kevin McCarthy (CA) that
directs the Secretary of Defense to collect the absentee ballots of
overseas military voters, and deliver the ballots to state election
officials via air transport. Although, the Association believes
legislation could more effectively streamline the current process by
allowing servicemembers to request and receive an absentee ballot
electronically but continue to return the signed completed ballot by
regular mail as is done now. The bill should also require states to
identify one state official to administer absentee ballots from
overseas military rather than county clerks and other local officials;
limit participation only to military personnel and Federal employees
overseas; and shift Federal responsibility away from DOD to another
agency such as the U.S. Election Assistance Commission.
In recent years, Congress has recognized the need for electronic
voting for servicemembers who are deployed overseas, and has mandated
DOD's Federal Voting Assistance Program to administer a pilot program
for internet voting since 2000. Unfortunately many states and local
election jurisdictions refused to participate.
The Association seeks support for improved active duty voter
participation in Federal elections and to expedite the military mail
processing of overseas ballots.
predatory lending protections
FRA has been in the forefront of ensuring active duty personnel and
their dependents have adequate protections against predatory lenders
who target military personnel and their families, and appreciates
support from this distinguished subcommittee and the full committee to
establish a 36 percent cap on pay day loans per provisions in the NDAA
for Fiscal Year 2007. This is an important readiness issue and FRA is
monitoring implementation of these requirements and recently expressed
concern to DOD about press reports indicating that predatory lenders
are making an end run around recently implemented DOD regulations (DOD-
2006-0S-0216).
The regulation implementing the law excludes credit cards,
overdraft loans, and all forms of open-ended credit from the 36 percent
rate cap. The Navy Times (31 Dec. 2007), however, indicates that some
predatory lenders are charging as much as 584 percent annual percentage
rate (APR) on these type of loans to servicemembers.
The Association believes that the current regulation is too narrow
and should include all loans to servicemembers and their dependents
except for mortgages and loans secured by collateral.
uniform services former spouses protection act
FRA continues to advocate for hearings and the introduction of
legislation addressing the inequities of the USFSPA. The Association
believes that USFSPA should be more balanced in its protection for both
the servicemember and the former spouse and that Congress needs to
review and amend so that the Federal Government is required to protect
its servicemembers against State courts that ignore its provisions.
FRA has long supported several recommendations in the Department of
Defense's September 2001 report, which assessed USFSPA inequities and
offered recommendations for improvement. Last year, the Department sent
a more extensive list of recommendations to staff of the House and
Senate Armed Services Committees regarding amending the USFSPA that
include the following FRA supported provision:
Base former spouse award amount on member's grade/
years of service at the time of divorce (and not retirement)
Prohibit award of imputed income while still on active
duty
Permit designation of multiple Survivor Benefit Plan
(SBP) beneficiaries
Permit SBP premiums to be withheld from former
spouse's share of retired pay if directed by the court
Few provisions of the USFSPA protect the rights of the
servicemember and none are enforceable by the Department of Justice or
DOD. If a State court violates the right of the servicemember under the
provisions of USFSPA, the Solicitor General will make no move to
reverse the error. Why? Because the act does not have the enforceable
language required for Justice or the Defense Department to react. The
only recourse is for the servicemember to appeal to the court, which in
many cases gives that court jurisdiction over the member. Some State
courts also award a percentage of veterans' compensation to ex-spouses,
a clear violation of U.S. law; yet, nothing has been done to stop this
transgression.
FRA believes Congress needs to take a hard look at the USFSPA with
the intent to amend it so that the Federal Government is required to
protect its servicemembers against State courts that ignore provisions
of the act.
reserve early retirement
FRA is disappointed that the effective date of a key provision in
the NDAA for Fiscal Year 2008, the Reserve retirement age provision
that is reduced by 3 months for each cumulative 90-days ordered to
active duty is effective upon the enactment of the legislation and NOT
retroactive to 7 October 2001 as addressed in the floor amendment to
the Senate version of the bill. Consistent with TMC, FRA strongly
endorses ``The National Guardsmen and Reservists Parity for Patriots
Act'' (H.R. 4930), sponsored Rep. Joe Wilson (SC) and ``The National
Guard and Reserve Retired Pay Equity Act'' (S. 2836) sponsored by Sen.
Saxby Chamblis (GA).
mandate travel cost re-imbursement
FRA appreciates the NDAA for Fiscal Year 2008 provision (Section
631) that permits travel reimbursement for weekend drills, not to
exceed $300, if the commute is outside the normal commuting distance.
The Association urges the subcommittee to make this a mandatory
provision. This is a priority issue with many enlisted reservists who
are forced to travel lengthy distances to participate in weekend drill
without any reimbursement for travel costs. Providing travel
reimbursement for drill weekends would assist with retention and
recruitment for the Reserves--something particularly important is to
increased reliance on these personnel in order to sustain our war and
other operational commitments.
conclusion
FRA is grateful for the opportunity to present these
recommendations to this distinguished subcommittee. The Association
reiterates its profound gratitude for the extraordinary progress this
subcommittee has made in advancing a wide range of military personnel
benefits and quality-of-life programs for all uniformed services
personnel and their families and survivors. Thank you again for the
opportunity to present the FRA' views on these critically important
topics.
Senator Ben Nelson. Thank you.
Ms. Moakler?
STATEMENT OF KATHLEEN B. MOAKLER, DIRECTOR OF GOVERNMENT
RELATIONS, NATIONAL MILITARY FAMILY ASSOCIATION
Ms. Moakler. Chairman Nelson, Senator Graham, thank you for
the many military-family-friendly provisions included in the
National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for Fiscal Year 2008.
We are happy that you have recognized the important role
that families play in supporting our servicemembers in all
stages of deployment. Excellent support programs exist. It is
important to find out which programs families are finding most
effective, and focus resources toward supporting those
programs. The evaluation process and the reports required in
the NDAA for Fiscal Year 2008 should help accomplish that.
Enhancements to the Family Medical Leave Act (FMLA) on
behalf of the families of the wounded are most timely and have
already been implemented. We also appreciate the FMLA changes
proposed for families in the midst of deployment, and hope
they, too, can be implemented soon.
You also recognized the excellence of the Yellow Ribbon
Reintegration Program from Minnesota by calling for it to be
implemented by the Reserve component in all States and
territories. We recognize its excellence, as well, but feel the
implementation would be carried out more thoroughly across the
board if the program were adequately funded. The reintegration
process, taking the initiative to educate families along with
the returning servicemember, acknowledging the challenges of
reconnecting as a family, and providing information and tools
to accomplish this is too important to ask already thin
financial resources to be stretched further.
As deployments continue, military families can be stressed
to the breaking point. We emphatically ask that you recognize
that greater access to mental health care and counseling for
returning servicemembers and families is vital. Military
children, the treasure of many military families, have
shouldered the burden of sacrifice with great pride. Many
programs have been created with the goal of providing support
and coping skills to our military children during this great
time of need. We appreciate this subcommittee's requirement to
report from DOD on programs that touch military children and
their caregivers, and hope the report results can be quickly
transformed into more effective programs.
Family members with special needs require extra
consideration. We recommend extending the Extended Care Health
Option (ECHO) program for 1 year for eligible families who are
retiring or being medically retired to aid in transition to
civilian support programs.
A fully funded, robust family readiness program is crucial
to military readiness. As deployments continue, families must
know there is a secure, yet flexible, set of support services
available to them to reinforce readiness and build resiliency.
While military childcare centers have consistently been
ranked highest in national ratings, families still experience
access problems. Despite new centers and funding provided last
year, there is still a shortfall of over 30,000 spaces.
Increased needs for respite care for both the families of the
deployed and families with special needs also add new strains
to the system. While some of the Services have broadened access
to childcare for geographically dispersed families, especially
for Guard and Reserve families, some have not. We ask the
subcommittee remain committed to helping all military families
access quality childcare.
Education is important in military families. The education
of military children is a prime concern for their parents. The
need for DOD-provided supplemental funding for Impact Aid is
increasing, and we ask for that increased funding. We also ask
this subcommittee to allow all school districts experiencing a
significant growth in their military student population due to
BRAC, global rebasing, or installation housing changes to be
eligible for the additional funding currently available only to
districts with an enrollment of at least 20 percent military
children.
Military spouses face unique employment challenges as they
deal with deployments and relocations. We appreciate the
partnerships being developed between DOD and the Services with
the Department of Labor and employers. Extending military-
spouse preference to all Federal agencies would expand
employment opportunities for this most mobile of workforces.
Spouses value education as a way to enhance their
employability. We hope that ways can be found to implement a
broader transferability of the GI Bill or tuition assistance
for military spouses.
Despite the implementation of long-awaited full-
replacement-value reimbursement, servicemembers still have
concerns as they anticipate moving from one installation to
another. Permanent change-of-station (PCS) allowances have not
kept up with today's expenses. PCS mileage rates have not been
adjusted since 1985. Temporary lodging expenses have not been
increased in 7 years. If they are moving to an installation
that is receiving a huge influx of troops and families, they
may be confronted with insufficient housing capacity, both on
and off the installations, overcrowded schools, and a shortage
of other community support structures.
We hear from military spouses how they would like to have a
professional equipment weight allowance, whether it is for the
items they collect as they run much-needed in-home daycare or
the paperwork and resources they accumulate as volunteer family
readiness group leaders.
TMC urges the subcommittee to upgrade PCS allowances to
better reflect the expenses members are forced to incur in
complying with government-directed moves.
We also urge the subcommittee to closely monitor rebasing
and BRAC plans and schedules to ensure sustainment and timely
development of adequate family support, quality-of-life
programs.
We appreciate your continuing attention to the needs of the
families of those who have made the greatest sacrifice: the
survivors of those who have died as a result of Active Duty
service. TMC views the special survivor allowance as a first
step toward the repeal of the Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP)-
Dependency and Indemnity Compensation (DIC) offset. We would
urge the subcommittee to expand eligibility for this allowance
to all SBP-DIC survivors.
We hear from the survivors of retirees that the practice of
recouping the final month's retired pay adds an unnecessary
financial stressor at a time the survivor is dealing with reams
of paperwork.
We thank you for your consideration of all these issues.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Moakler follows:]
Prepared Statement by Kathleen B. Moakler
Mr. Chairman and distinguished members of this subcommittee, the
National Military Family Association (NMFA) would like to thank you for
the opportunity to present testimony today on the quality of life of
military families. Once again, we thank you for your focus on the many
elements of the quality of life package for servicemembers and their
families: access to quality health care, robust military pay and
benefits, support for families dealing with deployment, special care
for the families of the wounded, and of those who have made the
greatest sacrifice.
NMFA endorses the recommendations contained in the statement
submitted by The Military Coalition. In this statement, NMFA will
expand on several issues of importance to military families:
I. Family Readiness
II. Family Health
III. Families and Deployment
IV. Wounded Families
V. Families in Transition
VI. Pay and Compensation
VII. Families and Community
family readiness
Today's military families are required to be in a constant state of
readiness. They are preparing for deployment, experiencing a
deployment, or recovering from a deployment until it is time to prepare
for another one. Family readiness calls for coordinated programs and
the information delivery system necessary to create a strong foundation
of family preparedness for the ongoing and unique challenges of
military family life.
NMFA is most grateful for the provisions included in the National
Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for Fiscal Year 2008. This
subcommittee listened to the family concerns presented in our testimony
last year and provided legislative changes that will greatly benefit
military families. NMFA maintains the Department of Defense (DOD) and
the Services provide many great programs to support military families
during all stages of deployment. It is imperative, as the conference
language emphasizes, ``support is continuously available to military
families in peacetime and war, as well as during periods of force
structure change and relocation of military units.'' NMFA appreciates
the emphasis on a consistent support structure for both active duty and
Reserve component, and the recommended inclusion of family support
programs in the planning and budgeting process.
We are especially interested in the congressional mandate for DOD
to measure the effectiveness and performance of these support programs.
Developing standardized metrics and ensuring all programs are properly
evaluated against those metrics will ensure only the most effective and
necessary programs continue to receive funding while indicating any
shortfalls in coverage where new or expanded programs may be required.
We look forward to participating in the surveys and reading the outcome
of the required reports.
The establishment of a DOD Military Family Readiness Council will
elevate the importance of family readiness and the programs that
support family readiness. We hope to work closely with the Council and
to participate wherever possible in the formulation of its
recommendations.
Since the beginning of the global war on terror, family programs
have made great progress. Outreach to families is constantly evolving.
We continue to hear from more and more families who access Military
OneSource for information and counseling sessions. NMFA regards
Military OneSource (www.militaryonesource.com), DOD's version of an
employee assistance program, as a solid resource for servicemembers,
military families and their extended family members, regardless of
Service affiliation or geographical location.
The DOD web portal www.militaryhomefront.dod.mil and the Service
Web sites continue to adapt to the changing needs of families. The
Army, including the Army Reserve, has been promoting virtual family
readiness groups as one way for the geographically dispersed units to
come together for support and information. The DOD Office of Family
Policy is reaching out to service providers with their traveling Joint
Family Assistance Workshop highlighting DOD resources. They also train
service providers--relocation managers, financial counselors, state
family assistance coordinators and others--on the most effective use of
resources, cross training them to be information and referral
specialists.
While we often think of family readiness in terms of military
readiness, recent natural disasters have placed military families in
the position of literally running for their lives. We are all familiar
with the devastation families impacted by Hurricane Katrina. The
wildfires in California this year found many military installations in
its path. It was encouraging to observe how the Navy and Marines used
the lessons learned in Katrina to alert families to the fire danger and
to establish safe locations for military families, with one-stop aid
centers to help them. Quick coordination of services was apparent and
lessened the blow to the military families who found themselves
displaced because of the fires. Military families, like all American
families, should be ready for emergencies. Installation and command
programs that foster emergency preparedness are another way to foster
family readiness.
Child Care
The Services--and families--continue to tell NMFA more child care
spaces are needed to fill the ever growing demand. We hear good news
stories like this from Fort Irwin, CA.
In recent months the Child Development Center (CDC) has
extended hourly care on a trial basis to see if longer hours
would be sufficiently used to warrant the changes. This
resulted from requests from families for longer hourly care
hours which typically were only available from 0900-1400.
Longer free respite hours are now available for all deployed
families and limited respite hours are available for Rear
Detachment families.
But, we also hear other stories from families:
We continue to struggle with the child care programs that
were created to assist Guard and Reserve specifically. It is
unfortunate that I will not even recommend the Operation Child
Care benefit to my families any longer because they have
actually been told that Air Force/ANG/AFR families do not
qualify to use the program. Families who have been denied
services or hit a brick wall when pursuing the program feel
angry, let down and disappointed. This really hampers morale so
why bother to add stress to an already stressful situation for
them.
NMFA is very grateful for the additional Child Care Centers (CDC)
Congress included in the Military Construction Appropriations Act for
Fiscal Year 2008. However, the new Centers and funding will only
provide 10 percent of the full time slots currently needed. There is
still a shortfall of 31,500 spaces. These figures do not include drop-
in and respite care shortages, which exist throughout the force.
Multiple deployments have diminished the number of child care
providers, both Center and home-based because Child and Youth Service
(CYS) programs have historically counted heavily on the ranks of
military spouses to fill these positions. Service CYS programs report a
growing shortage of spouses willing to provide child care as the stress
of single parenting and the worry over the deployed servicemember takes
its toll.
The partnerships between the Services and the National Association
of Child Care Resource and Referral Agencies (NACCRRA) are helping and
have grown over the past 2 years; however, not all families qualify for
the subsidies and not all programs are the same. NMFA was disappointed
to learn the Air Force is no longer providing funding for Air Force
families not currently enrolled in either Military Child Care in Your
Neighborhood or Operation Military Child Care. Currently approximately
800 Air Force families receive assistance through these programs.
However, over 375 families remain on indefinite wait lists due to lack
of Air Force funding. In addition, Title 32 families are now eligible
for NACCRRA programs, but Air Force families will continue to be denied
these programs. Additional challenges to expanding the Military Child
Care in Your Neighborhood program are related to accreditation. DOD
CDCs are nationally accredited; as a result, civilian centers desiring
to participate in the Military Child Care in Your Neighborhood program
must be accredited. Earning accreditation is an expensive and complex
procedure. Perhaps, an incentive could be provided to participating
civilian child care centers to receive their accreditation. Not only
would military children benefit, but all children using the Center
would benefit as well.
As always, getting the word out to families that such programs
exist is challenging. Military OneSource must do a better job of
putting the NACCRRA programs at the top of their list when referring
families to CDCs within their neighborhood. Too often, a family will
call OneSource and receive the closest child care option to their home
address, NOT the program that is currently working with the military
and providing subsidies.
Innovative strategies are also needed when addressing the
unavailability of after-hour child care (before 6 a.m. and after 6
p.m.) and respite care. The Army, as part of the funding attached to
its Army Family Covenant is rolling out more spaces for respite care
for families of deployed soldiers. Respite care is needed across the
board for the families of the deployed and for special needs families.
Families often find it difficult to obtain affordable, quality care
especially during hard-to-fill hours and on weekends. Both the Navy and
the Air Force have piloted excellent programs that provide 24/7 care.
The Navy has Centers in Norfolk and Hawaii, which provide a home-like
atmosphere for children of sailors working late nights or varying
shifts. The Air Force provides Extended Duty Child Care and Missile
Care (24-hour access to child care for servicemembers working in the
missile field). These innovative programs must be expanded to provide
care to more families at the same high standard as the Services'
traditional child development programs.
NMFA urges Congress to ensure resources are available to meet
thechild care needs of military families to include hourly, drop-in and
increased respite care for families of deployed servicemembers and
families with special needs members.
Working with Youth
Older children and teens must not be overlooked. School personnel
need to be educated on issues affecting military students and be
sensitive to their needs. To achieve this goal, schools need tools.
Parents need tools too. Military parents constantly seek more resources
to assist their children in coping with military life, especially the
challenges and stress of frequent deployments. Parents tell NMFA
repeatedly they want resources to ``help them help their children.''
Support for parents in their efforts to help children of all ages is
increasing but continues to be fragmented. New Federal, public-private
initiatives, increased awareness, and support by DOD and civilian
schools educating military children have been developed; however, many
military parents are either not aware such programs exist or find the
programs do not always meet their needs.
NMFA is working to meet this pressing need through its Operation
Purplesummer camps. Unique in its ability to reach out and gather
military children of different age groups (7-18), Services, and
components, Operation Purple provides a safe and fun environment in
which military children feel immediately supported and understood. Last
year, 4,000 campers, primarily the children of deployed servicemembers,
were able to attend camp. Our ultimate goal for 2008, with the support
of private donors, is to send 10,000 military children to camp.
Additionally, NMFA hopes to expand the camp experience to more children
of the wounded and bereaved, and a program addressing the family as a
unit.
NMFA appreciates the provisions in the NDAA for Fiscal Year 2008
instructing DOD to report on the effects of deployment of children of
all ages. Through its Operation Purple camps (OPC), NMFA has begun to
identify the cumulative effects multiple deployments are having on the
emotional growth and well being of military children and the challenges
posed to the relationship between deployed parent and child in this
very stressful environment. Understanding a need for qualitative
analysis of this information, NMFA contracted with the RAND corporation
to conduct a pilot study aimed at the current functioning and wellness
of military children attending Operation Purple camps and assessing the
potential benefits of the OPC program in this environment of multiple
and extended deployments. The results of this pilot study will be
available later this spring. NMFA also plans an additional longitudinal
study over the next several years.
Education of Military Children
As increased numbers of military families move into new communities
due to Global Rebasing and Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC), their
housing needs are being met further and further away from the
installation. Thus, military children may be attending school in
districts whose familiarity with the military lifestyle may be limited.
Educating large numbers of military children will put an added burden
on schools already hard-pressed to meet the needs of their current
populations. Impact Aid has traditionally helped to ease this burden;
however, the program remains underfunded. NMFA remains appreciative of
the additional funding you provide to civilian school districts
educating large numbers of military children. However, NMFA was
disappointed to learn the DOD supplement to Impact Aid was once again
funded at only $30 million for fiscal year 2008 for school districts
with more than 20 percent military enrollment and only $10 million was
provided to school districts experiencing significant shifts in
military dependent attendance due to force structure changes, with
another $5 million for districts educating severely-disabled military
children.
While the total funding available to support civilian schools
educating military children is greater than in recent years, we urge
Congress to further increase funding for schools educating large
numbers of military children. This supplement to Impact Aid is vital to
school districts that have shouldered the burden of ensuring military
children receive a quality education despite the stresses of military
life. NMFA also encourages this subcommittee to make the additional
funding for school districts experiencing growth available to all
school districts experiencing significant enrollment increases and not
just to those districts meeting the current 20 percent enrollment
threshold. We also urge you to authorize an increase in the level of
this funding until BRAC and Global Rebasing moves are completed. The
arrival of several hundred military students can be financially
devastating to any school district, regardless of how many of those
students the district already serves. Because military families cannot
time their moves, they must find available housing wherever they can.
Why restrict DOD funding to local school districts trying to meet the
needs of military children simply because they did not have a large
military child enrollment to begin with?
NMFA congratulates the DOD Office of Personnel and Readiness and
the Council of State Governments (CSG) for drafting the new Interstate
Compact on Educational Opportunity for Military Children. This compact
is intended to bring States together to allow for the uniform
treatment, at the State and local district level, of military children
transferring between school districts and States. Since July 2006, CSG
has worked with a variety of Federal, State, and local officials as
well as national stakeholder organizations representing education
groups and military families to create the new interstate compact. NMFA
was pleased to participate on both the Advisory Group and Drafting Team
for the compact. Currently, many States are considering joining the
compact, and legislatures in several have already filed bills to allow
their States to participate. NMFA is very excited to see this important
State legislation going forward.
NMFA asks Congress to increase the DOD supplement to Impact Aid to
$50 million to help districts better meet the additional demands caused
by large numbers of military children, deployment-related issues, and
the effects of military programs and policies. We also ask Congress to
allow all school districts experiencing a significant growth in their
military student population due to BRAC, Global Rebasing, or
installation housing changes to be eligible for the additional funding
currently available only to districts with an enrollment of at least 20
percent military children.
Spouse Education
Since 2004, NMFA has been fortunate to sponsor our Joanne Holbrook
Patton Military Spouse Scholarship Program, with the generosity of
donors who wish to help military families. In 2007, NMFA published
Education and the Military Spouse: The Long Road to Success, based on
spouse scholarship applicant survey responses, identifying education
issues and barriers specific to military spouses. The entire report may
be found at www.nmfa.org/education.
The survey found military spouses, like their servicemembers and
the military as a whole, value education and set education goals for
themselves. Yet, military spouses often feel their options are limited.
Deployments, the shortage of affordable and quality child care,
frequent moves, the lack of educational benefits and tuition assistance
for tuition are discouraging.
For military spouses, the total cost of obtaining a degree can be
significantly higher than the cost for civilian students. The unique
circumstances that accompany the military lifestyle have significant
negative impacts upon a spouse's ability to remain continuously
enrolled in an educational program. Military spouses often take longer
than the expected time to complete their degrees. More than one-third
of those surveyed have been working toward their goal for 5 years or
more.
The report offers recommendations for solutions that Congress could
provide. Some, like the recently announced partnership between the
Department of Labor (DoL) and DOD to designate military spouses as an
eligible group for DoL training and education funds have been
implemented. Others include:
Ensuring installation education centers have the
funding necessary to support spouse education programs and
initiatives,
Providing additional child care funding to support
child care needs of military spouse-scholars,
Providing additional funding for education benefits
under the ``Spouses to Teachers'' program,
Helping to defray additional costs incurred by
military spouses who ultimately spend more than civilian
counterparts to obtain a degree. Some possibilities include:
Removing housing allowances from FAFSA
calculations to allow more spouses to qualify for need-
based financial aid programs,
Providing tuition assistance to spouses,
Providing an additional education tax credit
to military spouses.
Also in the spouse suggestions was expanded eligibility for the
transfer of Montgomery G.I. Bill education benefits. NMFA wishes to
thank President George W. Bush for his recognition of the importance of
educational opportunities to military spouses in his recent State of
the Union address. NMFA hears often from military spouses who wish they
had access to the unused Montgomery G.I. Bill education benefits of
their servicemember. They feel this would greatly assist them in the
pursuit of educational and career objectives. Expanding the existing
G.I. Bill transferability pilot has been a top issue for the Army-wide
Army Family Action Plan delegates for several years. NMFA believes that
expanding the Montgomery G.I. Bill benefit to eligible dependents would
go a long way in making education more affordable for them.
We have concerns, however, on how to ensure an equitable
disbursement of this benefit and how the expansion of this program will
be funded. We feel the sooner in a servicemember's career that spouses
could avail themselves of this benefit, the greater the positive impact
would be on the spouse's education. Although these benefits are
currently available through some Services, we believe that all military
spouses of eligible servicemembers should be eligible. In addition, we
would hope transference of G.I. benefits would not preclude the
servicemember from receiving re-enlistment or other incentive bonuses.
It is difficult for families to make the choice between the short-term
benefit of bonuses and the long-term effect of additional education of
the spouse on the family. NMFA realizes that extending educational
benefits to military children may have unintended effects on future
recruitment of those same military children. It is a complex issue and
we welcome a full discussion of any legislation that may be proposed
with Congress and the Services.
Spouse Employment, Unemployment
NMFA applauds the DOD, and DoL, and the Department of Veteran
Affairs (VA) for the new Military Spouse Career Advancement Initiative,
which creates a more accessible education system for military spouses
along with targeting careers in high-growth sectors. The Military
Spouse Career Advancement Initiative will provide more than $35 million
to military spouses in 8 States on 18 military installations, and set
up accounts for eligible spouses in those States to cover expenses
directly related to post-secondary education and training. NMFA
believes this is an important first step to helping spouses advance
their careers, but we would like to see this pilot program expanded.
NMFA supports H.R. 2682 which expands the Workforce Opportunity Tax
Credit for employers who hire spouses of active duty and Reserve
component servicemembers, and to provide tax credits to military
spouses to offset the expense in obtaining career licenses and
certifications when servicemembers are relocated to a new duty station
within a different State.
Expanding spouse hiring preference beyond the DOD to the entire
Federal Government is another avenue to enhancing employment
opportunities and career development for military spouses.
Financial Readiness
Financial readiness is a critical component of family readiness.
NMFA completely supports the Military Lending Act (MLA) and is
following its implementation and enforcement closely. This legislation
was desperately needed to protect servicemembers and their families
from unscrupulous business practices. Last year we expressed our
concern that many lenders would attempt to exploit loopholes in the
narrow definitions contained in the regulation to circumvent the intent
of this important legislation. Unfortunately, our fears have been
realized. Covered products are so narrowly defined, lenders have
changed their product to fit the regulations. Payday loans have become
revolving credit loans addressed in the MLA. The Refund Anticipation
Loans (RALs) regulated in the MLA that were addressed were re-packaged
as well by tax preparation companies. Although they meet the letter of
the law, the new products use a debit card as a vehicle for the loan.
One debit card has an expiration date of August. If the taxpayer fails
to spend the entire refund by the expiration date a fee is charged to
get the remainder of the tax refund back. Installment loans, rent to
own, and credit cards are still not addressed.
While we fully recognize expanding this regulation could impede the
ability of some servicemembers and their families to obtain short-term
loans, we believe this risk is justified given the negative impact of
the use of predatory loans. Military banks and credit unions have
worked diligently to develop excellent alternatives to payday loans.
Small dollar, short-term loan products are available to servicemembers
through reputable lenders and should be marketed to pull families away
from predatory lenders. We look forward to the congressionally-mandated
DOD report on the MLA due in April 2008. We also believe better
education about other available resources and improved financial
education for both the servicemember and spouse will also reduce the
risk. NMFA contends that legitimate lenders have no need to fear an
interest rate cap of 36 percent. We encourage DOD to continue to make
military families aware of the need to improve their money management
skills and avoid high cost credit cards and other lenders. DOD must
continue to monitor high cost, low value financial products targeted at
military families.
NMFA asserts that the protections provided under the Military
Lending Act must be strengthened to eliminate loopholes that will
diminish the protection for servicemembers and their families. We urge
Congress to monitor DOD's implementation of the legislative provision
to ensure full protections are made available to military families.
Family readiness is directly linked to servicemember readiness.
NMFA asks Congress to direct DOD to maintain robust family readiness
programs addressing child care, youth services, education of military
children, spouse employment and education, and financial literacy and
to see that resources are in place to accomplish this goal.
family health
Family readiness calls for access to quality health care and mental
health services. Families need to know the various elements of their
military health care system (MHS) are coordinated and working as a
synergistic system. NMFA is concerned the DOD military health care
system may not have all the resources it needs to meet both the
military medical readiness mission and provide access to health care
for all beneficiaries. It must be funded sufficiently, so the direct
care system of military treatment facilities (MTF) and the purchased
care segment of civilian providers can work in tandem to meet the
responsibilities given under the TRICARE contracts, meet readiness
needs, and ensure access for all military beneficiaries.
The Military Health Care System
Officials of the DOD often speak of ``the MHS.'' There are annual
MHS conferences, a MHS Web site (www.tricare.mil), and a MHS Strategic
Plan. The current round of TRICARE contracts require coordination of
many health care activities in markets with multiple MTFs and Memoranda
of Understanding to govern the relationships between TRICARE
contractors and individual MTFs. Battlefield medicine has never been
more joint and is supported by the coordination of many elements. While
NMFA believes DOD has made some progress in living up to the rhetoric
regarding a military health ``system'', we still see too many
separations between and within Services. We agree with the statement of
the Task Force on the Future of Military Health Care that there is a
``lack of integration (within the MHS, which) diffuses accountability
for fiscal management, result (ing) in misalignment of incentives, and
limits the potential for continuous improvement in the quality of care
delivered to beneficiaries.'' NMFA feels there have been many missed
opportunities resulting in inefficiencies, higher costs, and decreased
beneficiary satisfaction. For example:
In a market served by several military hospitals and
clinics, one MTF decides to limit the items carried in its
pharmacy. While this decision saves money for this particular
MTF, it shifts pharmacy costs to other local MTFs or to DOD as
a whole when beneficiaries opt to obtain their medications in
the more expensive retail pharmacies.
In another market with several MTFs, local commanders
work together to share providers in order to keep care within
the MTF direct care side of the system and avoid the costs of
moving more patients to the more expensive purchased care side.
This arrangement, while sucessful, depends on the individuals
involved and could change when commanders are replaced.
In Alaska, several factors are in play: different
Services, geographical boundaries, and a lack of a robust
civilian network specialty care. Currently, the solution is to
fly the servicemember, family member(s), or retiree to the
nearest MTF--Madigan Army Medical Center in Washington State
rather than finding care close to home.
NMFA thanks this subcommittee for supporting continued funding to
provide for a robust military health care system. This system must
continue to meet the needs of servicemembers and the DOD in times of
armed conflict. It must also acknowledge that military members and
their families are indeed a unique population with unique duties, who
earn an entitlement to a unique health care program.
The proposals by DOD and the Task Force on the Future of Military
Health Care to raise TRICARE fees by exorbitant amounts have resonated
throughout the beneficiary population. Beneficiaries see these
proposals as a concentrated effort by DOD to change their earned
entitlement to health care into an insurance plan. NMFA appreciates the
concern shown by Members of Congress since the release of DOD's
proposals regarding the need for more information about the budget
assumptions used to create the proposals, the effects of possible
increases on beneficiary behavior, the need for DOD to implement
greater efficiencies in the Defense Health Care Program (DHP), and the
adequacy of the DHP budget as proposed by DOD. We appreciate the many
questions Members of Congress are asking about these proposals and urge
Congress to continue its oversight responsibilities on these issues.
TRICARE
In the ongoing debate about whether or not to raise TRICARE
beneficiary fees, NMFA believes it is important for everyone
participating in that debate to understand the difference between
TRICARE Prime and TRICARE Standard and to distinguish between creating
a TRICARE Standard enrollment fee and raising the Standard deductible
amount. TRICARE Prime has an enrollment fee for military retirees;
however, it offers enhancements to the health care benefit. These
enhancements include: lower out-of-pocket costs, access to care within
prescribed standards, additional preventive care, assistance in finding
providers, and the management of one's health care. In other words,
enrollment fees for Prime are not to access the earned entitlement, but
for additional services. These fees, which have not changed since the
start of TRICARE, are $230 per year for an individual and $460 per year
for a family.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Prime Standard
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Enrollment fees................. $230/year for an None
individual; $460/
year for a family.
Annual Deductibles.............. None.............. $150/individual;
$300 for a family
Outpatient co-payment (Prime)/ $12............... 25 percent of
cost share (Standard) for allowed charges
individual providers. 1,2
Inpatient co-payment/cost share None.............. 25 percent of
for individual providers. allowed charges
1,2
Daily inpatient hospitalization Greater of $11 per Lesser of $535/day
charge. day or $25 per or 25 percent of
admission. billed charges if
treated in non-
network hospital
3
Emergency Services co-payment/ $30............... 25 percent of
cost share. allowed charges
Ambulance Services co-payment/ $20............... 25 percent of
cost share. allowed charges
Preventive Examinations (such None.............. 25 percent cost
as: blood pressure tests, share 1,2
breast exams, mammograms,
pelvic exams, PAP smears,
school physicals) co-payments/
cost shares.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Providers may charge 15 percent above the TRICARE allowable and the
beneficiary is responsible for this additional cost, making the
potential cost share 40 percent.
\2\ If care is accessed from a TRICARE Prime/Extra network provider the
cost share is 20 percent.
\3\ If care is received in a TRICARE Prime/Extra network hospital, the
daily hospitalization rate is the lesser of $250/day or 25 percent of
negotiated charges.
(For a more detailed comparison of TRICARE costs, go to: http://
www.tricare.mil/tricarecost.cfm)
TRICARE Prime
DOD's proposal to increase TRICARE Prime enrollment fees, while
completely out-of-line dollar wise, was not unexpected. While Congress
temporarily forestalled increases over the past 2 years, NMFA believes
DOD officials continue to support large increased retiree enrollment
fees for TRICARE Prime, combined with a tiered system of enrollment
fees and TRICARE Standard deductibles. The Task Force on the Future of
the Military Health Care report, recently recommended the same. NMFA
believes DOD's tiered system based on rank was arbitrarily devised and
failed to acknowledge the needs of the most vulnerable beneficiaries:
survivors, wounded servicemembers, and their families. NMFA does
consider the Task Force's tiered system to be more palatable since it
is based on retiree pay rather than rank.
NMFA acknowledges the annual Prime enrollment fee has not increased
in more than 10 years and that it may be reasonable to have a mechanism
to increase fees. With this in mind, NMFA has presented an alternative
to DOD's proposal should Congress deem some cost increase necessary.
The most important feature of our proposal is that any fee increase be
no greater than the percentage increase in the retiree cost-of-living
adjustment (COLA). If DOD thought $230/$460 was a fair fee for all in
1995, then it would appear that raising the fees simply by the
percentage increase in retiree pay is also fair. NMFA also suggests it
would be reasonable to adjust the TRICARE Standard deductibles by tying
increases to the percent of the retiree annual COLA.
TRICARE Standard
NMFA remains especially concerned about what seems to be the intent
of DOD and the Task Force on the Future of Military Health Care to
create a TRICARE Standard enrollment fee. TRICARE Standard, as the
successor to CHAMPUS, is an extension of the earned entitlement to
health care. Charging a premium (enrollment fee) for TRICARE Standard
moves the benefit from an earned entitlement to an opportunity to buy
into an insurance plan. We are pleased the Task Force did not recommend
an enrollment fee for active duty family members. We note, however,
Standard is the only option for many retirees, their families, and
survivors because TRICARE Prime is not offered everywhere. Also, using
the Standard option does not guarantee beneficiaries access to health
care, which beneficiaries opting to use Standard rather than Prime
understand. DOD or the Task Force has not linked any guarantee of
access to a Standard enrollment fee.
We also ask what additional services beneficiaries who enroll in
Standard will receive after paying the enrollment fee. Or, will they
only be paying for the ``privilege'' of having to seek their own
providers, often filing their own claims, meeting a deductible, paying
a 20 to 25 percent cost share for their care (plus an additional 15
percent if the provider does not participate in the claim), and being
liable for a daily hospitalization charge of up to $535? Because they
recognize the cost liabilities of being in Standard, we know most will
continue to bear the cost of a TRICARE supplemental insurance policy.
NMFA opposes DOD's proposal to institute a TRICARE Standard
enrollment fee and believes Congress should reject this proposal
because it changes beneficiaries' entitlement to health care under
TRICARE Standard to just another insurance plan. However, we would be
remiss if we did not ask the many questions beneficiaries have about
how a Standard enrollment fee would be implemented and its implications
regarding access to care:
1. How much will it cost to implement the enrollment fee,
including the education efforts, additional tasks imposed on
the TRICARE contractors, and the inevitable cost of handling
appeals from beneficiaries whose claims were denied because
they did not know they had lost their benefit?
2. What type of open enrollment season will be needed to
provide retirees with the opportunity to coordinate coverage
between TRICARE and their employer-sponsored insurance?
3. Will retirees who do not enroll in Prime and do not pay a
premium (enrollment fee) for Standard be refused space
available care in MTFs, including their emergency rooms?
4. Will these same retirees be refused pharmaceutical
services at MTFs or be unable to use TRICARE retail network
pharmacies and the TRICARE mail order pharmacy (TMOP)?
5. Will retirees who only use Standard as a wrap-around to
their employer-provided health care insurance pay the same
premium (enrollment fee) as those who will use Standard as
their primary coverage?
NMFA is most appreciative of efforts by Congress to force DOD to
improve TRICARE Standard. Congressionally-mandated surveys of providers
have pointed out some issues related to providers' reluctance to treat
TRICARE patients, including the perennial complaints of complicated
paperwork and low reimbursement rates. We appreciate Congress'
requirement of DOD to report on patient satisfaction.
Pharmacy
It has been theorized there is a relationship between medication
co-payments and the use of generics by beneficiaries: as the difference
in co-payment widens between two groups (generics and preferred-band
named medication to non-preferred brand named drugs), beneficiaries
will chose the lower costing medications. In fact, the Task Force used
this assumption when designing their pharmacy tier and co-payment
structure. However, some studies have shown a high co-payment does not
necessarily drive beneficiaries to choose lower costing medications.
One study found participants did not switch to the lower cost generics,
finding there was a decrease in overall medication purchases by
consumers. This decrease in drug utilization meant consumers were no
longer adhering to or complying with their medication regime, which
could lead to increased Emergency Room visits and in-patient hospital
stays. It is believed the unexpected outcome resulted from the lack of
education by the insurer to the beneficiaries. Results may have been
different if they had been told the reason behind the large increases
and provided information on ways to lower their drug costs through the
purchase of generics and preferred-brand named drugs. As we all know,
DOD infrequently contacts its beneficiaries, even though military
associations have asked for years for this to be done. NMFA cautions
DOD about generalizing findings of certain beneficiary behaviors and
automatically applying them to our Nation's unique military population.
NMFA encourages Congress to require DOD to utilize peer-reviewed
research involving beneficiaries and prescription drug benefit options,
along with performing additional research involving military
beneficiaries, before making any recommendations on prescription drug
benefit changes such as co-payment and tier structure changes for
military servicemembers, retirees, their families, and survivors.
NMFA appreciates the inclusion of Federal pricing for the TRICARE
retail pharmacies in the NDAA for Fiscal Year 2008. However, we will
need to examine its effect on the cost of medications for both
beneficiaries and DOD. Also, we will need to see how this may
potentially impact the overall negotiation of future drug prices by
Medicare and civilian private insurance programs.
NMFA appreciates the establishment of the Beneficiary Advisory
Panel (BAP), which gave beneficiaries a voice in DOD process to move
medications to the Uniform Formulary's third tier. The BAP has played
an important role, but, at times it has been limited in its ability to
be effective. NMFA requests Congress require the BAP play a more
substantial role in the formulary-setting process, have access to drug
cost data on medications being considered, have BAP comments directly
incorporated in the decisionmaking process, and require formal feedback
by DOD addressing why recommendations by the BAP were not taken into
consideration.
TRICARE for Life Enrollment Fees
NMFA applauds the congressional creation of TRICARE for Life (TFL).
The reasons behind the creation of this benefit was to right an
injustice. We should not let this get lost when the Task Force's
recommendation, to include an enrollment fee for retired servicemembers
over 65, is discussed by DOD. NMFA strongly believes an enrollment fee
for TFL is not appropriate for many reasons. The fee will create
additional financial burdens on a population who has limited income and
is currently paying for Medicare Part B at $94 a month. The current
system does not really encourage wellness and prevention. It is
important to maintain continuity of care and access to prevention
programs for Medicare eligible retirees because it will stabilize this
group known for its co-morbidities and lead to more cost-effective care
for both Medicare and TRICARE. Also, being part of TRICARE allows
beneficiaries to access medications through MTFs and TMOP, which
creates a lower individual out-of-pocket burden and provides
significant costs savings for DOD and ultimately Medicare, making the
beneficiary a good steward of our tax dollars. Certainly, a victory for
everyone involved.
TRICARE Reimbursement
NMFA has been encouraged by the TRICARE contractors' efforts to
speed payments, especially to providers who choose to file claims
electronically. TRICARE is no longer the slowest payer, but it remains
the lowest payer. TRICARE rates are tied to Medicare rates, which often
mean providers are reluctant to accept too many TRICARE beneficiaries.
The passage of the Medicare, Medicaid, and SCHIP Extension Act of 2007
in December was important to TRICARE beneficiaries because it prevented
a scheduled 10.1 percent cut to Medicare physician reimbursement rate
for 6 months and provided a half-percent update in payments. NMFA is
concerned that continuing pressure to lower Medicare reimbursement
rates will create a hollow benefit for TRICARE beneficiaries. As
Congress takes up Medicare legislation this summer, NMFA requests
consideration of how this legislation will also impact military
families' health care, especially access to mental health services.
NMFA believes tying increases in TRICARE enrollment fees to the
percentage increase in the retiree COLA is a fair way to increase
beneficiary cost shares should Congress deem an increase necessary.
NMFA encourages Congress to direct DOD to continue efforts to gain
real efficiencies, improve the quality of care, and access before
passing additional costs on to beneficiaries.
NMFA believes Congress and DOD must address the reasons why
providers do not accept TRICARE Standard. There should be NO enrollment
fee for TRICARE Standard and TFL. Further research should be done on
the pharmacy benefit's impact on beneficiaries.
Improving Access to Care
MHS funding shortfalls are experienced first-hand by military
families enrolled in TRICARE Prime when they find their MTF cannot meet
prescribed access standards. No one is more cognizant of the need for
superior health care to be provided to servicemembers in harm's way
than their families. However, a contract was made with those who
enrolled in Prime. Beneficiaries must seek care in the manner
prescribed in the Prime agreement, but in return they are given what
are supposed to be guaranteed access standards. When an MTF cannot meet
those standards, appointments within the civilian TRICARE network must
be offered. In many cases, this is not happening and families are told
to call back next week or next month. In other cases, MTFs must send
enrolled beneficiaries to providers in the civilian network, thus
increasing costs to the system as a whole.
Because operational requirements have reduced the number of
uniformed health care personnel available to serve in the MTF system, a
more coordinated approach is needed to optimize care and enable MTFs to
meet access standards. We continue to hear difficulties in the Service
contracting process are preventing MTFs from filling open contract
provider slots and thus optimizing care within their facilities or
increasing the overall numbers of health care providers to help
backfill forward deployed health care personnel. NMFA suggests DOD
reassess the resource sharing program used prior to the implementation
of the T-Nex contracts and take the steps necessary to ensure MTFs meet
access standards with high quality health care providers.
MTFs must have the resources and the encouragement to ensure their
facilities are optimized to provide high quality, coordinated care for
the most beneficiaries possible. They must be held accountable for
meeting stated access standards. If funding or personnel resource
issues are the reason access standards are not being met, then
assistance must be provided to ensure MTFs are able to meet access
standards, support the military mission, and continue to provide
quality health care.
DOD Must Look for Savings
The Task Force on the Future of Military Health Care, along with
the Government Accountability Office, highlighted DOD had no single
point of accountability for costs. In fact, the Task Force went as far
as to say ``DOD cannot provide financial statements that are reliable
or that account with a high level of confidence the true and accurate
costs of health care in the MHS.'' Given this information, how can we
know what DOD's cost for beneficiary health care really is? We ask
Congress to establish better oversight for DOD's accountability in
becoming more cost-efficient.
We have two possible recommendations:
Require the Comptroller General to audit MTFs on a
random basis until all have been examined for their ability to
provide quality health care in a cost-effective manner;
Create an oversight committee, similar in nature to
the Medicare Payment Advisory Commission, which provides
oversight to the Medicare program and makes annual
recommendations to Congress. The Task Force often stated it was
unable to address certain issues not within their charter or
the timeframe in which they were commissioned to examine the
issues. This Commission would have the time to examine every
aspect in a nonbiased manner.
According to the Task Force on the Future of Military Health Care,
DOD's organizational structure is a large, inflexible, disintegrated
system that leads to negative outcomes at the operational level. The
Task Force noted fragmentation still exists within the MHS, which is
unable to effectively leverage resources to meet common or shared
requirements. The Task Force recommended DOD needed greater flexibility
and alignment at all levels in order to provide better decisionmaking
based on cost-effectiveness and to plan properly to manage prudently
its direct versus purchased health care services. DOD and the Task
Force have made recommendations for beneficiaries to pay enrollment
fees, higher co-pays and deductibles. NMFA believes DOD must first make
the health care side of its house run more efficiently. Large private
sector Health Care Organizations have incorporated best business
practices and centralized their resources. However, DOD continues to
split health care resources between three Services, and within the
Services and between the TRICARE contractors. Why should military
families have to pay for DOD's inability to gain control of their
health care costs through streamlining their organization? One solution
would be to move toward a Unified ``Joint'' Medical Command structure,
which was recommended by the Defense Health Board in 2006.
In recent years at the annual TRICARE conferences and other venues,
DOD officials have discussed the benefits of disease management,
especially for certain chronic illnesses. These benefits flow to the
beneficiaries through better management of their conditions and to DOD
through patients' decreased need for costly emergency room visits or
hospitalizations. However, more needs to be done. NMFA does not support
the recommendation of the Task Force on the Future of Military Health
Care to carve out one regional TRICARE contractor to provide both the
pharmacy and health care benefit. We agree a link between pharmacy and
disease management is necessary, but feel this pilot would only further
erode DOD's ability to maximize potential savings through TMOP. NMFA
was also disappointed to find no mention of disease management or a
requirement for coordination between the pharmacy contractor and
Managed Care Support Contractors in the Request for Proposals for the
new TRICARE pharmacy contract. The ability certainly exists for them to
share information bi-directional.
Despite the successes of the TRICARE Next Generation (T-Nex)
managed care support contracts, NMFA remains concerned that efforts to
optimize the MTFs have not met expectations in terms of increasing or
even maintaining access for TRICARE beneficiaries. NMFA believes
optimizing the capabilities of the facilities of the direct care system
through timely replacement construction, funding allocations, and
innovative staffing would allow more beneficiaries to be cared for in
the MTFs, which DOD asserts is the least costly venue. The Task Force
made recommendations to make DOD MHS more cost-efficient. NMFA
supports: the MHS must be appropriately sized, resourced, and
stabilized; and make changes in its business and health care practices.
NMFA is dismayed that DOD has taken only small steps to encourage
migration to the TMOP. Its marketing effort to promote the use of the
TMOP came only after NMFA and other associations raised the issue in
congressional testimony in their push for the implementation of
significant cost-saving measures prior to any increase in TRICARE fees.
Promoting use of the TMOP makes sense, as it provides significant
savings to beneficiaries, as well as huge savings to the Department.
The creation of the Members Choice Center by DOD and Express Scripts in
August 2007, to provide personal assistance in transferring
beneficiaries' prescriptions from TRICARE Retail Pharmacies (TRRx) to
TMOP, has provided more than $800,000 in savings to beneficiaries and
$9.3 million to DOD. Significant savings have also been seen in the
over-the-counter (OTC) demonstration project for select Proton Pump
Inhibitors. In just 6 months, roughly 14,000 beneficiaries have
participated with huge savings to beneficiaries and DOD. We are
confident similar results will be seen with the second OTC
demonstration project for select Antihistamine products. NMFA believes
it is imperative all of the medications available through TRRx should
also be made available through TMOP. Medications treating chronic
conditions, such as asthma, diabetes, and hypertension should be made
available at the lowest level of co-payment regardless of brand or
generic status. We agree with the recommendations of the Task Force on
the Future of Military Health Care that OTC drugs be a covered pharmacy
benefit and there be a zero co-pay for TMOP Tier 1 medications.
NMFA strongly suggests that DOD look within itself for cost savings
before first suggesting that beneficiaries bear the burden! We
encourage DOD to investigate further cost saving measures such as: a
systemic approach to disease management, a concentrated marketing
campaign to increase use of the TMOP, eliminating contract
redundancies, holding DOD more accountable, moving towards a Unified
Medical Command, and optimizing MTFs.
Support for Families With Special Needs
NMFA is grateful to Congress for expanding health care and other
support services to military dependent children with autism in the NDAA
for Fiscal Year 2008. This complicated condition places a burden on
many military families. Frequent military moves make it difficult for
these children to receive a consistent level of services. Approximately
12 percent of military children have disabilities, of which autism is
only one condition affecting military special needs children. While
grateful for the increased support targeted at military children with
autism, NMFA urges Congress and DOD to ensure a comparable level of
support for all military special needs families. Deployment of a
servicemember removes a caregiver from the home, making managing
therapy and doctors' appointments, negotiating with school officials
for suitable services, and caring for other children in the family
difficult for the parent remaining behind.
In the NDAA for Fiscal Year 2002, Congress authorized the Extended
Care Health Option (ECHO) to provide additional benefits to active duty
with a qualifying mental or physical disability in recognition of
extraordinary challenges faced by active duty families because of the
servicemember's deployment or frequent relocations that often make
accessing services in the civilian community difficult. We applaud
Congress and DOD desire to create a robust health care and educational
service for special needs children. But, these robust services do not
follow them when they retire. NMFA has encouraged the Services to allow
these military families the opportunity to have their final duty
station be in an area of their choice. This will allow them to move up
on waiting lists for local services before retirement. Because not all
servicemembers can have such an assignment, NMFA suggests ECHO be
extended for 1 year after retirement for those who were already
enrolled in ECHO prior to retirement.
We remain concerned that military servicemembers with special needs
family members continue to battle a lack of information or support and
are often frustrated by the failure of the military health care and
family support systems to work together and with civilian agencies to
support their families' needs.
Guard and Reserve Family Health Care
Despite increased training opportunities for families, the problem
still persists of educating Guard and Reserve family members about
their benefits. New and improved benefits do not always enhance the
quality of life of Guard and Reserve families as intended because these
families lack the information about how to access these benefits. NMFA
is grateful to Congress for its initial efforts to enhance the
continuity of care for National Guard and Reserve members and their
families by creating TRICARE Reserve Select. We continue to monitor
this new program closely, watching both premium increases and
beneficiaries access to providers. Because TRICARE Reserve Select is
basically the TRICARE Standard benefit, access to providers within
certain standards is not guaranteed. Because Guard and Reserve members
are paying premiums for this program, however, we believe they will
expect DOD to ensure providers are available and willing to treat
beneficiaries in this program.
TRICARE Reserve Select is not the complete answer to Guard and
Reserve families' health care needs. Information and support are
improving for Guard and Reserve families who must transition into
TRICARE; however, NMFA believes that going into TRICARE may not be the
best option for all of these families. Guard and Reserve servicemembers
who have been mobilized should have the same option as their peers who
work for the Department of Defense: DOD should pay their civilian
health care premiums. The ability to stay with their civilian health
care plan is especially important when a Guard or Reserve family member
has a special need. We appreciate the provision in the NDAA for Fiscal
Year 2008 that provided for a stipend for that purpose but the need is
just as great for a family member with a chronic condition, or in the
midst of treatment. NMFA also believes that paying a subsidy to a
mobilized Guard or Reserve member for their family's coverage under
their employer-sponsored insurance plan may also prove to be more cost-
effective for the government than subsidizing 72 percent of the costs
of TRICARE Reserve Select for Guard or Reserve members not on active
duty.
Emphasis must continue on promoting continuity of care for families
of Guard and Reserve servicemembers. NMFA's recommendation to enhance
continuity of care for this population is to allow members of the
Selected Reserve to choose between buying into TRICARE when not on
active duty or receive a DOD subsidy allowing their families to remain
with their employer-sponsored care when mobilized.
families and deployment
Families are impacted differently in all phases of deployment. They
may be preparing for a first deployment. They may be in the first few
months, adjusting to life without that all important partner, parent,
son or daughter. They may be feeling the strain as months 6, 7 or 8 go
by, as the tension of loved one in danger or the strain of keeping
things ``normal'' begin to show. They may be experiencing the
anticipation of reunion. But even with reunion there are worries, as we
heard from one young man: ``Will my dad still like me?'' With return
and reunion, families struggle to re-acquaint themselves with the
member who has returned. Will she be the same as before? Did he suffer
a traumatic brain injury (TBI)? How do we cope with his isolation or
changes in personality?
Each deployment is different. The needs of each family are
different as well. We hear from families that they are weary. A recent
article in USA Today highlighted the burn-out of family readiness group
leaders and commander's spouses, family members who support other
families in the unit, dealing with the problems at the other end of the
phone, expressed in the commissary line or shared at the child care
center. We appreciate the emphasis by the Services on the importance of
training these important volunteers. Having attended several regional
training sessions, we have seen first hand the tools and training that
these volunteers are equipped with. It does take a measure of
individual insight to know when a family member needs a good listener
and when they need more help than the volunteer is able to provide.
Care for these caregivers is essential. It is difficult to mandate or
legislate relief for volunteers. NMFA hopes that professional staff
members and commanders at the unit and installation levels are aware of
the stress that these volunteers live with and look for ways to relieve
them of some of these responsibilities. We applaud the Army's infusion
of family readiness support assistants to units down to the battalion
level to help relieve some of the overworked volunteers. But we want to
make sure that there is a distinction between administrative help and
the counseling that many of our deployed families need. We want to make
sure that this additional staff support is available across all
Services and components.
NMFA is pleased that DOD is reaching out to servicemembers and
families to gauge their needs. Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates'
recent visit with soldiers and families at Ft. Campbell revealed many
of the same concerns that NMFA hears from families. The impact of
extended deployments was a significant concern of families there.
Secretary Gates stated ``There is no question that 15-month deployments
are a real strain, not only on the soldiers, but (also) on the families
they leave behind.'' NMFA has said before, missing one birthday, one
Christmas, one anniversary can be viewed as just part of the
deployment. When two Christmases go by, or dad or mom has not been
there for two birthdays in a row, the sacrifice can seem too great.
The Services are also reaching out to the families of individual
augmentees, those ``onesies and twosies'' who often are far from the
unit headquarters of the deploying unit or may get lost in the shuffle.
The Navy has developed a number of new initiatives in support of
individual augmentee (IA) sailors and their families. One such
initiative is the new Fleet and Family Support Centers (FFSC) and
Expeditionary Combat Readiness Center (ECRC) individual augmentee
newsletter. This newsletter will be published monthly to inform
augmentees and their families of programs and services available to
them. The ECRC Care Line can be reached via phone at 877-364-4302,
email at [email protected], or online at http://www.ecrc.navy.mil/.
Fleet and Family Support Centers (FFSC) have also created programs
and services to keep IAs and their families informed. Among them are
Virtual Individual Augmentee Discussion Groups hosted by Fleet and
Family Support Centers worldwide. Discussion Groups will be available
to help IA family members stay connected to other Navy families who are
experiencing an IA deployment. Participation is via Internet and
telephone.
Guard and Reserve
NMFA would like to thank Congress for authorizing many provisions
within the NDAA for Fiscal Year 2008 that affect our Guard and Reserve
families. We now ask Congress to fund these important provisions to
help improve the quality of life for our Guard and Reserve families,
who have sacrificed greatly in support of our Nation. In the recently
released final report from the Commission on the National Guard and
Reserves the commissioners stated ``Reserve Component family members
face special challenges because they are often at a considerable
distance from military facilities and lack the on-base infrastructure
and assistance available to active duty families.'' The report also
stated ``Military family members today believe that all families in the
community should enjoy a comparable level of ``purple'' support
services, regardless of Service or component--with adequate funding and
staffing resources.'' The report recognized the importance of Military
OneSource to Reserve component families. While citing a robust
volunteer network as crucial, the report also stated that family
readiness suffers when there are too few paid staff professionals
supporting the volunteers. These findings resonate with support
recommendations made by NMFA through the years. NMFA thanks the
Commission for recognizing the importance of family support to the
National Guard and Reserve.
The Yellow Ribbon Reintegration program was extremely successful in
the State of Minnesota. Best practices always deserve to be shared.
NMFA thanks this subcommittee for including provisions to implement the
Yellow Ribbon program in all States and territories. This program
should provide National Guard and Reserve members and their families
with sufficient information, services, referral, and proactive outreach
opportunities throughout the entire deployment cycle. We are well aware
that members of the Reserve components face a host of unique challenges
upon returning to their families, hometowns, and civilian jobs. NMFA is
concerned, however, that a lack of funding may diminish the impact of
this critical program. We urge Congress to fully fund this initiative
supporting the men and women of our Reserve components and their
families who have answered the call to protect our Nation. We must not
forget that reintegration programs must address the needs of the entire
family, including children.
NMFA supports the institution of the Yellow Ribbon Reintegration
program in all States and territories but asks that the program be
fully funded to be most effective.
Military Family Life Consultants
As this DOD program has matured, NMFA hears good things about the
Military Family Life Consultant (MFLC) program. More servicemembers and
families are familiar with the program and expect to see the counselors
in their communities. We heard from one Marine family who said:
As a Marine Corps wife and a medical provider at Quantico, I
can tell you the family life consultants have been a God send.
Quick access for marines to get counseling for combat
operational stress, stress management and spouse education post
deployment. They are so accommodating to the marines schedule
and they work closely with deployment health issues and mental
health clinic.
Installations and commanders are also recognizing them as resource
multipliers. Said one family support professional:
The MFLC program works hard to make services available to
families. New MFLCs are announced in the post paper as she or
he is assigned. MFLCs attend post activities to meet families,
pass out phone numbers and make themselves available to
families. I have personally met them on playgrounds, at
workshops offered through MCEC, and through MOPs meeting
groups.
MFLCs are also an integral part of NMFA's Operation Purple (OP)
Camps. Through the support of DOD every OP camp, with the exception of
the western region, has assigned an MFLC mental health consultant (NMFA
wishes to thank the TriWest Health Care Alliance which supports OP
camps in the west through a similar program).
MFLCs fill an important need in the overall support of military
families. The program's success warrants its continued authorization
and funding.
wounded families
Wounded Servicemembers Have Wounded Families
Post-deployment transitions can be especially problematic for
injured servicemembers and their families. NMFA asserts that behind
every wounded servicemember is a wounded family. Spouses, children,
parents, and siblings of servicemembers injured defending our country
experience many uncertainties. Fear of the unknown and what lies ahead
in future weeks, months, and even years, weighs heavily on their minds.
Other concerns include the injured servicemember's return and reunion
with their family, financial stresses, and navigating the transition
process to the VA.
The system should alleviate, not heighten these concerns, and
provide for coordination of care that starts when the family is
notified the servicemember has been injured and ends with the DOD and
VA working together to create a seamless transition as the injured
servicemember transfers from active duty status to veteran status. NMFA
congratulates Congress on the NDAA for Fiscal Year 2008 Wounded Warrior
Act, in which many issues affecting this population were addressed. We
also appreciate the work DOD and the VA have done in establishing the
Senior Oversight Committee (SOC) to address the many issues highlighted
by the three Presidential Commissions. However, more still needs to
done. NMFA recently heard the SOC is now meeting monthly rather than
weekly. There is certainly more work to be done. We urge Congress to
establish an oversight committee to monitor DOD and VA's partnership
initiatives, especially with the upcoming administration turnover and
the disbandment of the SOC early this year.
It is NMFA's belief the government, especially the VA, must take a
more inclusive view of military families. Those who have the
responsibility to care for the wounded servicemember must also consider
the needs of the spouse, children, and the parents of single
servicemembers and their siblings. According to the TBI Task Force,
family members are very involved with taking care of their loved one.
As their expectations for a positive outcome ebbs and flows throughout
the rehabilitation and recovery phases, many experience stress and
frustration and become emotional drained. NMFA recommends care for the
families of the wounded/ill/injured should include support, assistance,
and counseling programs. NMFA recently held a focus group composed of
wounded servicemembers and their families to learn more about issues
affecting them. They said following the injury, families find
themselves having to redefine their roles. They must learn how to
parent with an injury and become a spouse/lover with an injury. Each
member needs to understand the unique aspects the injury brings to the
family unit. Reintegration programs become a key ingredient in the
family's success. NMFA believes we need to focus on treating the whole
family with programs offering skill based training for coping,
intervention, resiliency, and overcoming adversities. Parents need
opportunities to get together with other parents who are in similar
situations and share their experiences and successful coping methods.
DOD and VA need to provide family and individual counseling to address
these unique issues. A retreat for the entire family and for the couple
provides an opportunity to reconnect and bond as a family again.
Caregivers of the severely wounded, ill, and injured services
members, such as those with severe TBI, must be trained through a
standardized program, certified, and compensated. Caregivers need to be
recognized for the important role they play in the care of their loved
one. Without them, their quality of life would be significantly
compromised. Additional financial burdens would be placed on the DOD
and the VA health care systems. NMFA has heard from caregivers the
difficult decisions they have to make over their loved one's bedside
following the injury. Many don't know how to proceed because they don't
know what their loved one's wishes were. We support the recently
released TBI Task Force recommendation for DOD to require each
deploying servicemember to have a medical power of attorney and a
living will. The NDAA for Fiscal Year 2008 authorized an active-duty
TRICARE benefit for severely wounded/ill/injured servicemembers, but
not for their family members. This needs to be rectified to include the
servicemember's spouse and children. NMFA recommends an active duty
benefit like the surviving spouse benefit for 3 years for the family
members of those who are medically retired.
The impact of the wounded/ill/injured on children is often
overlooked and underestimated. Military children experience a
metaphorical death of the parent they once knew and must make many
adjustments as their parent recovers. Many families relocate to be near
the MTF or the VA Polytrauma Center in order to make rehabilitation
process more successful. As the spouse focuses on the rehabilitation
and recovery, older children take on new roles. They may become the
caregivers for other siblings, as well as for the wounded parent. Many
spouses send their children to stay with neighbors or extended family
members, as they tend to their wounded/ill/injured spouse. Children get
shuffled from place to place until they can be reunited with their
parents. Once reunited, they must adapt to the parent's new injury and
living with the ``new normal.'' Brooke Army Medical Center has
recognized a need to support these families and has allowed for the
system to expand in terms of guesthouses co-located within the hospital
grounds. The on-base school system is also sensitive to issues
surrounding these children. Unfortunately, not all families enjoy this
type of support. NMFA is concerned the impact of the injury is having
on our most vulnerable population, military children. NMFA believes we
need research to better understand this phenomenon and identify
effective support programs for these children.
NMFA strongly suggests research on families, especially children of
wounded/ill/injured servicemembers; standardized training,
certification, and compensation for caregivers; individual and family
counseling and support programs; and a reintegration program that
provides an environment rich for families to reconnect. An oversight
committee to monitor DOD's and VA's continued progress toward seamless
transition.
Mental Health
As the war continues, families' need for a full spectrum of mental
health services--from preventative care to stress reduction techniques,
to individual or family counseling, to medical mental health services--
continues to grow. The military offers a variety of mental health
services, both preventative and treatment, across many helping agencies
and programs. However, as servicemembers and families experience
numerous lengthy and dangerous deployments, NMFA believes the need for
confidential, preventative mental health services will continue to
rise. It will also remain high for some time even after military
operations scale down. Successful return and reunion programs will
require attention over the long term, as well as a strong partnership
at all levels between the various mental health arms of the DOD and VA.
The Army's Mental Health Advisory Team (MHAT) IV report links the
need to address family issues as a means for reducing stress on
deployed servicemembers. The team found the top non-combat stressors
were deployment length and family separation. They noted that soldiers
serving a repeat deployment reported higher acute stress than those on
their first deployment and the level of combat was the key ingredient
for their mental health status upon return. They found there was no
difference in Services. Multiple deployers reported higher acute stress
than first-time deployers, which is a difference from the MHAT III that
found those who redeploy were better prepared due to improved pre-
deployment training. They also acknowledged deployment length was
causing higher rates of martial problems. Given all the focus on mental
health prevention, the study found current suicide prevention training
was not designed for a combat/deployed environment. Recent reports on
the increased number of suicides in the Army also focused on tour
lengths and relationship problems.
DOD's Task Force on Mental Health stated timely access to the
proper mental health provider remains one of the greatest barriers to
quality mental health services for servicemembers and their families.
NMFA and the families it serves have noted with relief more providers
are deployed to theaters of combat operations to support
servicemembers. The work of these mental health professionals with
units and individuals close to the combat action they experience have
proved very helpful and will reduce the stress that impedes
servicemembers' performance of their mission and their successful
reintegration with their families.
While families are pleased more mental health providers are
available in theater to assist their servicemembers, they are less
happy with the resulting limited access to providers at home. DOD's
Task Force on Mental Health found families are reporting an increase
difficulty in obtaining appointments with social workers,
psychologists, and psychiatrists at their military hospitals and
clinics. The military fuels the shortage by deploying some of its child
and adolescent psychology providers to the combat zones. Providers
remaining at home stations report they are frequently overwhelmed
treating active duty members who either have returned from deployment
or are preparing to deploy to fit family members into their schedules,
which could lead to compassion fatigue. Creating burnout and
exacerbating the problem.
In the seventh year of the global war on terror, care for the
caregivers must become a priority. NMFA hears from the senior officer
and enlisted spouses who are so often called upon to be the strength
for others. We hear from the health care providers, educators, rear
detachment staff, chaplains, and counselors who are working long hours
to assist servicemembers and their families. Unless these caregivers
are also afforded respite care, given emotional support through their
command, and effective family programs, they will be of little use to
those who need their services most.
Thousands of servicemember parents have been away from their
families and placed into harm's way for long periods of time. Military
children, the treasure of many military families, have shouldered the
burden of sacrifice with great pride and resiliency. Many programs,
both governmental and private, have been created with the goal of
providing support and coping skills to our military children during
this great time of need. Unfortunately, many support programs are based
on vague and out of date information.
Given this concern, NMFA has partnered with RAND Corporation to
research the impact of war on military children with a report due in
April 2008. In addition, NMFA held its first ever Youth Initiatives
Summit for Military Children, ``Military Children in a Time of War''
last October. All panelists agreed the current military environment is
having an effect on military children. Multiple deployments are
creating layers of stressors, which families are experience at
different stages. Teens especially carry a burden of care they are
reluctant to share with the nondeployed parent in order to not ``rock
the boat.'' They are often encumbered by the feeling of trying to keep
the family going, alongside anger over changes in their schedules,
increase responsibility, and fear for their deployed parent. Children
of the National Guard and Reserve face unique challenges as there are
no military installations for them to utilize. They find themselves
``suddenly military'' without resources to support them. School systems
are generally unaware of this change in focus within these family units
and are ill prepared to lookout for potential problems caused by these
deployments. Also vulnerable are children who have disabilities that
are further complicated by deployment. Their families find stress can
be overwhelming, but are afraid of reaching out for assistance for fear
of retribution on the servicemember.
NMFA recommends research to:
Gain a better understanding of the impact of war,
especially multiple and extended deployments;
Identify and fund effective programs to address this
issue;
Educate those who are at the touch point of our
military children on how to provide support, such as clergy,
child care providers, and teachers; and
Encourage DOD to reach out and partner with those
private and nongovernmental organizations who are experts in
their field on children and adolescents to identify and
incorporate best practices in the prevention and treatment of
mental health issues affecting our military children.
National provider shortages in this field, especially in child and
adolescent psychology, are exacerbated in many cases by low TRICARE
reimbursement rates, TRICARE rules, or military-unique geographical
challenges: large populations in rural or traditionally underserved
areas. Many mental health providers are willing to see military
beneficiaries in a voluntary status. However, these providers often
tell us they will not participate in TRICARE because of what they
believe are timeconsuming requirements and low reimbursement rates.
More must be done to persuade these providers to participate in TRICARE
and become a resource for the entire system, even if that means DOD
must raise reimbursement rates.
Many mental health experts state that some post-deployment problems
may not surface for several months or years after the servicemember's
return. We encourage Congress to request DOD to include families in its
Psychological Health Support survey; perform a pre and post-deployment
mental health screening on family members (similar to the PDHA and
PDHRA currently being done for servicemembers as they deploy into
theater); and sponsor a longitudinal study, similar to DOD's Millennium
Cohort Study, in order to get a better understanding of the long-term
effects of war on our military families.
NMFA is especially concerned not as many services are available to
the families of returning National Guard and Reserve members and
servicemembers who leave the military following the end of their
enlistment. They are eligible for TRICARE Reserve Select, but as we
know Guard and Reserve are often located in rural areas where there may
be no mental health providers available. We ask you to address the
distance issues families face in linking with military mental health
resources and obtaining appropriate care. Isolated Guard and Reserve
families do not have the benefit of the safety net of services provided
by MTFs and installation family support programs. Families want to be
able to access care with a provider who understands or is sympathetic
to the issues they face. NMFA recommends the use of alternative
treatment methods, such as telemental health; increasing mental health
reimbursement rates for rural areas; modifying licensing requirements
in order to remove geographical practice barriers that prevent mental
health providers from participating in telemental health services; and
educating civilian network mental health providers about our military
culture.
Mental health professionals must have a greater understanding of
the effects of mild TBI in order to help accurately diagnose and treat
the servicemember's condition. They must be able to deal with
polytrauma--Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) in combination with
multiple physical injuries. NMFA appreciates Congress establishing a
Center of Excellence for TBI and PTSD. For a long time, the Defense and
Veterans Brain Injury Center (DVBIC) has been the lead agent on TBI.
Now with the new Center, it is very important DVBIC become more
integrated and partner with other Services in researching TBI. Also, we
need more education to civilian health care providers on how to
identify signs and symptoms of mild TBI and PTSD.
DOD must balance the demand for mental health personnel in theater
and at home to help servicemembers and families deal with unique
emotional challenges and stresses related to the nature and duration of
continued deployments. We ask you to continue to put pressure on DOD to
step up the recruitment and training of uniformed mental health
providers and the hiring of civilian mental providers to assist
servicemembers in combat theaters AND at home stations to care for the
families of the deployed and servicemembers who have either returned
from deployment or are preparing to deploy.
DOD should increase reimbursement rates to attract more providers
in areas were there is the greatest need. TRICARE contractors should be
tasked with stepping up their efforts to attract mental health
providers into the TRICARE networks and to identify and ease the
barriers providers cite when asked to participate in TRICARE.
families in transition
Survivors
NMFA applauds the enhancement of medical benefits included in the
NDAA for Fiscal Year 2006 making surviving children eligible for full
medical benefits to age 21 (or 23 if they are enrolled in college)
bringing them in line with the active duty benefit for dependent
children. To complete the benefit package, we ask Congress to allow
surviving children to remain in the TRICARE Dental Program until they
age out of TRICARE and, in cases where the surviving family had
employer-sponsored dental insurance, treat them as if they had been
enrolled in the TRICARE Dental Program at the time of the
servicemember's death.
Because the VA has as part of its charge the ``care for the widow
and the orphan,'' NMFA was concerned about recent reports that many Vet
Centers did not have the qualified counseling services they needed to
provide promised counseling to survivors, especially to children. DOD
and the VA must work together to ensure surviving spouses and their
children can receive the mental health services they need. New
legislative language governing the TRICARE behavioral health benefit
may also be needed to allow TRICARE coverage of bereavement or grief
counseling. While some widows and surviving children suffer from
depression or some other medical condition for a time after their loss,
many others simply need counseling to help in managing their grief and
helping them to focus on the future. Many have been frustrated when
they have asked their TRICARE contractor or provider for ``grief
counseling'' only to be told TRICARE does not cover ``grief
counseling.'' Available counselors at military hospitals can sometimes
provide this service and certain providers have found a way within the
reimbursement rules to provide needed care, but many families who
cannot access military hospitals are often left without care because
they do not know what to ask for or their provider does not know how to
help them obtain covered services. Targeted grief counseling when the
survivor first identifies the need for help could prevent more serious
issues from developing later.
NMFA recommends that surviving children be allowed to remain in the
TRICARE Dental Program until they age out of TRICARE eligibility. We
also recommend that grief counseling be more readily available to
survivors.
NMFA appreciates the work being done by DOD and the Services to
provide training to casualty assistance officers and to make sure
survivors are receiving accurate information in a timely manner. The
survivor notebook provided by DOD and the Services, The Days Ahead:
Essential Papers for Families of Fallen Servicemembers, has received
praise from survivors and families and has enhanced the information
being provided by the Services. The Army Long Term Family Case
Management Office--the one-stop resolution and assistance for benefits,
outreach, advocacy, and support--for their improvements to the case
management system and continued communication with families to further
refine their services and response time.
NMFA still believes the benefit change that will provide the most
significant long-term advantage to the financial security of all
surviving families would be to end the Dependency and Indemnity
Compensation (DIC) offset to the Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP). Ending
this offset would correct an inequity that has existed for many years.
Each payment serves a different purpose. The DIC is a special indemnity
(compensation or insurance) payment paid by the VA to the survivor when
the servicemember's service causes his or her death. It is a flat rate
payment of $1,091 for the surviving spouse and $271 for each surviving
child. The SPB annuity, paid by DOD, reflects the longevity of the
service of the military member. It is ordinarily calculated at 55
percent of retired pay. Military retirees who elect SBP pay a portion
of their retired pay to ensure that their family has a guaranteed
income should the retiree die. If that retiree dies due to a service
connected disability, their survivor becomes eligible for DIC.
Surviving active duty spouses can make several choices, dependent
upon their circumstances and the ages of their children. Because SBP is
offset by the DIC payment, the spouse may choose to waive this benefit
and select the ``child only'' option. In this scenario, the spouse
would receive the DIC payment and the children would receive the full
SBP amount until each child turns 18 (23 if in college), as well as the
individual child DIC until each child turns 18 (23 if in college). Once
the children have left the house, this choice currently leaves the
spouse with an annual income of $13,092, a significant drop in income
from what the family had been earning while the servicemember was alive
and on active duty. The percentage of loss is even greater for
survivors whose servicemembers served longer. Those who give their
lives for their country deserve more fair compensation for their
surviving spouses.
NMFA appreciates the establishment of a special survivor indemnity
allowance as a first step in the process to eliminate the DIC offset to
SBP. As written, the NDAA for Fiscal Year 2008 only provides this
allowance to survivors of military retirees who paid premiums for the
Survivor Benefit Plan and survivors of gray area reservists who have
signed up for SBP but had not yet begun paying premiums. The House
version of the NDAA for Fiscal Year 2008 extended this allowance to all
surviving spouses, including those survivors of active duty deaths.
NMFA believes that eligibility for this special allowance should be
extended to all survivors.
NMFA believes several other adjustments could be made to the
Survivor Benefit Plan. These include allowing payment of the SBP
benefits into a Special Needs Trust in cases of disabled children and
allowing SBP eligibility to switch to children if a surviving spouse is
convicted of complicity in the member's death.
NMFA has always emphasized that servicemembers and families
understand there is a package of survivor benefits. While NMFA
understands the impetus for allowing a servicemember to designate
payment of the death gratuity in 10 percent increments to persons other
than their primary next of kin, it begs the question ``what is the
purpose of the death gratuity?'' The death gratuity was originally
intended to act as a financial bridge, to help with living expenses
until other benefits such as the Dependency and Indemnity Compensation
(DIC) payment, the Survivor Benefit annuity, and Social Security
benefits begin to be paid. The death gratuity is not an insurance
payment, even though its $100,000 payment is bigger than many civilian
life insurance plans. NMFA is concerned that families may be left
without that financial bridge if the servicemember designates someone
other than their primary next of kin to receive the entire death
gratuity. We do appreciate the provision language that requires
notification of the spouse if the servicemember does change designees.
We will monitor with interest the effects of this change on surviving
families.
NMFA recommends that eligibility for the special survivor indemnity
allowance be expanded to include all SBP-DIC survivors. We also ask the
DIC offset to SPB be eliminated to recognize the length of commitment
and service of the career servicemember and spouse
Families on the Move
NMFA is gratified that DOD has begun to implement the ``Families
First'' program for Permanent Change of Station (PCS) moves with the
launching of the full replacement value (FRV) component late last year.
This program is long overdue. It will provide much needed protections
to military families entrusting their most precious possessions to
movers. We ask Congress to monitor additional issues related to
Families First to ensure all components are brought online in a timely
manner. NMFA will monitor the implementation of the provision included
in the NDAA for Fiscal Year 2008 that requires the servicemember to
comply with reasonable restrictions or conditions prescribed in order
to receive payment for damaged or lost items. NMFA is concerned that
this language, coupled with the small business language in the
Conference Report, could be used to diminish or destroy this important
benefit families have waited so long to receive. NMFA asks Congress to
ensure full replacement value coverage is not diminished or lost now
that families finally have the benefit.
We also ask Congress to recognize that military spouses accumulate
professional goods over the course of a military career. Frequent moves
make it difficult to establish and maintain professional materials used
for a job or volunteer activities that will ultimately count against
the family's weight allowance when the time to move arrives. Military
members are permitted a professional goods weight allowance to
compensate for the computers, books and equipment that must accompany
them from duty station to duty station. We request that spouses be
provided this professional courtesy as well.
NMFA was disappointed this subcommittee's recommendation for
shipment of a second vehicle to non-foreign overseas duty stations was
dropped in conference. A PCS move to an overseas location can be
especially stressful. Military families are faced with the prospect of
being thousands of miles from extended family and living in a foreign
culture. At many overseas locations, there are insufficient numbers of
government quarters resulting in the requirement to live on the local
economy away from the installation. Family members in these situations
can begin to feel extremely isolated; for some the only connection to
anything familiar is the local military installation. Unfortunately,
current law permits the shipment of only one vehicle to an overseas
location, including Alaska and Hawaii. Since most families today have
two vehicles, they sell one of the vehicles.
Upon arriving at the new duty station, the servicemember requires
transportation to and from the place of duty leaving the military
spouse and family members at home without transportation. This lack of
transportation limits the ability of spouses to secure employment and
the ability of children to participate in extra curricular activities.
While the purchase of a second vehicle alleviates these issues, it also
results in significant expense while the family is already absorbing
other costs associated with a move. Simply permitting the shipment of a
second vehicle at government expense could alleviate this expense and
acknowledge the needs of today's military family.
NMFA requests that Congress ease the burden of military PCS moves
on military families by authorizing a professional goods weight
allowance for military spouses and by authorizing the shipment of a
second vehicle for families assigned to an overseas location on
accompanied tours.
Pay and Compensation
NMFA thanks members of this subcommittee for their recognition that
servicemembers and their families deserve a comprehensive benefit
package consistent with the extraordinary demands of military service.
We ask you to continue to evaluate changing circumstances that may
diminish the value of that package and threaten the retention of a
quality force. We also ask you to recognize the interaction between the
various elements of the compensation package and how they affect
families' eligibility for certain State and Federal programs. Despite
regular annual pay increases, in addition to targeted raises, over the
past several years, military pay for some servicemembers still lags
behind civilian pay. NMFA was disappointed to see the additional one
half percent above ECI provision was stripped from the NDAA for Fiscal
Year 2008 during conference. We encourage Congress to consider
extending the pay raise for 2009 by an additional one-half percent over
the ECI.
Military Allowances and Safety Net Programs
In congressional testimony since 2003, NMFA has raised a
longstanding frustration for military families: the confusion involved
in how and when military allowances are counted to determine
eligibility for military and civilian programs. NMFA again reinforces
the need for Members of Congress, as well as State officials, to assist
in bringing a sense of order in how military allowances are counted for
Federal and State programs. We ask you to help ensure equitable access
to these safety net services and protect families against disruptions
in benefit eligibility caused by the receipt of deployment pays. No
family should have to face the prospect of losing valuable benefits for
a disabled child because a servicemember has received deployment
orders. Families living off the installation are often there only
because of insufficient on-base housing, yet endure higher expenses
than families living on an installation. Ideally, therefore, NMFA
believes tax-free allowances such as BAH should not be counted under
any safety net program, which is how they are now treated in
determining eligibility for the Earned Income Tax Credit. NMFA
understands this could increase the number of military families
eligible for some of these programs, but believe this increase is
justified given the need for equitable treatment of all servicemembers,
as well as the loss of spouse income due to military relocations and
high operations tempo.
Inconsistent treatment of military allowances in determining
eligibility for safety net programs creates confusion and can exact a
financial penalty on military families. A start in correcting this
inequity would be to adopt a common standard in how BAH should be
counted in eligibility formulas and to ensure that the receipt of
deployment-related allowances do not cause military family members to
become ineligible for support services for which they would otherwise
be eligible.
Flexible Spending Accounts
Flexible Spending Accounts have done a great deal to help Federal
employees and corporate civilian employees defray out-of-pocket costs
for both their health care and dependent care needs. NMFA believes this
important program should be extended to military servicemembers, and
urges Congress to work with the Department of Defense to accomplish
this much needed change. It is imperative that we include active duty
and Selected Reserve members in this cost saving benefit.
NMFA asks that a flexible spending account benefit be extended to
military families.
Commissaries and Exchanges
The commissary is a key element of the total compensation package
for servicemembers and retirees and is valued by them, their families,
and survivors. NMFA surveys indicate that military families consider
the commissary one of their most important benefits. In addition to
providing average savings of more than 30 percent over local
supermarkets, commissaries provide an important tie to the military
community. Commissary shoppers get more than groceries at the
commissary. They gain an opportunity to connect with other military
family members and to get information on installation programs and
activities through bulletin boards and installation publications.
Finally, commissary shoppers receive nutrition information and
education through commissary promotions and educational campaigns
contributing to the overall health of the entire beneficiary
population.
NMFA is concerned that there will not be enough commissaries to
deal with the areas experiencing substantial growth. The surcharge was
never intended to pay for DOD and Service transformation. Additional
funding is needed to ensure commissaries are built in areas that are
gaining personnel as a result of these programs.
The military exchange system serves as a community hub, in addition
to providing valuable cost savings to members of the military
community. Equally important is the fact that exchange system profits
are reinvested in important Morale Welfare and Recreation (MWR)
programs, resulting in quality of life improvements for the entire
community. We believe that every effort must be made to ensure that
this important benefit and the MWR revenue is preserved, especially as
facilities are down-sized or closed overseas. Exchanges must also
continue to be responsive to the needs of deployed servicemembers in
combat zones.
Military Housing
In the past few years, privatized housing has changed the lifestyle
for the military families who live there. New or renovated housing with
spacious floor plans, new appliances and amenities you would find the
new suburban subdivisions have gone a long way to improving the quality
of life for military families. However, there are still a few things
that need to be addressed.
With rebasing, as more installations become joint, there is a need
for a single unified definition of adequate housing. Currently some
servicemembers are receiving refunds of part of their BAH while members
of other Services living in identical units are not. The only
difference is the individual Service definition of ``adequate
housing''. This situation creates a disparity in benefit between
servicemembers of equal rank. In addition, there are concerns that DOD
is not adequately monitoring construction contracts. Air Force
privatization contracts have fallen hopelessly behind schedule in some
areas leaving sizeable wait lists for housing that should already be
complete and occupied. Better oversight is absolutely necessary. NMFA
appreciates the provision in the NDAA for Fiscal Year 2008 calling for
a report on this issue.
Commanders must be held accountable for privatized communities.
These housing areas remain the responsibility of the installation
Commander even when managed by a private company. Military members
should not be on wait lists while civilians occupy housing. While
privatization contracts permit other occupants for vacant units,
Commanders must ensure that privatized housing is first and foremost
meeting the needs of the active duty population of the installation. In
some cases this will require modification or renegotiation of
contracts. On an aesthetic and health care note, NMFA asks that a
minimum number of non-smoking quarters be designated at each
installation. Non-smokers, especially in multi-family dwellings, are
being forced to live with second hand smoke in far too many cases. NMFA
has received complaints from families who are suffering health
consequences of living with a neighbor's smoking habit. This is
unacceptable.
NMFA feels there needs to be a review of BAH standards. While
families who live on the installation are better off, families living
off the installation are forced to absorb more out-of-pocket expenses
in order to live in a home that will meet their needs. In the
calculation for BAH there is no regard for family size. In addition,
the standards are based on an outdated concept of what would constitute
a reasonable dwelling. For example, in order to receive BAH for a
single family dwelling a servicemember must be an E9. However, if that
same servicemember lived in military housing, he or she would likely
have a single family home at the rank of E6 or E7. BAH standards should
mirror the type of dwelling a servicemember would occupy if government
quarters were available.
families and community
Higher stress levels caused by open-ended and multiple deployments
require a higher level of community support. Military families,
especially those geographically dispersed, often look to support
programs in their communities because of their proximity and
familiarity.
A question is often asked about whether there is a sense of
detachment between the civilian community and military servicemembers
and their families. A small part of the Nation is being asked to assume
duties and sacrifices while the rest of the Nation goes about their
business, oblivious to the contributions of the few. To recognize the
sacrifices and the day-to-day needs of America's military family
members, NMFA worked with the U.S. Family Health Plan, a TRICARE
provider, to implement a public service campaign urging citizens to
``support, befriend, remember and appreciate'' military family members.
The campaign consists of national print, radio, TV, online and in-
cinema public service announcements (PSAs). The messages are moving and
emotional, designed to get people thinking about the families who
contribute to the Nation's well-being every day, during war as well as
peace. For example, the PSAs suggest having coffee with a soldier's
parents, hiring a military spouse and mentoring a military child.
Thirty- and 15-second video PSAs were shown to approximately 3.4
million moviegoers in 205 theatres this past summer. The videos along
with four radio PSAs, may be downloaded from http://
www.yearofthemilitaryfamily.org/.
NMFA often learns of other community programs that are reaching out
to military families. Some of these are initiatives funded by other
Federal agencies. Many of these programs are highlighted on the America
Supports You Web site. In North Carolina, Essential Life Skills for
Military Families is a 12-hour workshop series designed for National
Guard and Reserve component couples. The sessions offer to help
military families deal with the unique challenges they experience as a
citizen soldier family. Held in their own communities, the classes are
taught by local Cooperative Extension Family and Consumer Sciences
Agents. Funding for this project was provided by the United States
Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children
and Families. The program addresses marriage and family relationships,
parenting, balancing military and family needs, financial literacy,
legal issues and building a support network in your own community.
NMFA is also partnering with the United Way's 2-1-1 program. This
hotline program provides health and human service information to
callers around the United States. The program is robust in some areas,
like Texas and still in the development stage in others. NMFA is
offering military family friendly information and resources through
webinars and conferences to the 2-1-1 information and referral
operators so that they can send military families who call the hotline
to already existent military resources like Military OneSource or State
Joint Family Assistance Centers.
Military families share a bond that is unequaled in the civilian
world. They support each other through hardship, deployments, PCS
moves, and sometimes, the loss of a loved one. The military community
is close knit and must be so. It is imperative that our Nation ensure
the necessary infrastructure and support components are in place to
support families regardless of where they happen to be located
geographically. More importantly, we ask you and other Members of
Congress to ensure that the measures undertaken today in the interest
of cutting costs and improving efficiency do not also destroy the sense
of military community so critical to the successful navigation of a
military lifestyle. Educating families on what support is being
provided helps reduce the uncertainty for families.
Preparation and training are essential in reaching families and
making sure they are aware of additional resources available to them.
While NMFA appreciates the extraordinary support that was made
available to address the special needs of the families during
deployment extensions and last year's ``Surge'', our Nation must ensure
this level of support is available to all families day-in and day-out.
Military family support and quality of life facilities and programs
require dedicated funding, not emergency funding. Military families are
being asked to sustain their readiness. The least their country can do
is make sure their support structure is consistently sustained as well.
Strong families equal a strong force. Family readiness is integral to
servicemember readiness. The cost of that readiness is an integral part
of the cost of the war and a national responsibility. We ask Congress
to shoulder that responsibility as servicemembers and their families
shoulder theirs.
Senator Ben Nelson. Thank you.
Sergeant Cline?
STATEMENT OF MASTER SERGEANT MICHAEL P. CLINE, USA (RET.),
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, ENLISTED ASSOCIATION OF THE NATIONAL GUARD
OF THE UNITED STATES
Sergeant Cline. Thank you.
Mr. Chairman, Senator Graham, we thank you for holding
these hearings on behalf of the men and women who make up our
Nation's National Guard and Reserve component.
Thanks to the diligent work of Congress and this
subcommittee, the National Guard and Reserves have proven they
are a ready, reliable, and relevant force. Today, almost
700,000 National Guard and Reserve members have been called to
Active Duty for Operation Enduring Freedom (OEF) and Operation
Iraqi Freedom (OIF), and 173,000 have been deployed multiple
times. More than 527 National Guard members have made the
ultimate sacrifice for freedom.
Mr. Chairman, one of the most asked-about issues that faces
the Associations of TMC is the early retirement provision
passed last year. It was signed into law by the President in
January of this year. However, this vital piece of legislation
didn't provide retroactively back to October 2001, when our
Guard and Reserve members began deploying. EANGUS and the
member organizations of TMC are opposed to the lack of
retroactivity. We believe it sends a message, loud and clear,
that the budget of the United States has a higher priority than
the lives sacrificed in its defense.
Although the estimates by the Congressional Research
Service (CRS) is in excess of $2 billion over 10 years, we
believe the demographics used by the CRS are overinflated.
Based on the Defense Advisory Committee on Military
Compensation Report in 2005, only 47 percent of officers and 15
percent of enlisted will remain in uniform long enough to
qualify for retirement. Of the Guard's end strength of
approximately 460,000, only 5,227 of those will be eligible for
early retirement. Even if you include the Federal Reserves, the
costs will not amount to $2 billion over 10 years. We ask the
committee to endorse Senator Chambliss' bill, S. 2836, to
include retroactivity, those who have so proudly answered the
call of our country. In this year of political chaos and debate
over the war in Iraq, we don't ask that you endorse the war,
but we do ask that you support those who have answered the call
to duty. Please support our troops.
We are most grateful to Congress for adopting the 10-year
post-service readjustment benefit for National Guard and
Reserve veterans of Iraq and Afghanistan, and others who have
served on Active Duty on contingency operations, but additional
upgrades are needed to fully match the MGIB with the needs of
all warriors who serve in the 21st century. We ask that you
authorize a month-for-month MGIB entitlement for reservists who
serve multiple Active Duty tours for up to 36 months; integrate
our Reserve and Active Duty MGIB laws under title 38, restore
basic Reserve MGIB benefits for drill service for 47 to 50
percent of the Active Duty rates, change the ``14 years from
date of eligibility'' rule to ``as long as you're a member in
good standing'' in the Guard and Reserve, and, last, authorize
upfront reimbursement of tuition or training coursework.
The Commission on the National Guard and Reserves rendered
their report on January 31 of this year. It made 95
recommendations. The majority of the document discounts the
importance of the Reserves and a militia. The report recommends
diminishing the full-time support workforce in the Guard and
replacing them with Active component soldiers. Today, with
heavier commitments and more deployments, full-time support is
critical to the mission for success. This necessary full-time
force pays dividends in preparing lives for war, and cannot be
sacrificed on the economic altar. We oppose degrading the full-
time support program for the Guard and Reserve.
EANGUS agrees with the Commission that the Chief of the
National Guard Bureau should be promoted to general and have a
seat on the Joint Chiefs of Staff. There is no representation
that relates the homeland security mission so critical to
America. The Chief of the National Guard Bureau brings that
focus to the panel. Likewise, the top officers at Northern
Command (NORTHCOM) need to be National Guard, due to the
complexity of coordinating with individual States and their
governments.
Duty status reform--either on Active Duty or not, the
Commission considers in-Active Duty training as Active Duty,
and therefore, recommends adjusting the pay from receiving 1
day's pay per drill period to 1 day's pay for 1 day's work.
This will reduce the DOD's liability for pay, benefits, and
retirement, but it also reduces the financial benefit to Guard
and Reserve members to include a reduction of retirement points
and potential recruiting and retention problems. We stand
opposed to this recommendation.
Mr. Chairman, Senator Graham, thank you for the opportunity
to express the views of TMC. We look forward to working with
your subcommittee.
[The prepared statement of Sergeant Cline follows:]
Prepared Statement by MSG Michael P. Cline, USA (Retired)
Mr. Chairman, Senator Graham, and distinguished members of the
subcommittee, the Enlisted Association of the National Guard of the
United States appreciates the opportunity to submit our views regarding
the Defense Department's budget submission for fiscal year 2009 and its
possible effect on the National Guard.
The Enlisted Association of the National Guard of the United States
is the only military service association that solely represents the
interests of every enlisted soldier and airmen in the Army and Air
National Guard. Our constituency base is comprised of over 414,000
soldiers and airmen, their families, and a large retiree membership.
The Enlisted Association of the National Guard of the United States
receives no Federal funds or Federal grants.
The Army and the Air National Guard are part of the ``Reserve
component,'' a term which is commonly used to refer collectively to the
seven individual Reserve components of the Armed Forces. The role of
the Reserve component as codified in law is 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, to fill the needs of the Armed Forces
whenever more units and persons are needed than are in the regular
components.''
The war on terror has taxed the resources of the U.S military and,
in particular, the Army. The Army has responded by relying very heavily
on the citizen soldiers of the National Guard and Reserves. Currently,
the Reserve component has over 95,000 service men and women on active
duty. Since the beginning of the war on terror, 527 National Guardsmen
have been killed in action or suffered disease or non-battle related
mortality. Thousands more have been wounded and their lives have been
changed forever. On the other hand, involvement of the Reserves in the
war on terror has filled the ranks with the most combat experienced
force since World War II.
We would like to highlight a few issues we hope will be taken into
consideration during the committee's review of the fiscal year 2009
budget and the Future Years Defense Program.
early retirement
We greatly appreciate the subcommittee's support for earlier
retirement eligibility. In Public Law 110-181, signed by President Bush
on January 28, 2008, the provisions for earlier retirement were a
significant advance on this issue. This issue is the number one
priority issue for our association, and the number one issue that the
three senior enlisted leaders of the National Guard Bureau face as they
travel and talk with Guard members. But as pleased as we are with the
provisions in that law, we are deeply concerned that the provisions are
not retroactive to the beginning of the war on terror. Over 600,000
reservists have served in the war, around the world, since September
11, 2001. Without the retroactivity, it screams to those veterans that
their service doesn't count as much as it should.
We see the provisions as a tangible incentive for those members
with 20 years of service or more, our most experienced force. They have
no bonus or other incentives to stay, and they cannot retire and
receive an immediate annuity. By allowing the possibility of earlier
retirement, it incentivizes their service and they will stay with the
Guard. When they stay, we all win, retaining their vast and important
experience. The same senior enlisted leaders at the National Guard
Bureau will tell you that they are losing that experience just after 20
years of service, and the earlier retirement eligibility is just the
incentive needed to retain them in boots.
So we thank you for what you've done so far, and encourage you to
continue to work on this issue to include the 600,000 who have
valiantly served their country by making this law retroactive to
September 11.
compensation
We thank the subcommittee for its work on raising the pay of
military members above the ECI. We believe there is still a pay gap
between what military members are paid and what their comparable
civilian counterparts earn, despite what the Defense Department says.
The Department includes in its calculations the intangible benefits a
military member receives, which are difficult to quantify. For example,
they include commissary privileges--quantifying that benefit will
differ from person to person, depending on whether or not they use the
commissary and if they do, how much. We do not believe the intangible
benefits can be used in the metrics to compute the pay gap.
Our members are civilians when not in Federal service, and they
experience that gap once they are ordered to active duty. For some, it
has caused their families to rely on government programs and to even
consider bankruptcy as avenues to solve their dire financial problems.
We encourage the subcommittee to continue to strive to close the pay
gap, which will have a profound effect in the lives of our members and
their families.
Bonuses and other forms of cash compensation that the subcommittee
has authorized not only attracted but motivated our citizen soldiers
and airmen to serve their country and then remain in that service.
Recruiting and retention of National Guard members is at an all time
high, and all of them are volunteers. We don't view returning to
conscription a viable alternative to the benefits the National Guard
enjoys today.
We do ask the subcommittee to consider raising the amount of Family
Serviceman's Group Life Insurance payable for children from $10,000 to
$25,000, remaining at no cost to the military member. The cost of care
and even funerals has risen, and $10,000 would be only a partial
reimbursement against any costs for a child.
inactive duty travel
Our association and its members greatly appreciate the
subcommittee's authority for inactive duty travel that was in Public
Law 110-181, amending title 37, U.S.C., to allow for payment of travel
and expenses related to inactive duty training outside of normal
commuting distances. The law allows for payment of up to $300 per round
trip with conditions. It was a good first step. However, with the
increasing cost of fuel, as well as the impact on airline tickets, this
very issue alone could determine whether a Guard member decides to stay
or leave the Service.
We would encourage the subcommittee to remove the restrictions and,
for the most part, limit the determining factor to the normal commuting
distance. In the case of the Virgin Islands and Hawaii, where the Guard
is spread out over several islands, we would ask the subcommittee to
place exceptions in title 37, section 408a, for those two geographic
locations so that they don't have to meet the normal commuting distance
restriction.
tricare fee increases
For yet another year, the Defense Department has provided Congress
a budget with false assumptions regarding the savings that will be
accrued to fund TRICARE, and have asked for increases in fees, co-
payments and deductibles. As the Government Accountability Office (GAO)
report on TRICARE Reserve Select shows, the Defense Department is
really not a reliable source for estimating its costs for health care
programs. The GAO report doesn't mention the initial $300 million that
Congress gave the Department for TRICARE Reserve Select in fiscal year
2004 for a pilot project that never was. The GAO report says in fiscal
year 2005, the Department estimated its costs for the program to be $70
million, and actual costs were $5 million. In fiscal year 2006, after
raising rates for users 8.5 percent, the Department estimated the
program costs to be $442 million, and their actual costs were $40
million. It is evident to the average person that the Department can't
estimate costs for health care. The GAO report also said that the
Department doesn't have a reliable or accurate accounting system.
We believe all military members, and especially our National Guard
members, have paid the cost of health care with their service and their
lives. The Future of Military Health Care Task Force reported that the
military health care system needs to be very generous, and we agree.
The Task Force reported that the military health care system should not
be free, and we agree--and the price is being paid every minute of
every day in the lives of our soldiers and airmen and their families.
The Task Force reported that the military health care system should be
fair to the American taxpayer, and we agree, once the American taxpayer
makes the same sacrifices that members of the military make, and the
numbers say that less than 1 percent of the American taxpayers are
willing to serve their Nation in its military forces.
We thank the subcommittee for not raising the fees, co-payments and
deductibles on TRICARE, and urge the subcommittee to require a greater
accountability of the Defense Department before any other sacrifices,
monetary or otherwise, are required of our members or veterans.
A related issue is the provider fee schedule, and its tie to
Medicare rates. More than a legislative band-aid needs to be applied to
revamp the provider fees, to prevent the decrease of fees and increase
the pool of eligible providers, especially in rural areas. This affects
TRICARE Standard and TRICARE Reserve Select. As an example, the TRICARE
fee schedule is so little, most providers in the State of Alaska will
not accept TRICARE (acknowledging there is a provider access problem in
Alaska as well) rendering TRICARE Reserve Select a useless benefit to
many of those Guard and Reserve members who live in the State.
We also suggest the subcommittee consider allowing gray area
retirees the option to buy into TRICARE Reserve Select at the same rate
as currently serving members. When our Guard members retire prior to
reaching age 60 or in conjunction with the early retirement provisions
in Public Law 110-181, they will have a lapse in health care. We
propose the subcommittee consider allowing this small group of retirees
the ability to buy into TRICARE at the same rate as those on TRICARE
Reserve Select.
dental funding
One of the largest readiness needs, other than equipment, for the
National Guard is dental treatment prior to mobilization and
deployment. Currently authorized just prior to mobilization, during the
alert period, there is still a problem with dental readiness and 90
days just isn't enough time to diagnose and treat our National Guard.
In addition, dental insurance rates through the TRICARE Reserve Dental
Program are steep. Family coverage for National Guard members is almost
$84 per month, and our Individual Ready Reserve cousins pay over $101
monthly, and rates are set to increase in February next year another 5
percent. When added to TRICARE Reserve Select rates, our citizen
soldiers and airmen and their families are paying $337 monthly for
basic services. That's a lot of money for over a third of our members,
and they will make an economic decision to self insure rather than to
pay those premiums. When they decide to self insure, military readiness
for deployment is severely degraded.
We seek your help in providing authority for the dental readiness
of our members. Whether through additional government subsidizing of
the dental contractor, space available treatment in military or
veterans treatment facilities, or another idea that the subcommittee
may have, something must be done to relieve this situation, and we
request your assistance.
montgomery gi bill
Education benefits were once the prime reason Guard members
enlisted but at this particular time it is no longer is as much of a
motivator. We are distressed by that fact, and have long been promoters
of the educational benefits of military service. We recommend the
subcommittee amend title 10, U.S.C., and move the entire Montgomery GI
Bill program into Title 38. The Defense Department recently testified
that they have no opposition to this action. Further, we recommend the
subcommittee fix the inequities between active and Reserve benefits and
reset the benefit to 47 percent of the active duty benefit--those
benefits have shrunk to less than 29 percent of the active duty benefit
in the last 8 years. Additionally, we recommend that the subcommittee
authorize transferability of benefits from the servicemember to his/her
spouse or family member should the servicemember be unable to use his/
her educational benefit. We also recommend to the subcommittee that
consideration be given to expansion of benefits based on cumulative
periods of active duty due to multiple deployments of Guard and Reserve
members. Finally, we recommend that the 14-year time limit on Chapter
1606 benefits be lifted, and eligibility for entitlements be extended
to a set period of time (i.e. 15 years) after separation from service,
without tying expiration of benefits to the date of initial
eligibility.
report, commission on the national guard and reserve
The Commission on the National Guard and Reserve rendered their
report on January 31, 2008, and made 95 recommendations. In a macro
sense, we disagree with the Commission's recommendations. The report
takes a precarious step towards assimilating the National Guard into
the Active Forces, losing its Constitutional mandate and charter, and
relegating the Guard to limited roles and missions. As a trade-off, the
report recommends more joint assignments, commensurate rank with
responsibility, and accountability of Active component commanders for
Reserve strength and readiness. Although a few of the recommendations
seem worthy of consideration, the majority of the document discounts
the militia as nothing more than bill payers for active duty billets
and structure.
One recommendation is for the Department of Homeland Security to
determine civil support requirements, not the Defense Department. We do
not believe that the Department of Homeland Security has the capability
or expertise resident in the agency to determine the homeland security
requirements for the Guard. We oppose the Department of Homeland
Security determining or dictating requirements for the National Guard.
The report recommends diminishing the full-time support workforce
in the Guard and replacing them with Active component soldiers. The
Guard had such an arrangement in the early-1980s, when the Guard first
started their Active Guard Reserve program. Today, with heavier
commitments and more deployments with which to deal, full time support
is critical to mission success. The Army Guard is funded for less than
60 percent of their full-time support requirements. The Air Guard is
somewhat better. This necessary full-time force pays dividends in
preparing lives for war, and cannot be sacrificed on the economic
altar. We oppose any degradation of the full-time support program.
We agree with the Commission that the Chief, National Guard Bureau,
should be promoted to General and have a seat on the Joint Chiefs of
Staff. Traditionally, the Joint Chiefs have all been Active component
officers, all fine men. However, they are combat-oriented, wartime
focused officers. There is no representation that relates the homeland
security mission so critical to America. The Chief, National Guard
Bureau, brings that focus to the panel. Likewise, the top officers at
Northern Command need to be National Guard, either Army or Air, due to
the complexity of coordinating with individual States and their
governments. An Active component officer knows little to nothing of
communicating with State governments, especially for emergency planning
and response.
The commission recommended revamping the retirement system, taking
the views of the Defense Advisory Committee on Military Compensation
from 2006. Although the recommendation is close to what the Guard
currently has, it will be a tremendous culture change for the Active
component. Without more specificity on the recommendation, it only
causes confusion and distrust in the process and the system, two
undesirable qualities in a time of war. We believe the parent Services,
as well as the U.S. Coast Guard, Public Health Service, and National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, will all have concerns about
this recommendation, even though the report was not inclusive of those
organizations.
It recommends shifting capabilities currently resident in the Guard
that are not required for its State missions but are required for its
Federal missions either to the Federal Reserve components or to the
active duty military, as appropriate. This means the Guard will do
homeland security and civil support missions only and no longer have
combat roles or missions. It would be impossible for the Army or Air
Force to prosecute the war on terror without the Guard, and impossible
for the Active components to recruit, train, and retain the thousands
of people it would need to replace the Guard capability. We oppose this
recommendation.
Another recommendation is for duty status reform--taking 29
statuses down to 2, either on active duty or not. The Commission
considers inactive duty training as active duty, and therefore
recommends adjusting the pay from receiving one day's pay per drill
period to one day's pay for one day. The Commission recommends
implementing this within 2 years and completing it within 5 years. This
may reduce duty statuses and the Defense Department's liability for
pay, benefits and retirement, but it also reduces the financial benefit
for the Guard member, to include a reduction of retirement points and
eventual retirement compensation (and possibly survivors benefit
annuity payments to surviving spouses). We stand opposed to this
recommendation.
We do agree that Basic Allowance for Housing, which pays a reduced
housing allowance for periods of active duty of less than 30 days, can
be eliminated altogether and any period of active duty would receive
prorated housing allowance.
space available travel privileges for surviving spouses
When a military member passes away, the surviving spouse is no
longer eligible to use the space available travel benefit since that
spouse no longer has a sponsor with whom to travel. There is no cost to
the government associated with this benefit--if there is a seat
available on the military aircraft, the spouse fills the seat. If there
is no seat, the spouse does not fly. If there is a small cost to fly,
the spouse pays the cost. The spouse would have to comply with all
space available standards, such as carrying their own luggage, climbing
stairs unassisted, and being financially responsible during their
travel.
We believe this benefit is earned by the spouse with the years of
sacrifice the spouse endured while their military member served our
great nation. Such a small change in the law is the right thing to do
for them, as they are one of the few classes of beneficiaries unable to
travel on a military aircraft. We encourage the subcommittee to
consider legislation to allow surviving spouses to fly on military
aircraft space available.
equipment shortages
Our soldiers and airmen will not remain in the National Guard if
they have no equipment on which to train, either for sustainment after
returning from deployment or in preparation for deployment. As much as
TRICARE is a readiness issue, so is equipment and both have personnel
implications in recruiting and retention of Guard members.
Within the last couple of weeks, you have heard the testimony of
the Reserve chiefs, to include the Chief of the National Guard Bureau,
with regard to equipment shortfalls in the Guard. Much of the Guard's
equipment has been moved to Iraq, and we believe some of that
equipment, which was supposed to come back from theater, has been given
to the Iraqi Army. A major news source reported in mid-March that
refurbished U.S. humvees, which have been used by U.S. forces and were
scheduled to be sent home, had been transferred to the Iraqi Army. A
total of 8,500 vehicles are part of this action.
Testimony has likened the Guard equipment problem to a local fire
or police department being called for help, and not showing up with its
required equipment to address the situation. Billions and billions of
dollars have been authorized and appropriated by Congress, and the
Department cannot accurately track those appropriations down to the end
item being purchased. Indeed, there is doubt that the monies earmarked
for Guard equipment were ever used for that purpose.
We want to go on record with our appreciation for the National
Guard and Reserve Equipment Account, for without it our Guard would be
seriously without any necessary supplies and equipment. We implore the
subcommittee to work with the appropriators to ensure the
accountability for equipment procurement has proper oversight.
We thank you for the opportunity to express the views of the
Enlisted Association of the National Guard of the United States and
look forward to working with the subcommittee. We know the subcommittee
is well aware of the National Guard, the capabilities it brings to the
table, and the undeniable devotion to this Nation the National Guard
has in its citizen soldiers and airmen.
Senator Ben Nelson. Thank you, Sergeant.
Colonel Strobridge?
STATEMENT OF COL. STEVEN P. STROBRIDGE, USAF (RET.), DIRECTOR
OF GOVERNMENT RELATIONS, MILITARY OFFICERS ASSOCIATION OF
AMERICA
Colonel Strobridge. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and Senator
Graham. My portion of the Coalition testimony will address
health care issues.
We certainly fully support the comments Meredith made on
care for wounded warriors and their families, and we applaud
what the committee did in first-step actions in this year's
NDAA, but we do think that is only a first step, and we have a
long way to go.
In that regard, continued collaboration between this
committee and the Veterans Affairs Committee is going to be
absolutely essential. We still have a lot of problems to deal
with on that front.
Meredith mentioned some of the eligibility continuity
problems encountered by families after disability retirement.
We believe that members and families who are forced from Active
Duty because of service-caused disabilities should retain
Active-Duty-level TRICARE coverage for 3 years. The new law
does that only for the servicemember, and only when VA care is
not available. That's too limited and too vague for troops and
families facing extended rehab requirements after leaving
Active Duty. Families shouldn't be caught between differing
definitions of what VA care is available, as they are now. We
allow 3 years Active-Duty-level coverage for survivors when a
servicemember dies on Active Duty. To us, the severely wounded
and their families deserve no less. Examples of those kinds of
things--Meredith mentioned the cognitive therapy issue. We have
people who are in the ECHO program who lose their benefits when
they're retired, per diem for family caregivers, those kinds of
issues.
We're also concerned that there's no central oversight to
ensure that all departments and Services implement best
practices from all the various ongoing military, VA, and
civilian test projects on TBI and post-traumatic stress
disorder. We urge including this responsibility under the newly
legislated DOD-VA Interagency Program Office or establishing a
related office for that purpose.
Finally, we support the disability retirement model in
which DOD accepts VA-assigned disability ratings, but we still
need to address interservice differences on what conditions are
deemed unfitting or pre-existing. We oppose doing away with the
DOD disability retirement system, as some have envisioned,
which would substantially reduce retirement benefits for many
wounded warriors, and we don't think that was the intent of
this exercise.
On TRICARE fees, we oppose the large increases proposed by
DOD in the recent task force report, and we urge restoring the
$1.2 billion budget cut. We think it's wrong that the task
force focused only on cost to the government, with barely a
sentence on what military people earn for their career of
sacrifice. In 2001, the new administration's officials praised
TRICARE for Life, but now act as if no one expected that health
care expenses for retirees over 65 would be very high. We can't
see what changed during the past 6 years of war that makes the
military community any less deserving of their benefit.
The plan to raise drug co-pays 100 to 400 percent would put
them higher than most civilian plans. The Blue Cross/Blue
Shield plan that the Military Officers Association offers every
one of our employees has lower co-pays, across the board, than
DOD proposes. DOD would quintuple the retail generic co-pay
from $3 to $15. That's more than 87 percent of civilian plans
charge. Wal-Mart offers generics to anybody who walks in the
door, for $4 for 400 generic drugs.
The Coalition believes military benefits should be driven
by standards and principles, not the budget. Just as we have
statutory standards for most other major compensation elements,
we urge the subcommittee to put some standards in this year's
defense bill using S. 604 as the model. Fundamental among these
are that military retirement and health benefits are the
primary offset for the extraordinary sacrifices inherent in two
or three decades of military service, that military people pay
steep premiums for care, over and above the cash fees they pay
in retirement, and pay them up front in service and sacrifice
over multiple decades; and, finally, that the percentage
increase in fees in any year shouldn't exceed the percentage
increase in military compensation.
Two years ago, you met with us and DOD leaders to urge us
to work together to find ways to reduce costs in ways that
don't hurt military people. We took that very seriously, and we
identified 16 ways, and have offered, repeatedly, to partner
with the DOD on those. The DOD has refused, until just
recently. Thanks to Dr. Casscells and General Granger, they're
now looking at several of our proposals. We will be willing
partners in that effort, if we're allowed.
One final item, a recent GAO report confirmed that Guard
and Reserve members are overcharged for TRICARE Reserve Select
by about $50 for single people and $175 a month for families.
We urge the subcommittee to cut TRS fees and direct refunds. We
continue to believe--and the Guard and Reserve Commission
agreed--that the government will save money and Reserve
families will be better served by authorizing an optional
subsidy to continue their civilian family coverage when
mobilized, just as we already do for DOD civilians who are
mobilized as Guard or Reserve members.
That concludes my remarks. Thank you very much for your
consideration.
[The prepared statement of The Military Coalition follows:]
Prepared Statement by The Military Coalition
Mr. Chairman and distinguished members of the committee. On behalf
of The Military Coalition, a consortium of nationally prominent
uniformed services and veterans' organizations, we are grateful to the
committee for this opportunity to express our views concerning issues
affecting the uniformed services community. This statement provides the
collective views of the following military and veterans' organizations,
which represent approximately 5.5 million current and former members of
the 7 uniformed services, plus their families and survivors.
Air Force Association
Air Force Sergeants Association
Air Force Women Officers Associated
American Logistics Association
American Veterans
Army Aviation Association of America
Association of Military Surgeons of the United States
Association of the United States Army
Chief Warrant Officer and Warrant Officer Association,
U.S. Coast Guard
Commissioned Officers Association of the U.S. Public
Health Service, Inc.
Enlisted Association of the National Guard of the
United States
Fleet Reserve Association
Gold Star Wives of America, Inc.
Jewish War Veterans of the United States of America
Marine Corps League
Marine Corps Reserve Association
Military Chaplains Association of the United States of
America
Military Officers Association of America
Military Order of the Purple Heart
National Association for Uniformed Services
National Military Family Association
National Order of Battlefield Commissions
Naval Enlisted Reserve Association
Naval Reserve Association
Noncommissioned Officers Association
Reserve Enlisted Association
Reserve Officers Association \1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The Reserve Officers Association supports the non-health care
portion of the testimony.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Society of Medical Consultants to the Armed Forces
The Retired Enlisted Association
United States Army Warrant Officers Association
United States Coast Guard Chief Petty Officers
Association
Veterans of Foreign Wars of the United States
Veterans' Widows International Network
The Military Coalition, Inc., does not receive any grants or
contracts from the Federal Government.
executive summary
Wounded Warrior Issues
Joint Transition Office
The Coalition is encouraged with the creation of a joint DOD-VA
office to oversee development of a bidirectional electronic medical
record. However, we strongly recommend that the subcommittee upgrade
the scope of responsibilities and span of authority for the new DOD-VA
Interagency Program Office to include top-down planning and execution
of all ``seamless transition'' functions, including the joint
electronic health record; joint DOD/VA physical; implementation of best
practices for traumatic brain injury (TBI), post-traumatic stress
disorder (PTSD), and special needs care; care access/coordination
issues; and joint research.
The Coalition believes authorizing 3 years of their active-duty-
level health care benefit for service-disabled members and their
families after separation or retirement is essential to align stated
``seamless transition'' intentions with the realities faced by disabled
members and families.
Disability Retirement Reform
The Coalition urges the subcommittee to ensure any legislative
changes to the military disability evaluation and retirement systems do
not reduce compensation and benefit levels for disabled servicemembers.
The Coalition does not support proposals to do away with the
military disability retirement system and shift disability compensation
responsibility to the VA.
The Coalition urges an expanded review of all administrative and
disciplinary separations since October 7, 2001, for members with recent
combat experience to assess whether the behavior that led to separation
may have been due to service-caused exposure.
Active Force Issues
End Strength and Associated Funding
The Coalition strongly urges the subcommittee to sustain projected
increases in ground forces and provide additional recruiting,
retention, and support resources as necessary to attain/sustain them.
The Coalition urges the subcommittee to reconsider the consistency
of projected reductions of Navy and Air Force forces with long-term
readiness needs.
Compensation and Special Incentive Pay
The Coalition urges the subcommittee to propose a military pay
raise of at least 3.9 percent for fiscal year 2009 (one-half percentage
point above private sector pay growth) and to continue such half-
percent annual increases over the employment cost index (ECI) until the
current 3.4 percent pay comparability gap is eliminated.
The Coalition also urges the subcommittee to continue periodic
targeted pay raises as appropriate to recognize the growing education
and technical qualifications of enlisted members and warrant officers
and sustain each individual grade/longevity pay cell at the minimum
70th percentile standard.
Access to Quality Housing
The Military Coalition urges reform of military housing standards
that inequitably depress BAH rates for mid- to senior-enlisted members
by relegating their occupancy to inappropriately small quarters.
Family Readiness and Support
The Coalition urges the subcommittee to support increased family
support funding and expanded education and other programs to meet
growing needs associated with increased ops tempo, extended deployments
and the more complex insurance, retirement, and savings choices faced
by over-extended military families.
Spouse Employment
The Coalition urges the subcommittee to support legislation which
would expand the Workforce Opportunity Tax Credit for employers who
hire spouses of Regular and Reserve component servicemembers.
Additionally, the Coalition supports providing tax credits to
offset military spouses' expenses in obtaining career-related licenses
or certifications when servicemembers are relocated to a different
State.
Flexible Spending Accounts
TMC urges the subcommittee to continue pressing the DOD until
servicemembers are provided the same eligibility to participate in
Flexible Spending Accounts (FSAs) that all other Federal employees and
corporate employees enjoy. Additionally, we support S.773.
Permanent Change of Station Allowances
The Military Coalition urges the subcommittee to upgrade permanent
change-of-station allowances to better reflect the expenses members are
forced to incur in complying with government-directed relocations, with
priority on adjusting flat-rate amounts that have been eroded by
years--or decades--of inflation, and shipment of a second vehicle at
government expense to overseas accompanied assignments.
Base Realignment and Closure/Rebasing/Military Construction/
Commissaries
The Coalition urges the subcommittee to closely monitor rebasing/
base realignment and closure (BRAC) plans and schedules to ensure
sustainment and timely development of adequate family support/quality
of life programs. At closing and gaining installations, respectively--
to include housing, education, child care, exchanges and commissaries,
health care, family centers, unit family readiness, and other support
services.
Morale, Welfare, and Recreation Programs
TMC urges the subcommittee to ensure that DOD funds MWR programs at
least to the 85 percent level for Category A programs and 65 percent
for Category B requirements.
Education Enhancements
TMC urges the subcommittee to work with the Veterans Affairs
Committee to establish the benchmark level of Montgomery GI Bill (MGIB)
education benefits at the average cost of attending a 4-year public
college, and support continuous in-State tuition eligibility for
servicemembers and their families in the State in which the member is
assigned and the member's home State of record once enrolled as a
student.
National Guard and Reserve Issues
Reserve Retirement and `Operational Reserve' Policy
TMC strongly urges further progress in revamping the Reserve
retirement system in recognition of increased service and sacrifice of
National Guard and Reserve component members, including at a minimum,
extending the new authority for a 90-day=3-month reduction to all
National Guard and Reserve members who have served since September 11.
A Total Force Approach to the Montgomery GI Bill
TMC urges Congress to integrate Guard and Reserve and active duty
MGIB laws into Title 38. In addition, TMC recommends restoring basic
Reserve MGIB rates to approximately 50 percent of active duty rates and
authorizing upfront reimbursement of tuition or training coursework for
Guard and Reserve members.
Family Support Programs and Benefits
TMC urges Congress to continue and expand its emphasis on providing
consistent funding and increased outreach to connect Guard and Reserve
families with relevant support programs.
Tangible Support for Employers
The Coalition urges Congress to support needed tax relief for
employers of Selected Reserve personnel and reinforce the Employer
Support for Guard and Reserve Program.
Seamless Transition for Guard and Reserve Members
The Coalition urges the subcommittee to continue and expand its
efforts to ensure Guard and Reserve members and their families receive
needed transition services to make a successful readjustment to
civilian status.
Retirement Issues
Concurrent Receipt
The Coalition urges the subcommittee to act expeditiously on the
recommendations of the Veterans' Disability Benefits Commission and
implement a plan to eliminate the deduction of VA disability
compensation from military retired pay for all disabled military
retirees.
Uniformed Services Retiree Entitlements and Benefits
TMC urges the subcommittee to resist initiatives to ``civilianize''
the military retirement system in ways that reduce the compensation
value of the current retirement system and undermine long-term
retention.
Permanent ID Card Reform
The Coalition urges the subcommittee to direct the Secretary of
Defense to authorize issuance of permanent military identification
cards to uniformed services family members and survivors who are age 65
and older.
Survivor Issues
Survivor Benefit Plan-Dependency and Indemnity Compensation Offset
The Coalition strongly urges the subcommittee to take further
action to expand eligibility for the special survivor indemnity
allowance to include all Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP)-Dependency and
Indemnity Compensation (DIC) survivors and continue progress toward
completely repealing the SBP-DIC offset for this most-aggrieved group
of military widows.
Final Retired Paycheck
TMC urges the subcommittee to end the insensitive practice of
recouping the final month's retired pay from the survivor of a deceased
retired member.
Health Care Issues
Full Funding for the Defense Health Program
The Military Coalition strongly urges the subcommittee to take all
possible steps to restore the reduction in TRICARE-related budget
authority and ensure continued full funding for Defense Health Program
needs.
Protecting Beneficiaries Against Cost-Shifting
The Coalition urges the subcommittee to require DOD to pursue
greater efforts to improve TRICARE and find more effective and
appropriate ways to make TRICARE more cost-efficient without seeking to
``tax'' beneficiaries and make unrealistic budget assumptions.
TMC Health Care Cost Principles
The Coalition most strongly recommends Rep. Chet Edwards' and Rep.
Walter Jones' H.R. 579 and Sen. Frank Lautenberg's and Sen. Chuck
Hagel's S. 604 as models to establish statutory findings, a sense of
Congress on the purpose and principles of military health care
benefits, and explicit guidelines for and limitations on adjustments.
Active duty members and families should be charged no
fees except retail pharmacy co-payments, except to the extent
they make the choice to participate in TRICARE Standard or use
out-of-network providers under TRICARE Prime.
For retired and survivor beneficiaries, the percentage
increase in fees, deductibles, and co-payments that may be
considered in any year should not exceed the percentage
increase beneficiaries experience in their compensation.
The TRICARE Standard inpatient copay should not be
increased further for the foreseeable future. At $535 per day,
it already far exceeds inpatient copays for virtually any
private sector health plan.
There should be no enrollment fee for TRICARE Standard
or TRICARE For Life (TFL), since neither offers assured access
to TRICARE-participating providers. An enrollment fee implies
enrollees will receive additional services, as Prime enrollees
are guaranteed access to participating providers in return for
their fee. Congress already has required TFL beneficiaries to
pay substantial Medicare Part B fees to gain TFL coverage.
There should be one TRICARE fee schedule for all
retired beneficiaries, just as all legislators, Defense leaders
and other Federal civilian grades have the same health fee
schedule. The TRICARE schedule should be significantly lower
than the lowest tier recommended by the DOD, recognizing that
all retired members paid large upfront premiums for their
coverage through decades of arduous service and sacrifice.
TRICARE Standard Enrollment
The Coalition strongly recommends against establishment of any
TRICARE Standard enrollment system; to the extent enrollment may be
required, any beneficiary filing a claim should be enrolled
automatically, without denying the claim. No enrollment fee should be
charged for TRICARE Standard until and unless the program offers
guaranteed access to a participating provider.
Private Employer Incentive Restrictions
The Coalition recommends Congress modify the law restricting
private employer TRICARE incentives to explicitly exempt employers who
offer only cafeteria plans (i.e., cash payments to all employees to
purchase care as they wish) and employers who extend specific cash
payments to any employee who uses health coverage other than the
employer plan (e.g., FEHBP, TRICARE, or commercial insurance available
through a spouse or previous employer).
Provider Participation Adequacy
The Coalition urges the subcommittee to continue monitoring DOD and
Government Accountability Office (GAO) reporting on provider
participation to ensure proper follow-on action.
Administrative Deterrents to Provider Participation
The Coalition urges the subcommittee to continue its efforts to
reduce administrative impediments that deter providers from accepting
TRICARE patients.
TRICARE Reimbursement Rates
The Coalition urges the subcommittee to exert what influence it can
to persuade the Finance Committee to reform Medicare/TRICARE statutory
payment formula. To the extent the Medicare rate freeze continues, we
urge the subcommittee to encourage the DOD to use its reimbursement
rate adjustment authority as needed to sustain provider acceptance.
Additionally, The Coalition urges the subcommittee to require a
Comptroller General report on the relative propensity of physicians to
participate in Medicare vs. TRICARE, and the likely effect on such
relative participation of a further freeze in Medicare/TRICARE
physician payments along with the affect of an absence of bonus
payments.
Minimize Medicare/TRICARE Coverage Differences
The Coalition urges the subcommittee to align TRICARE coverage to
at least match that offered by Medicare in every area and provide
preventive services at no cost.
TRICARE Reserve Select (TRS) Premium
The Coalition recommends reducing TRS premiums to $48/month
(single) and $175/month (family), as envisioned by the GAO, with
retroactive refunds as appropriate. For the future, the percentage
increase in premiums in any year should not exceed the percentage
increase in basic pay.
The Coalition further recommends that the subcommittee request a
report from the Department of Defense (DOD) on options to assure TRS
enrollees' access to TRICARE-participating providers.
Private Insurance Premium Option
The Coalition recommends developing a cost-effective option to have
DOD subsidize premiums for continuation of a Reserve employer's private
family health insurance during periods of deployment as an alternative
to permanent TRICARE Reserve Select coverage.
Involuntary Separatees
The Coalition recommends authorizing 1 year of post-Transitional
Assistance Management Program (TAMP) TRS coverage for every 90 days
deployed in the case of returning members of the Individual Ready
Reserve (IRR) or members who are involuntarily separated from the
Selected Reserve. The Coalition further recommends that voluntarily
separating reservists subject to disenrollment from TRS should be
eligible for participation in the Continued Health Care Benefits
Program (CHCBP).
Gray Area Reservists
The Coalition urges the subcommittee to authorize an additional
premium-based option under which members entering ``gray area'' retiree
status would be able to avoid losing health coverage.
Reserve Dental Coverage
The Coalition supports providing dental coverage to reservists for
90 days pre- and 180 days post-mobilization (during TAMP), unless the
individual's dental readiness is restored to T-2 condition before
demobilization.
Restoration of Survivors' TRICARE Coverage
The Coalition recommends restoration of TRICARE benefits to
previously eligible survivors whose second or subsequent marriage ends
in death or divorce.
TRICARE Prime Remote Exceptions
The Coalition recommends removal of the requirement for the family
members to reside with the active duty member to qualify for the
TRICARE Prime Remote Program, when the family separation is due to a
military-directed move or deployment.
Base Realignment and Closure, Rebasing, and Relocation
The Coalition recommends codifying the requirement to provide a
TRICARE Prime network at all areas impacted by BRAC or rebasing.
Additionally, we recommend that DOD be required to provide an annual
report to Congress on the adequacy of health resources, services,
quality and access of care for those beneficiary populations affected
by transformation plans.
Pharmacy Co-payment Changes
The Coalition recommends deferral of any pharmacy copay increases
pending assessment of the effects of the new Federal pricing law on
usage and cost patterns for the different venues, and that the
subcommittee instead urge DOD to pursue copay reductions and ease prior
authorization requirements for medications for chronic diseases, based
on private sector experience that such initiatives reduce long-term
costs associated with such diseases.
Rapid Expansion of ``Third Tier'' Formulary
The Coalition urges the subcommittee to reassert its intent that
the Beneficiary Advisory Panel (BAP) should have a substantive role in
the formulary-setting process, including access to meaningful data on
relative drug costs in each affected class, consideration of all BAP
comments in the decisionmaking process, and formal feedback concerning
rationale for rejection of BAP recommendations.
Referral and Authorization System
The Coalition recommends that Congress require a cost analysis
report, including input from each Managed Care Support Contractor,
concerning the referral process within DOD and reliance on Civilian
Network Providers within an MTF's Prime Service Area.
Deductibility of Health and Dental Premiums
The Coalition urges all Armed Services Committee members to seek
the support of the Finance Committees to approve legislation to allow
all military beneficiaries to pay TRICARE-related insurance premiums in
pre-tax dollars, to include TRICARE dental premiums, TRICARE Reserve
Select premiums, TRICARE Prime enrollment fees, premiums for TRICARE
Standard supplements, and long-term care insurance premiums.
overview
Mr. Chairman, The Military Coalition (TMC) thanks you and the
entire subcommittee for your continued, steadfast support of our active
duty, Guard, Reserve, retired members, and veterans of the uniformed
services and their families and survivors. the subcommittee's work last
year generated ground-breaking, innovative improvements in military end
strength, currently serving pay, survivor benefits, disabled retiree
programs, and of most significance, improvements in wounded warrior
benefits, care, and treatment. These enhancements will definitely make
a positive difference in the lives of active, Guard and Reserve
personnel, retirees, survivors, and families.
As our men and women in uniform continue to prosecute the global
war on terror, the Coalition believes it is critical that the Nation
support our troops with the appropriate resources. The services have
reported that they are wearing out equipment at a record pace; however,
the Coalition is concerned that we are wearing out our people in
uniform at even a faster pace. The current rate of deployments and the
accompanied stress to our troops and their families put at risk the
readiness of our servicemembers.
The men and women in uniform, active duty, Guard, and Reserve, are
answering the call--but not without ever-greater sacrifice. Currently,
over 615,000 National Guard and Reserve members have been called to
active Federal service for the war on terrorism. Over 150,000 have had
two or more deployments, putting particular stress on these members'
civilian careers and employers. The ``total force'', with the support
of their families, continues to endure mounting stress brought about by
repeated deployments and ever-increasing workloads. Therefore, now is
not the time to scrimp on the needs for our troops and their families.
Over the past several years, the Pentagon has repeatedly sought to
curb spending on military personnel and facilities to fund operational
requirements. In the process, the DOD has imposed dramatic force
reductions in the Air Force and the Navy, tried to deter military
retirees from using their earned health coverage by proposing large
TRICARE fee increases, and cut back on installation quality of life
programs.
The Coalition believes these efforts to rob personnel to fund
operations will only make the uniformed services more vulnerable to
future readiness problems. We agree with the Chairman of the Joint
Chiefs of Staff, who has stated that 4 percent of gross domestic
product (GDP) should be the ``absolute floor'' for the overall military
budget. If we want a strong national defense, we have to pay for a
strong military force as well as replace and upgrade aging, war-worn
weapons and equipment.
The Coalition is encouraged by Congress' strong support for
continued increases to Army and Marine Corps end strength, in
recognition that our troops and families are dangerously overburdened.
We believe the country must follow through on future planned increases,
regardless of troop withdrawals from Iraq, and that these should be
funded through permanent increases in the defense budget, not
supplemental appropriations that undermine essential, long-term
commitments. It's been proven that our military didn't have sufficient
forces to meet the requirements of the current war. It would be
inexcusable not to be better prepared for future contingencies.
In our statement today, The Military Coalition offers its
collective recommendations on what needs to be done to address
important personnel-related issues in order to sustain long-term
personnel readiness.
wounded warrior issues
Last February, a series of articles in the Washington Post titled
``The Other Walter Reed'' profiled shocking cases of wounded
servicemembers who became lost in military health care and
administrative systems upon being transferred to outpatient
rehabilitative care.
Subsequently, the national media ran many stories of seriously
wounded troops warehoused in substandard quarters, waiting weeks and
months for medical appointments and evaluation board results, left
pretty much on their own to try and navigate the confusing maze of
medical system and benefit and disability rules, and low-balled into
disability separations rather than being awarded the higher benefits of
military disability retirement.
Interviews with family members--spouses, children, and parents--
revealed heartbreaking real life dramas of those who quit their jobs
and virtually lived at military hospitals to become caregivers to
seriously wounded troops. Left with diminishing resources and
unfamiliar with military benefit and disability rules, they were
severely disadvantaged in trying to represent the interests of their
wounded spouses and children who couldn't stand up for themselves.
These issues drew the attention of the President and Congress,
leading to the immediate appointment of multiple special commissions
and task forces charged with investigating the problems and identifying
needed solutions. The Coalition is very grateful for the work of the
Dole-Shalala Commission, the Marsh-West Independent Review Group, the
VA Interagency Task Force on Returning Veterans, the Mental Health Task
Force, and the previously authorized Veterans' Disability Benefits
Commission. The Coalition endorses the vast majority of these groups'
recommendations, and we're pleased that the subcommittee made a
conscientious effort to address many of them in the Wounded Warrior Act
provisions of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for Fiscal
Year 2008.
Congress and TMC agree that our Nation's service men and women have
earned first class care and assistance, both during recuperation and
following separation or retirement from the military.
We are gratified at the sincere and unprecedented leadership
efforts in the Departments of Defense and Veterans' Affairs and the
Armed Services and Veterans' Affairs Committees to transform the system
to make this long overdue goal a reality.
But years of bureaucratic and parochial barriers can't be swept
away as easily as we all would wish. The good work done in 2007 was
only a modest first step on the path to transforming military and
veterans programs to meet the pressing needs of wounded and disabled
members and their families. We're still a long, long way from achieving
the ``seamless transition'' goal.
Joint Transition Office
The Coalition believes one critical problem is bureaucratic
stovepiping in each department. While both DOD and VA are making great
efforts to cooperate, there is no permanent joint activity or office
whose primary mission is to jointly plan and execute the seamless
transition strategy and then exercise productive oversight over the
longer-term process. There's no doubt about the good intentions of
leadership, but to sustain the effort for the long term requires a
change in organizational structure. Periodic meetings, after which the
DOD and VA participants return to their separate offices on opposite
sides of the Potomac, won't sustain the effort after the horror stories
fade from the headlines.
This simply can't be someone's part-time job. It requires a full-
time joint Federal transition office, staffed by full-time DOD, service
and VA personnel working in the same office with a common joint
mission: developing, implementing and overseeing the Joint Executive
Council's strategic plan. This office's responsibilities should
include:
Joint In-Patient Electronic Health Record--The NDAA
for Fiscal Year 2008 took the first step in authorizing a DOD/
VA Interagency Program Office to oversee this specific
initiative, which TMC has been seeking for years. But we
believe the 2012 objective for implementing this system is too
long to wait. Congress must press DOD and VA to speed delivery
as soon as humanly possible, with concrete timelines and
milestones for action. TMC also believes that the same logic
that necessitates a joint office's oversight of this specific
initiative is equally applicable in other areas, and that the
interagency office's area of responsibility should be expanded
accordingly.
Special Needs Health Care--Polytrauma Rehabilitation
Centers were established to meet the specialized clinical care
needs of patients with multiple trauma conditions. They provide
comprehensive inpatient rehabilitation services for individuals
with complex cognitive, physical and mental health sequelae of
severe disabling trauma. These centers require special
oversight in order to ensure the required resources are
available to include specialized staff, technical equipment and
adequate bed space. This oversight must be a joint effort since
it provides a significant piece of the health care continuum
for severely injured personnel.
PTSD, Traumatic Brain Injuries (TBI), and Mental
Health/Counseling--The Coalition strongly supports the
provisions in the NDAA for Fiscal Year 2008 establishing
Centers of Excellence for these programs. We simply must have
some central monitoring, evaluation, and crossfeed to take best
advantage of the wide variety of current and planned DOD,
Service, and VA programs and pilot projects aimed at
destigmatizing, identifying, and treating TBI and PTSD. The
Coalition believes it also is important to ensure that TBI and
PTSD are identified and treated as combat injuries rather than
mental health problems. The Coalition is doubtful whether these
centers, by themselves, will be in a position to ensure
coordination and implementation of best practices across all
departments and Services.
Caregiver Initiatives--Several wounded warrior
provisions in the recently enacted NDAA provide additional
support for the caregiver of the wounded warrior, typically a
family member. However, we believe more needs to be done to
strengthen support for families, to include the authorization
of compensation for family member caregivers of severely
injured who must leave their employment to care for the
servicemember.
Access to Care--A significant impediment to the
``seamless transition'' goal is that there are significant
differences between health coverage and some other entitlements
when a member transitions from active military Service to
separated or retired status. TRICARE benefits for disability
retirees and families are not the same as they were on active
duty, and there are significant differences between coverage
and availability of programs between TRICARE and the VA. When a
member dies on active duty, Congress has deemed that the
member's family should be eligible for 3 years of active-duty-
level TRICARE coverage to assist in the family's transition.
TMC believes strongly that members who are disabled
significantly by military service deserve equal treatment. The
NDAA for Fiscal Year 2008 authorized continued active-duty
level coverage, but only for the servicemember, and then only
in cases where VA coverage is not available. TMC believes this
limitation significantly undermines the seamless transition
goal for wounded/disabled members whose rehabilitation and
recovery may continue long after the time they leave active
duty. Their needs--and those of their families--should not be
inhibited by higher copays, deductibles, and coverage decreases
the moment they are separated or retired from active duty.
Allowing disabled members and their families to retain their
active duty military health care benefit for 3 years after
separation or retirement is essential to align our stated
intentions with the realities faced by disabled members and
families.
Joint Research-Combined Research Initiatives would
further enhance the partnership between VA and DOD. Since many
of the concerns and issues of care are shared, joint
collaboration of effort in the area of research should enable
dollars to go much further and provide a more standardized
system of health care in the military and veteran communities.
Furthermore, research must also be performed jointly and across
all military departments and with other practicing health care
agencies to ensure timely integration of these findings in the
diagnosis and treatment of wounded and disabled patients.
The Coalition is encouraged with the creation of a joint DOD-VA
office to oversee development of a bi-directional electronic medical
record. However, we strongly recommend that the subcommittee upgrade
the scope of responsibilities and span of authority for the new DOD-VA
Interagency Program Office to include top-down planning and execution
of all ``seamless transition'' functions, including the joint
electronic health record; joint DOD/VA physical; implementation of best
practices for TBI, PTSD, and special needs care; care access/
coordination issues; and joint research.
The Coalition believes authorizing 3 years of their active-duty-
level health care benefit for service-disabled members and their
families after separation or retirement is essential to align stated
``seamless transition'' intentions with the realities faced by disabled
members and families.
Disability Retirement Reform--Several of the Walter Reed task
forces and commissions recommended significant changes to the DOD
Disability Evaluation System (DES), and the NDAA for Fiscal Year 2008
includes several initiatives requiring joint DOD/VA DES pilot programs;
use of the VA Schedule for Rating Disabilities; review of medical
separations with disability ratings of 20 percent or less; and enhanced
disability severance pay. These changes will hopefully improve the
overall DES and correct the reported ``low-ball'' ratings awarded some
wounded warriors.
The Coalition is very supportive of the current DOD/VA disability
rating pilot, which has the potential to help streamline transition
from active duty into veteran/retired status. However, we believe
further legislative efforts are required to curb service differences in
determining whether a condition existed prior to service. To this end,
language in the NDAA for Fiscal Year 2008 aimed at addressing this
problem may actually have exacerbated it by amending only a part of the
relevant provisions of law.
The Coalition does not support proposals to simply do away with the
military disability retirement system and shift disability compensation
responsibility to the VA. While this proposal seems administratively
simple, and supports our long-standing ``concurrent receipt'' goal of
ensuring proper vesting of service-based retirement for members who
suffer from service-caused disabilities, it poses two significant risks
that TMC deems unacceptable. First, it would cause significant
compensation reductions for some severely disabled personnel--up to
$1,000 a month or more in some cases, and even more for some Guard and
Reserve members who suffer severe disabilities. Second, it would
eliminate the 30 percent-disability retirement threshold that now
establishes eligibility for retiree TRICARE coverage for disabled
members and their families. TMC believes there must continue to be a
statutory military disability threshold above which the member is
considered a military retiree (not simply a separatee and veteran) and
eligible for all the privileges of military retirement, including
TRICARE coverage. The Coalition objects strongly to establishing
disability ratings, compensation, or health care eligibility based
whether the disability was incurred in combat vice non-combat.
The Coalition strongly supports the recent NDAA requirement for a
case review of members separated with 20 percent or lower ratings since
Oct. 7, 2001. There is evidence that many received ``low-ball'' ratings
that did not adequately reflect the degree of their disabilities and
unfairly denied them eligibility for military disability retired pay
and health coverage.
But we believe the subcommittee did not go far enough to correct
past inequities. The Coalition is aware of many cases of ``model
troops'' who fell into depression, drug use, and disciplinary
situations after one or more combat tours, and who subsequently
received administrative or disciplinary discharges.
The Coalition urges the subcommittee to ensure any legislative
changes to the military disability evaluation and retirement systems do
not reduce compensation and benefit levels for disabled servicemembers.
The Coalition does not support proposals to do away with the military
disability retirement system and shift disability compensation
responsibility to the VA.
The Coalition urges an expanded review of all administrative and
disciplinary separations since Oct. 7, 2001 for members with recent
combat experience to assess whether the behavior that led to separation
may have been due to service-caused exposure.
active force issues
The subcommittee's key challenges will be to fend off those who
wish to cut needed personnel and quality of life programs while working
with DOD and the Administration to reduce the stress on the force and
their families already subjected to repeated, long-term deployments.
Rising day-to-day workloads for non-deployed members and repeated
extensions of combat tours creates a breeding ground for retention
problems. Meeting these challenges will require a commitment of
personnel and resources on several fronts.
End Strength and Associated Funding
The Coalition was encouraged when the subcommittee ensured that the
Army and Marine Corps authorized end strengths continued to grow in
fiscal year 2008, and we are further encouraged that the DOD has asked
for additional manpower increases for the Army and Marine Corps over
the next 4 years.
Congress must ensure these increases are sufficient to ease force
rotation burdens and the services are fully funded in order to achieve
the new end strength. Increasing end strength is not a quick fix that
will ease the stressors on currently serving servicemembers and their
families.
Some already speculate that the planned increases may not be needed
if we can reduce the number of troops deployed to Iraq. The Coalition
believes strongly that the increases are essential to future readiness,
regardless of force levels in Iraq. We know we didn't have enough
troops to fight the current war without imposing terrible penalties on
military members and families, and we must build our force management
plans to avoid having to do so when the Nation is faced with another
major unexpected contingency requirement.
For too long, we have planned only for the best-case scenario,
which ignores our responsibility to the Nation to be prepared for
unexpected and less-favorable scenarios, which could well arise
anywhere around the globe, including the Far East.
A full range of funding is required to support this necessary end
strength, including housing, health care, family programs, and child
care. Having the services absorb these costs out of pocket is self-
defeating.
Furthermore, as the Army and Marine Corps increase over the next 4
years, the Coalition remains concerned that ongoing Navy and Air Force
active and Reserve personnel cuts are driven by budget considerations
rather than operational requirements. We believe it is increasingly
likely that future experience will prove these cutbacks ill-advised,
and urge the subcommittee to reconsider their consistency with long-
term readiness needs.
The Coalition strongly urges the subcommittee to sustain projected
increases in ground forces and provide additional recruiting,
retention, and support resources as necessary to attain/sustain them.
The Coalition urges the subcommittee to reconsider the consistency
of projected reductions of Navy and Air Force forces with long-term
readiness needs.
Compensation and Special Incentive Pays
The Coalition is committed to ensuring that pay and allowance
programs are equitably applied to the seven uniformed services. In that
regard, the Coalition urges the subcommittee to be mindful that
personnel and compensation program adjustments for DOD forces should
also apply to uniformed members of the Coast Guard, NOAA Corps, and
Public Health Service.
Since the turn of the century, Congress and DOD have made
significant progress to improve the lives of men and women in uniform
and their families. Since 1999, when military pay raises had lagged a
cumulative 13.5 percent behind the private sector pay comparability
standard, the subcommittee has narrowed that gap to 3.4 percent. Each
year during that span, the subcommittee has ensured at least some
progress in shrinking that disparity further. TMC is grateful for that
progress, and believes strongly that it should continue until full pay
comparability is restored.
DOD uses the 70th percentile of earnings of private workers of
comparable age, experience and education as a standard to help
rebalance the military pay table through special targeted pay increases
depending on grade and longevity status. The Coalition believes this
measure is useful as one tool in the process of establishing the proper
progression of the pay table, and needs to be monitored and applied as
necessary in the future. But it does not, by itself, supplant overall
growth in the ECI as the measure of pay comparability, nor does it
erase the remaining 3.4 percent gap between military pay raises and
private sector pay growth.
The Coalition believes Congress will never find a better
opportunity to phase out the remaining gap than today's conditions when
private sector pay growth is relatively low. In assessing the proper
amount to reduce the pay gap, Congress also should consider that
today's troops are working much harder--and their families sacrificing
much more--for their modest raises.
This year, we expect the Defense budget will propose a 3.4 percent
raise for military personnel in 2009--a percentage equal to the growth
in private sector pay 2 years earlier in 2007. The Coalition believes
strongly that this is not the time to end Congress' steady path of
progress in reducing the military pay comparability gap.
The Coalition urges the subcommittee to propose a military pay
raise of at least 3.9 percent for fiscal year 2009 (one-half percentage
point above private sector pay growth) and to continue such half-
percent annual increases over the ECI until the current 3.4 percent pay
comparability gap is eliminated.
The Coalition also urges the subcommittee to continue periodic
targeted pay raises as appropriate to recognize the growing education
and technical qualifications of enlisted members and warrant officers
and sustain each individual grade/longevity pay cell at the minimum
70th percentile standard.
Access to Quality Housing
Today's housing allowances come much closer to meeting military
members' and families' housing needs than in the past, thanks to the
conscientious efforts of the subcommittee in recent years.
But the Coalition believes it's important to understand that some
fundamental flaws in the standards used to set those allowances remain
to be corrected, especially for enlisted members.
The Coalition supports revised housing standards that are more
realistic and appropriate for each pay grade. Many enlisted personnel
are unaware of the standards for their respective pay grade and assume
that their BAH level is determined by a higher standard or by the type
of housing for which they would qualify if they live on a military
installation. For example, only 1.25 percent of the enlisted force (E-
9) is eligible for BAH sufficient to pay for a three-bedroom single-
family detached house, even though thousands of more junior enlisted
members do, in fact, reside in detached homes. The Coalition believes
that as a minimum, this BAH standard (single-family detached house)
should be extended gradually to qualifying servicemembers beginning in
grade E-8 and subsequently to grade E-7 and below over several years as
resources allow.
The Military Coalition urges reform of military housing standards
that inequitably depress BAH rates for mid to senior enlisted members
by relegating their occupancy to inappropriately small quarters.
Family Readiness and Support
A fully funded, robust family readiness program continues to be
crucial to overall readiness of our military, especially with the
demands of frequent and extended deployments.
Resource issues continue to plague basic installation support
programs. At a time when families are dealing with increased
deployments, they are being asked to do without. Often family centers
are not staffed for outreach. Library and sports facilities hours are
being abbreviated or cut altogether. Manpower for installation security
is being reduced. These are additional sacrifices that we are imposing
on our families left behind while their servicemembers are deployed.
In a similar vein, the Coalition believes additional authority and
funding is needed to offer respite and extended child care for military
families. These initiatives should be accompanied by a more aggressive
outreach and education effort to improve members' and families'
financial literacy. We should ensure members are aware of and
encouraged to use child care, mental health support, spousal
employment, and other quality-of-life programs that have seen recent
growth. However, this education effort should also include expanded
financial education initiatives to inform and counsel members and
families on life insurance options, Thrift Savings Plan, IRAs, flexible
spending accounts, savings options for children's education, and other
quality of life needs.
In particular servicemembers must be educated on the long-term
financial consequences of electing to accept the much lower-value
$30,000 REDUX retention bonus after 15 years of service vice sustaining
their full High-3 retirement benefit.
The Coalition urges the subcommittee to support increased family
support funding and expanded education and other programs to meet
growing needs associated with increased ops tempo, extended deployments
and the more complex insurance, retirement, and savings choices faced
by over-extended military families.
Spouse Employment
The Coalition is pleased that movement is being made to enhance the
total force spouse employment opportunities through a test program and
strong partnerships between DOD, Department of Labor, service
organizations, employers, and others; however, more needs to be done.
More and more military spouses are in the workforce than in the
past, but challenges in finding jobs after relocation adversely impact
the military families' financial stability and satisfaction with
military life. Spouse employment helps contribute to a strong military
and helps in retention of our high quality, All-Volunteer Force.
Defense leaders repeatedly acknowledge, ``We recruit servicemembers,
but we retain families.''
One of the greatest frustrations for working spouses is the career
and financial disruption associated with military-directed relocations.
If we're serious about retaining more military families, we must get
serious about easing this significant career and military life
dissatisfier.
The Coalition urges the subcommittee to support legislation which
would expand the Workforce Opportunity Tax Credit for employers who
hire spouses of Regular and Reserve component servicemembers.
Additionally, the Coalition supports providing tax credits to
offset military spouses' expenses in obtaining career-related licenses
or certifications when servicemembers are relocated to a different
State.
Flexible Spending Accounts
The Coalition cannot comprehend the DOD's continuing failure to
implement existing statutory authority for active duty and Selected
Reserve members to participate in FSAs, despite both Armed Services
Committees' prodding on this subject.
All other Federal employees and corporate civilian employees are
able to use this authority to save thousands of dollars a year by
paying out-of-pocket health care and dependent care expenses with pre-
tax dollars. It is unconscionable that the Department has failed to
implement this money-saving program for the military members who are
bearing the entire burden of national sacrifice in the global war on
terrorism.
TMC urges the subcommittee to continue pressing the DOD until
servicemembers are provided the same eligibility to participate in FSAs
that all other Federal employees and corporate employees enjoy.
Additionally, we support S. 773.
Permanent Change of Station Allowances
Permanent Change of Station (PCS) allowances have continually
failed to keep pace with the significant out-of-pocket expenses
servicemembers and their families incur in complying with government-
directed moves.
For example, PCS mileage rates still have not been adjusted since
1985. The current rates range from 15 to 20 cents per mile--an ever-
shrinking fraction of the 50.5 cents per mile rate authorized for
temporary duty travel. Also, military members must make any advance
house-hunting trips at personal expense, without any government
reimbursements such as Federal civilians receive.
Additionally, the overwhelming majority of service families consist
of two working spouses, making two privately owned vehicles a
necessity. Yet the military pays for shipment of only one vehicle on
overseas moves, including moves to Hawaii and Alaska. This forces
relocating families into large out-of-pocket expenses, either by
shipping a second vehicle at their own expense or selling one car
before leaving the States and buying another upon arrival. The
Coalition is greatly disappointed that, for 2 consecutive years, a
subcommittee proposal to authorize shipping two vehicles to non-foreign
duty locations outside of CONUS has been dropped in conference.
The Coalition is grateful that the senior enlisted PCS weight
allowance tables were increased slightly in the NDAA for Fiscal Year
2006; however, we believe that these modification need to go further
for personnel in pay grades E-7, E-8, and E-9 to coincide with
allowances for officers in grades O-4, O-5, and O-6 respectively. The
personnel property weight for a senior E-9 leader without dependents
remains the same as for a single O-3 despite the normal accumulation of
household goods over the course of a career.
Four years ago, the subcommittee authorized the Families First
initiative. Among its provisions was full replacement value (FRV)
reimbursement for household goods damaged during PCS moves. We are
grateful that this first FRV phase has begun but will continue to
monitor its implementation. The next phase, focusing on survey results
and real time access to the progress of household goods in the moving
process has yet to be fully implemented. We will continue to monitor
the progress and hope that Congress will be doing the same.
Aside from that long-delayed initiative the last real adjustment in
PCS expenses was 7 years ago in 2001, when this subcommittee upgraded
PCS per diem (but not mileage) rates and raised the maximum daily
Temporary Lodging Expense (TLE) allowance from $110 to $180 a day for a
PCSing family, among certain other adjustments, including the increase
in the junior enlisted weight allowances. That TLE amount is supposed
to cover a family's food and lodging expenses while in temporary
quarters at the gaining or losing installation. Today, after 7 years of
inflation, it's hardly adequate to cover the daily expenses of a family
of four or five anywhere in America, let alone a family ordered to
relocate to San Diego or Washington, DC.
The Coalition also supports authorization of a dislocation
allowance for servicemembers making their final ``change of station''
upon retirement from the uniformed services and a 500-pound
professional goods weight allowance for military spouses.
We cannot avoid requiring members to make regular relocations, with
all the attendant disruptions in their children's education and their
spouses' careers. The Coalition believes strongly that the Nation that
requires military families to incur these disruptions should not be
making them bear the attendant high expenses out of their own pockets.
The Military Coalition urges the subcommittee to upgrade permanent
change-of-station allowances to better reflect the expenses members are
forced to incur in complying with government-directed relocations, with
priority on adjusting flat-rate amounts that have been eroded by
years--or decades--of inflation, and shipment of a second vehicle at
government expense to overseas accompanied assignments.
Base Realignment and Closure/Rebasing/Military Construction/
Commissaries
TMC remains concerned about inadequacy of service implementation
plans for DOD transformation, global repositioning, Army modularity,
and BRAC initiatives. Given the current wartime fiscal environment, TMC
is greatly worried about sustaining support services and quality of
life programs for members and families. These programs are clearly at
risk--not a week goes by that the Coalition doesn't hear reports of
cutbacks in base operation accounts and base services because of
funding shortfalls.
Feedback from the installation level is that local military and
community officials often are not brought ``into the loop'' or provided
sufficient details on changing program timetables to plan, seek, and
fund support programs (housing, schools, child care, roads, and other
infrastructure) for the numbers of personnel and families expected to
relocate to the installation area by a specific date.
We believe it is important to note that the commissary is a key
element of the total compensation package for servicemembers and
retirees. In addition to providing average savings of 30 percent over
local supermarkets, commissaries provide an important tie to the
military community. Shoppers get more than groceries at the commissary.
It is also an opportunity to connect with other military family members
and to get information on installation programs and activities through
bulletin boards and installation publications. Finally, shoppers
receive nutrition information and education through commissary
promotions and educational campaigns contributing to the overall health
of the entire beneficiary population.
The Coalition urges the subcommittee to closely monitor rebasing/
BRAC plans and schedules to ensure sustainment and timely development
of adequate family support/quality of life programs. At closing and
gaining installations, respectively--to include housing, education,
child care, exchanges and commissaries, health care, family centers,
unit family readiness, and other support services.
Morale, Welfare, and Recreation Programs
The availability of appropriated funds to support MWR activities is
an area of continuing concern. TMC strongly opposes any DOD initiative
that withholds or reduces MWR appropriated support for Category A and
Category B programs or that reduces the MWR dividend derived from
military base exchange programs.
Servicemembers and their families are reaching the breaking point
as a result of the war and the constant changes going on in the force.
It is unacceptable to have troops and families continue to take on more
responsibilities and sacrifices and not give them the support and
resources to do the job and to take care of the needs of their
families.
TMC urges the subcommittee to ensure that DOD funds MWR programs at
least to the 85 percent level for Category A programs and 65 percent
for Category B requirements.
Education Enhancements
Providing quality education for all military children is a key
recruiting and retention standard that has been historically supported
by the subcommittee.
The Coalition is concerned that there was no increase in the amount
of the DOD Supplement to Impact Aid. The need for supplemental funding
as school districts receive more military children as rebasing is
implemented is increasing. We believe that the funding should reflect
this greater impact.
Servicemembers have seen the value of their MGIB dramatically
diminish due to double digit education inflation. The Coalition
recommends tying the MGIB education benefit level to the average cost
of a 4-year public college.
Furthermore, service families facing several duty location changes
during a career often encounter problems establishing State residency
for the purpose of obtaining in-State tuition rates for military
children and spouses. The Coalition supports authorizing in-State
college tuition rates for servicemembers and their families in the
State in which the member is assigned and the member's home State of
record. The in-State tuition should remain continuous once the military
member or family member is established as a student.
TMC urges the subcommittee to work with the Veterans' Affairs
Committee to establish the benchmark level of MGIB education benefits
at the average cost of attending a 4-year public college, and support
continuous in-State tuition eligibility for servicemembers and their
families in the State in which the member is assigned and the member's
home State of record once enrolled as a student.
national guard and reserve force issues
Every day somewhere in the world, our National Guard and Reserves
are answering the call to service. Although there is no end in sight to
their participation in homeland security, overseas deployment and
future contingency operations, Guard and Reserve members have
volunteered for these duties and accept them as a way of life in the
21st century.
Since September 11, 2001, more than 615,000 National Guard and
Reserve service men and women have been called to active Federal
service for the war on terrorism and more than 150,000 have served
multiple deployments. They are experiencing similar sacrifices as the
active-Duty Forces. However, readjusting to home life, returning to
work and the communities and families they left behind puts added
stress on Guard and Reserve members. Unlike active duty members, whose
combat experience enhances their careers, many Guard Reserve members
return to employers who are unhappy about their active duty service and
find that their civilian careers have been inhibited by their prolonged
absences. Further, despite the continuing efforts of the subcommittee,
most Guard and Reserve families do not have the same level of
counseling and support services that the active duty members have.
All Guard and Reserve components are facing increasing challenges
involving major equipment shortages, end-strength requirements,
wounded-warrior health care, assistance and counseling for Guard and
Reserve members for pre-deployment and post-deployment contingency
operations.
Congress and the DOD must provide adequate benefits and personnel
policy changes to support our troops who go in harm's way.
Reserve Retirement and `Operational Reserve' Policy
The assumption behind the 1948-vintage G-R retirement system--
retired pay eligibility at age 60--was that these servicemembers would
be called up only infrequently for short tours of duty, allowing the
member to pursue a full-time civilian career with a full civilian
retirement. Under the ``Operational Reserve'' policy, reservists will
be required to serve 1-year active duty tours every 5 or 6 years.
Repeated, extended activations devalue full civilian careers and
impede reservists' ability to build a full civilian retirement, 401(k),
etc. Regardless of statutory reemployment protections, periodic long-
term absences from the civilian workplace can only limit Guard and
Reserve members' upward mobility, employability and financial security.
Further, strengthening the Reserve retirement system is needed as an
incentive to retain critical mid-career officers and NCOs for a full
Reserve career to meet long-term readiness needs.
The Coalition is grateful for the NDAA for Fiscal Year 2008
provision that would lower the Reserve retirement age by 3 months for
each cumulative 90 days of active duty on contingency operation orders.
TMC appreciates the importance of this small first step, but is very
concerned that the new authority authorizes such credit only for
service in 2008 and beyond--ignoring the extreme sacrifices of those
who have borne the greatest burden of sacrifice in the war on terror
for one, two, three or more combat tours in the past 6 years.
TMC strongly urges further progress in revamping the Reserve
retirement system in recognition of increased service and sacrifice of
National Guard and Reserve component members, including at a minimum,
extending the new authority for a 90 day=3 month reduction to all
National Guard and Reserve members who have served since September 11.
A Total Force Approach to the MGIB
The Nation's active duty, National Guard, and Reserve Forces are
operationally integrated under the Total Force policy. But educational
benefits under the MGIB do not reflect the policy nor match benefits to
service commitment.
TMC is grateful that the NDAA for Fiscal Year 2008 addressed a
major inequity for operational reservists by authorizing 10 years of
post-service use for benefits earned under Chapter 1607, 10 U.S.C.
But this change will require the DOD, not the VA to pay the costs
of readjustments for reservists. At a hearing on January 17, 2008, a
senior DOD official acknowledged that the DOD no longer should control
Chapter 1607.
In addition, basic Reserve MGIB benefits for initial service entry
have lost proportional parity with active duty rates since September
11. These relative benefits have spiraled down from a historic ratio of
47-50 percent of active duty MGIB levels to less than 29 percent--at a
time when Guard and Reserve recruitment continues to be very
challenging.
TMC urges Congress to integrate Guard and Reserve and active duty
MGIB laws into Title 38. In addition, TMC recommends restoring basic
Reserve MGIB rates to approximately 50 percent of active duty rates and
authorizing upfront reimbursement of tuition or training coursework for
Guard and Reserve members.
Family Support Programs and Benefits
The Coalition supports providing adequate funding for a core set of
family support programs and benefits that meet the unique needs of
Guard and Reserve families with uniform access for all servicemembers
and families. These programs would promote better communication with
servicemembers, specialized support for geographically separated Guard
and Reserve families and training and back up for family readiness
volunteers. This access would include:
Web-based programs and employee assistance programs
such as Military OneSource and Guard Family.org.
Enforcement of command responsibility for ensuring
that programs are in place to meet the special needs of
families of individual augmentees or the geographically
dispersed.
Expanded programs between military and community
religious leaders to support servicemembers and families during
all phases of deployments.
Availability of robust preventive counseling services
for servicemembers and families and training so they know when
to seek professional help related to their circumstances.
Enhanced education for Guard and Reserve family
members about their rights and benefits.
Innovative and effective ways to meet the Guard and
Reserve community's needs for occasional child care,
particularly for preventive respite care, volunteering, and
family readiness group meetings and drill time.
A joint family readiness program to facilitate
understanding and sharing of information between all family
members, no matter what the service.
The Coalition recognizes the subcommittee's longstanding interest
and efforts on this topic, including several provisions in the NDAA for
Fiscal Year 2008. The Coalition will monitor the results of the surveys
and increased oversight called for in the provisions and looks forward
to working closely with the Family Readiness Council.
TMC urges Congress to continue and expand its emphasis on providing
consistent funding and increased outreach to connect Guard and Reserve
families with relevant support programs.
Tangible Support for Employers
Employers of Guard and Reserve servicemembers shoulder an extra
burden in support of the national defense. The new ``Operational
Reserve'' policy places even greater strain on employers. For their
sacrifice, they get plaques to hang on the wall.
For Guard and Reserve members, employer `pushback' is listed as one
of the top reasons for reservists to discontinue Guard and Reserve
service. If we are to sustain a viable Guard and Reserve Force for the
long term, the Nation must do more to tangibly support employers of the
Guard and Reserve and address their substantive concerns, including
initiatives such as: