    [Senate Hearing 115-215]
    [From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

                                                            S. Hrg. 115-215

                         HEARING ON PENDING LEGISLATION

    =======================================================================

                                    HEARING

                                   BEFORE THE

                         COMMITTEE ON VETERANS' AFFAIRS
                              UNITED STATES SENATE

                         ONE HUNDRED FIFTEENTH CONGRESS

                                 FIRST SESSION

                                   __________

                                 JUNE 15, 2017

                                   __________

           Printed for the use of the Committee on Veterans' Affairs

     [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

             Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.fdsys.gov

                                ______

                 U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
     29-500 PDF           WASHINGTON : 2019

                         COMMITTEE ON VETERANS' AFFAIRS

                       Johnny Isakson, Georgia, Chairman

    Jerry Moran, Kansas                  Jon Tester, Montana, Ranking
    John Boozman, Arkansas                   Member
    Dean Heller, Nevada                  Patty Murray, Washington
    Bill Cassidy, Louisiana              Bernard Sanders, (I) Vermont
    Mike Rounds, South Dakota            Sherrod Brown, Ohio
    Thom Tillis, North Carolina          Richard Blumenthal, Connecticut
    Dan Sullivan, Alaska                 Mazie K. Hirono, Hawaii
                                         Joe Manchin III, West Virginia

                      Thomas G. Bowman, Staff Director \1\
                      Robert J. Henke, Staff Director \2\
                    Tony McClain, Democratic Staff Director

                          Majority Professional Staff
                                Amanda Meredith
                                 Gretchan Blum
                                Leslie Campbell
                                Maureen O'Neill
                                   Adam Reece
                                 David Shearman
                                Jillian Workman

                          Minority Professional Staff
                                Dahlia Melendrez
                                Cassandra Byerly
                                    Jon Coen
                                  Steve Colley
                                   Simon Coon
                               Michelle Dominguez
                                 Eric Gardener
                                   Carla Lott
                                  Jorge Rueda

    \1\ Thomas G. Bowman served as Committee majority Staff Director
    through September 5, 2017, after being confirmed as Deputy Secretary of
    Veterans Affairs on August 3, 2017.
    \2\ Robert J. Henke became the Committee majority Staff Director on
    September 6, 2017.

                                C O N T E N T S

                                  ----------

                                 June 15, 2017
                                    SENATORS

                                                                       Page
    Isakson, Hon. Johnny, Chairman, U.S. Senator from Georgia........     1
    Tester, Hon. Jon, Ranking Member, U.S. Senator from Montana......     1
    Boozman, Hon. John, U.S. Senator from Arkansas...................    22
    Tillis, Hon. Thom, U.S. Senator from North Carolina..............    24
    Rounds, Hon. Mike, U.S. Senator from South Dakota................    25

                                   WITNESSES

    McCaskill, Hon. Claire, U.S. Senator from Missouri...............     2
        Letters for the Record.......................................     4
    Coy, Curtis L., Deputy Under Secretary for Economic Opportunity,
      Veterans Benefits Administration, U.S. Department of Veterans
      Affairs; accompanied by Bradley Flohr, Senior Advisor for
      Compensation Service...........................................     8
        Prepared statement...........................................     9
        Response to request arising during the hearing by Hon. Mike
          Rounds.....................................................    26
    Hubbard, Will, Vice President of Government Affairs, Student
      Veterans of America............................................    28
        Prepared statement...........................................    30
    Kamin, John, Assistant Director, Veterans Employment and
      Education, The American Legion.................................    39
        Prepared statement...........................................    41
    Murray, Patrick, Associate Director, National Legislative
      Service, Veterans of Foreign Wars of the United States.........    55
        Prepared statement...........................................    57
    Robinson, Brig. Gen. Roy (Ret.), President, National Guard
      Association of the United States...............................    62
        Prepared statement...........................................    64

                                    APPENDIX

    Burr, Hon. Richard, U.S. Senator from North Carolina; prepared
      statement......................................................    71
    Crapo, Hon. Mike, U.S. Senator from Idaho; prepared statement....    73
    Heitkamp, Hon. Heidi, U.S. Senator from North Dakota; prepared
      statement......................................................    74
    Inhofe, Hon. James, U.S. Senator from Oklahoma; prepared
      statement......................................................    74
    Lachica, Eric, Executive Director for ACFV leaders, American
      Coalition for Filipino Veterans, Inc. (ACFV); letter...........    76
    U.S. Department of Defense (DOD); prepared statement.............    77
    Shellenberger, Sam, Deputy Assistant Secretary, Veterans'
      Employment and Training Service, U.S. Department of Labor
      (DOL); prepared statement......................................    80
    Enlisted Association of the National Guard of the United States
      (EANGUS); prepared statement...................................    82
    Crawford, Scott, High Ground Veterans Fellow, High Ground
      Veterans Advocacy (HGVA); letter...............................    84
    Porter, Tom, Legislative Director, Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans
      of America (IAVA); prepared statement..........................    89
    Military Officers Association of America (MOAA); prepared
      statement......................................................    94
    Morosky, Aleks, National Legislative Director, Military Order of
      the Purple Heart (MOPH); prepared statement....................    97
    National Association of College and University Business Officers
      (NACUBO); prepared statement...................................   100
    Wescott, Dr. Joseph, Legislative Director, National Association
      of State Approving Agencies (NASAA); prepared statement........   102
    Gore, Phil, Legislative Director, National Association of
      Veterans' Program Administrators (NAVPA); prepared statement...   107
    National Military Family Association; prepared statement.........   112
    Paralyzed Veterans of America (PVA); prepared statement..........   113
    Reserve Officers Association of the United
      States (ROA); prepared statement...............................   114
    Tragedy Assistance Program for Survivors (TAPS); prepared
      statement......................................................   116
    Veterans Educations Success (VES); prepared statement............   120
    Goldsmith, Kristofer, Assistant Director for Policy and
      Government Affairs, Vietnam Veterans of America (VVA); prepared
      statement......................................................   127
        Attachment: Veterans Legal Services Clinic, Yale Law School;
          memorandum.................................................   136

                         HEARING ON PENDING LEGISLATION

                                  ----------

                            THURSDAY, JUNE 15, 2017

                                           U.S. Senate,
                                Committee on Veterans' Affairs,
                                                        Washington, DC.
        The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 11:10 a.m., in
    room 418, Russell Senate Office Building, Hon. Johnny Isakson,
    Chairman of the Committee, presiding.
        Present: Senators Isakson, Boozman, Heller, Rounds, Tillis,
    Tester, and Brown.

          OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. JOHNNY ISAKSON, CHAIRMAN,
                       U.S. SENATOR FROM GEORGIA

        Chairman Isakson. I call this meeting of the Senate
    Veterans' Affairs Committee to order.
        We are going to have a lot of things going on this morning.
    We have three critical votes that will start at eleven o'clock,
    which it is 11 right now. We have 14 bills that we are going to
    cover today or 30 different provisions included by members of
    the Senate. We have a lot of work to do. We have a lot of
    people to hear from. So, it is going to be a busy day with
    people coming in and out to go vote in the first hour and then
    finishing up in the second hour.
        The order of business is going to be: I am going to make my
    opening statement, which I am making now, then we will go to
    Senator Tester, who will make his. We will go next to Senator
    McCaskill to make her statement. I want to thank her for being
    here on time and thank her for the work she has done on the
    issue of mustard gas and the Arla Harrell Act, which she has
    worked so hard on and I have committed for a long time to help
    her with. We are glad to have her, and she will talk about
    that.
        When she is finished, John Boozman, Senator Boozman will be
    here from Arkansas to take my place and Senator Tester's place
    to conduct the rest of the meeting. I appreciate his being
    here. I also appreciate you being here, Senator McCaskill.
        Ranking Member Tester?

                 OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. JON TESTER,
               RANKING MEMBER, U.S. SENATOR FROM MONTANA

        Senator Tester. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Today's agenda
    includes a number of really important bills that will affect VA
    benefits and critical to the veterans' ability to transition
    back into civilian life and get a good job and get an
    education.
        I, too, want to thank Claire for being here today. I know
    she has worked very, very hard on this issue, and I will make a
    commitment to you to do our level best to get this thing to the
    floor as soon as we can because it is important.
        These bills also collectively symbolize the bipartisan
    cooperation on this Committee and the deference that we give to
    veterans and the organizations and advocates for their needs.
    Some of the organizations are going to be represented here
    today, and I want to welcome them. I especially want to thank
    the National Guard Association of the U.S. for joining us here
    today, because the fact is whether you are active duty, Guard,
    or Reserve, a deployment is a deployment, which is why I am
    proud to correct the unacceptable benefit inequity that
    currently exists for those deployed under 12304 Bravo orders.
    Those that deploy have our Nation's gratitude, and they should
    certainly be entitled to educational benefits as a result of
    their service.
        In addition to correcting this benefit disparity, the Ed
    for Troops and Veterans Act also allows servicemembers and
    veterans to defer student loans during predeployment training.
    It also keeps tuition assistance for Reservists and Guardsmen
    on pace with the rising cost of higher education, and it
    provides grants for veteran education centers on college
    campuses.
        I am also pleased to see legislation that attempts to fix
    lingering challenges to veterans being granted the benefits
    they deserve, bringing justice to veterans and their families.
        The bills that we will discuss today aim to address some of
    the challenges our veterans face in getting the benefits they
    deserve. I look forward to eliminating those challenges,
    improving those benefits, and streamlining the delivery. I want
    to thank you, Mr. Chairman, for holding this hearing.
        Chairman Isakson. Thank you, Senator Tester, and as is our
    tradition, if a member who is not a Member of the Committee but
    is a member of the Senate is here at our meeting and has a bill
    before the Committee, we will introduce them to present that
    bill, and as a courtesy, we do not bombard them with any
    questions. They can leave as soon as they have made their
    testimony.
        With that said, Ms. McCaskill, you have free rein. The
    Senator from Missouri, Claire McCaskill.

                  STATEMENT OF HON. CLAIRE McCASKILL,
                       U.S. SENATOR FROM MISSOURI

        Senator McCaskill. Thank you. Thank you so much, Mr.
    Chairman and Ranking Member Tester. Thank you for the
    opportunity to address the Committee on an issue that is very,
    very important to, I think, our country.
        I will confess that this is a big deal to me, but it is a
    big deal to me because of who Arla Harrell is.
        This is an injustice that has been perpetrated against a
    small group of World War II veterans. Throughout World War II,
    the U.S. Government conducted a number of classified tests of
    mustard agents on U.S. soldiers. The intent was to better
    understand how chemicals like mustard gas and lewisite affected
    the human body and to help the military defend against these
    threats.
        In total, approximately 60,000 servicemembers are estimated
    to have participated in these tests, with about 4,000 of them
    facing the most extreme forms of full-body exposure. Fewer than
    400 of them are still alive today.
        While the intent of these tests was understandable, the
    impact on the health and well-being of the subjects has lasted
    a lifetime.
        One of these servicemembers is a constituent of mine, Arla
    Harrell, who is very ill. He is 90 years old, whose photo you
    see beside me. Arla was twice subjected to the extreme form of
    full-body exposure of mustard gas while stationed at Camp
    Crowder in Neosho, MI, for basic training in 1945.
        Arla's story is known to this Committee. As I have told you
    before, he and his fellow subjects were told they would be
    helping the military test summer clothing in exchange for
    additional leave. It was not until they arrived at the testing
    site that they were told they would be exposed to mustard gas.
        Those who became sick during these tests, like Arla, were
    threatened with court-martial if they did not continue with the
    testing. Following his exposure, Arla was hospitalized twice,
    first at Camp Crowder while still in basic training and again
    at the 98th General Hospital in Munich, Germany. Despite the
    obvious medical impacts of the testing, Arla and thousands of
    veterans like him kept faith with the oath of secrecy they were
    forced to swear.
        When the oath was finally lifted, 25 years ago, the VA
    attempted to establish a process to compensate these veterans,
    who were finally able to talk about what happened to them with
    their loved ones and their doctors. The VA's written testimony
    states these procedures are adequate and that they have and
    continue to lead to fair and equitable outcomes. That is a
    blatant lie. They have not led to fair and equitable outcomes.
        I am not sure it is possible how they can make this
    statement since the VA has rejected 90 percent of the
    applicants who have applied for benefits concerning exposure to
    mustard gas. Of the thousands of veterans who were exposed,
    only about 40 who have applied for benefits, all but 40 have
    been denied. So, only 40 veterans have ever been given what
    they are entitled to after they did the patriotic thing for
    their country undergoing these tests.
        To give you an example of how broken this system is, the VA
    rejected Arla's claim on the basis that due to a lack of proper
    recordkeeping, it cannot confirm mustard gas testing occurred
    at Camp Crowder, given Arla's personal statements, medical
    records notwithstanding. In other words, they called him a
    liar.
        As you can see in the handouts we have provided, we have
    been able to prove that mustard gas was used at Camp Crowder
    through reports published by the Army Corps of Engineers in the
    nineties, which even detailed the recovery of vials of mustard
    gas at Camp Crowder.
        Despite all this evidence, the VA has repeatedly denied
    Arla's claim. His family has been working for 50 years to get
    him help--25 years actually since he was allowed to talk about
    it. While the current VA disability claims process may
    adequately address the needs of veterans with full access to
    their records, it simply is not capable of giving Arla and his
    fellow mustard gas veterans the fair treatment they deserve.
    The existing framework cannot adequately account for the
    classified nature of the testing, the years of secrecy, the
    poor recordkeeping, and for some veterans, the destruction of
    their case files in the massive '73 fire at the Personnel
    Records Center.
        My bill's scope is so narrowly tailored, you would have
    already had to apply for this benefit to have it impact you.
    This does not open the door to new applicants. It is very
    narrowly tailored.
        He has suffered with the effects of full-body exposure
    since 1945, 70 years after the experiments took place. The
    government still has yet to appropriately assist and compensate
    Arla and his fellow subjects.
        Arla's children have written letters outlining the terrible
    burden. I hope you will look at them. I have asked them to be
    made part of the record today, and I would ask that these
    letters be entered into the record.
        I would like to highlight one passage written by his
    daughter, Trish Ayers, who wrote, ``My dad and other living
    soldiers who endured the tests suffer with lifelong side
    effects and have kept the secrets that were required of them.
    They have all done their duty to their service and to their
    country. It is now time they are recognized and there is a more
    realistic path to securing the approval of their claims. It is
    time our country does their duty to these veterans.''
        Arla, his wife Betty, and their five children have fought
    for compensation, as I said, for 25 years. I think every Member
    of this Committee realizes that this is an extreme injustice.
        It is, they say, maybe there is 400. Last year, they
    acknowledged there were 400 people this might apply to. Every
    day that passes there are fewer. I believe the amount of money
    that is put on this bill, Mr. Chairman, $10 million, is high. I
    do not think it will even reach near that amount. It is $1
    million a year.
        I implore this Committee to find that $1 million a year for
    Arla Harrell and the handful of veterans across this country
    that deserve this.
        I know the Secretary of the VA supports this. He has told
    me that he does. I have fought the staff at the VA repeatedly
    on this. It is hard for me to understand why. But I am very
    hopeful that this Committee will finally give these brave men,
    who kept a terrible secret for so many years because they were
    so patriotic and cared more about their country than their own
    health.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        [The letters follow:]
      Prepared Statement from Arla Ray Harrell, Son of Arla Wayne Harrell
        Dear Senator McCaskill: My father, Arla Wayne Harrell, was drafted
    into the army in 1944. He had recently turned 18 and never been more
    than a few miles from his birthplace. His trip to Camp Crowder Missouri
    for basic training was not only farther than he had ever traveled, but
    had a larger population than he had ever witnessed. During basic
    training, he was told if he would volunteer for a special duty (timed
    exposure to mustard gas in a locked chamber), he would receive two
    extra weeks of leave. He was also told there would be minimal health
    risk. The potential that he would receive any harmful effects was
    minimized, and he was promised medical treatment if required.
        For an 18 year old, an additional two weeks leave was an enticing
    and manipulative offer. To someone that age, the benefit of leave far
    outweighed the risks.
        He was mandated to sign a vow of secrecy, which stated that he
    could not speak about any of these events for fifty years. Even though
    my Father suffered his entire life with medical conditions associated
    with exposure to mustard gas, he kept his word and did not speak about
    the experiment until the fifty year limit was reached. To maintain this
    vow truly demonstrates his values of loyalty, duty, selfless service,
    honor, integrity and personal courage to the United States Armed
    Forces.
        Fifty years later, my Dad applied for disability for his medical
    issues. Claims demanded that he show proof that he was exposed to
    mustard gas. This was impossible for him as many of the records had
    been burned in a fire. The records that were available regarding the
    mustard gas testing were still classified and not available to him. Any
    efforts to prove that he had been exposed to mustard gas were blocked
    at every path. He has received no compensation from any government
    agency or veterans association.
        I am a retired Army Senior NCO and served my country proudly for 26
    years. I feel betrayed and saddened by the way my father has been
    treated. I am saddened by the fact that the military would use American
    Soldiers as human guinea pigs and also for the fact that they refuse to
    acknowledge that it was done.
        My dad is now 90 years old and his time is short. The Soldier's
    creed states that I will leave no Soldier behind. Please do not leave
    my father and his fellow Soldiers behind. My father will never have the
    same life he could have had without the medical issues he has dealt
    with, but it would be a great benefit to acknowledge it happened to him
    before he leaves us.
                On my honor,
                                               Arla Ray Harrell
                                     ______

                  Prepared Statement from Betty Harrell Agan,
                         Daughter of Arla Wayne Harrell
        Dear Senator McCaskill: Thank you for the support and hard work you
    and your staff have done for my dad, Arla Wayne Harrell--World War II
    veteran.
        We, our family. is honored to have Senate Bill 75 named after our
    dad. When he was told this bill was named after him--a bill for World
    War II veterans who experienced Mustard Gas experiments, which was not
    part of regular military training, he had tears running down his face.
    My dad can no longer talk as a bad stroke took what was left of his
    voice away. He has had years of chronic hoarseness and laryngitis. My
    dad has over a quarter century of mustard gas claim denials from the
    VA.
        They always say he is not on the DOD exposure database. We have
    found out on a statement of case from the VA, this is not true. In 2011
    before Senator McCaskill knew my dad's story, the VA knew dad was on
    the DASD-HRPO (Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense--Human Resource
    Protection Office) list. The VA was given this information by the
    Department of Defense. The VA never told my dad of this.
        Also in the denials, he was never at a known site where mustard gas
    was found, according to the VA, Camp Crowder, Neosho, Missouri. There
    are others who have made the same claim as my dad while they were
    stationed at Camp Crowder.
        I've received a disc from the Records Management Center--3, 183
    pages of information on my dad I'm going through.
        After dad's latest denial , 2016, we filed a NOD (Notice of
    Disagreement) with the VA. The VA denied it. Next we asked for an
    appeal in Washington, DC but as of yet we have not been given a date
    nor have we heard from anyone.
        No one at the VA has ever offered to give us any help.
        Senate Bill 75--the Arla Harrell Act--corrects a problem many of
    the remaining World War II veterans have faced with their claims. My
    dad and other veterans who were experimented on have faced an uphill
    battle. My dad would have had a better life starting in 1991 with his
    first mustard gas claim, as would have all of the vets. They would have
    been receiving medical care better suited to their illness caused by
    the experiments.
        My dad and the other veterans whom are mostly dead now, served
    their country twice--once in the military and foremost in the sacrifice
    of their health. They insured those that followed got better and safer
    equipment when war gases were used. They insured mustard gas injuries
    had better medical care.
        Senate Bill 75 removes road blocks for these World War II veterans.
                                     ______

                 Prepared Statement from Trish Harrell Ayers,
                         Daughter of Arla Wayne Harrell
        Dear Senator McCaskill: I would like to share a bit about my dad,
    Arla Harrell, for whom the Arla Harrell Act is named. He is an honest
    and honorable man. Never in my life have I heard him utter a lie or
    shade the truth. He is loyal to his family and his country.
        When he was eighteen years old, he joined the service and was sent
    to Camp Crowder for basic training. While there, he was part of the
    secret Mustard Gas program and was informed that he could never speak
    of the test or he would be imprisoned. He kept his promise until, in
    his later years, when he learned he was no longer held to that promise.
    He kept the secret from him family and his medical providers.
        I was present the day, at the V.A. Hospital in Columbia, MO, when
    he was first asked about exposure to Mustard Gas. A medical provider,
    while looking at dad's x-ray, questioned him about being exposed to
    Mustard Gas. I will never forget the look of terror on Dad's face. I
    suspect the medical provider also noticed Dad's fear. Once Dad was
    assured he could now speak of the tests, he quietly answered, ``yes.''
        Our family quickly researched and found out that the veil of
    secrecy had been lifted and veterans were able to speak of the tests.
    Then it was like the flood gates opened. Dad told us the horrors that
    he held inside for over fifty years. He told me that he and a group of
    men were locked inside a room and were forced to breathe in Mustard
    Gas. He told me his lungs and skin burned during the tests. He had
    trouble breathing as did the other soldiers. He was hospitalized
    shortly after the exposure and, at least one other time.
        Once Dad learned he could speak of the tests, he made the decision
    to submit a claim for the exposure. He thought it would be a simple
    thing. When he received his first denial, it hit him hard. He felt that
    he had done what was asked of him and now they were implying that it
    didn't happen and, ultimately, that he was not telling the truth. This
    was hard for my father to swallow, being a man of his word. He wanted
    to continue to pursue the claim so he, with my Mom's help, filed the
    appeal. Letters were written to his Members of Congress requesting
    assistance. He was denied again. For years, he and my mom did
    everything in their power to get a claim approved, but to no avail.
    With each denial, Dad became depressed and discouraged. The process was
    time consuming, but he continued on.
        When Dad's health declined, my sisters and brother and I joined
    forces with Mom to continue the process. We searched the internet, read
    books about the subject and tried everything in our power to locate
    records that would prove Dad's claim.
        Locating records became our biggest challenge. Many of his records
    were housed in the facility that burned. He, then, was being asked to
    submit records that no longer existed. Even with this, we still
    searched for records and often felt like we were being given the run-
    around.
        In the past several years, while reading the report on a hearing on
    the Mustard Gas experiments, I read that it was noted that the Army did
    not keep good records of these experiments and who was exposed. So, in
    essence, we have been asked to supply records that may never have been
    created.
        He was told that Mustard Gas testing did not happen at Camp
    Crowder. Later we found that the Army Corps of Engineers had located
    Mustard Gas buried at Camp Crowder. Dad was not informed of this
    change. Also, we learned that a number of veterans had filed claims
    that they, too, underwent testing at Camp Crowder. Their stories
    aligned perfectly. Dad did not know any of them but they all had the
    same memories.
        At 90 years old, Dad's health continues to decline, to the point
    where he can only speak a few words. Dad is forced to communicate with
    his eyes. Whenever we spoke about the work we were doing on his Mustard
    Gas claim, he would smile. When he was told of the Arla Harrell Act, he
    teared up, and then smiled broadly.
        Last week, when I told him that The Arla Harrell Act was going to
    be presented in The United States Committee on Veterans Affairs, his
    eyes filled with tears. We told him a number of times to make sure he
    understood it was the U.S. Senate. He continued to tear up. He wants to
    be acknowledged. Later, when I was telling a member of the nursing home
    staff about the upcoming hearing, he smiled the biggest smile, the same
    smile I see when he sees Mom the first time every day.
        I grew up with a man who worked full-time in spite of physical
    challenges with his breathing. He could not be around perfumes,
    chemicals, and nail polish. His stamina was impacted but he still kept
    his secret and never told his doctor. I often wonder if he had been
    allowed to speak of this, at least to his doctor, that maybe there
    could have been something medically they could have done to ease his
    suffering. We will never know. I remember, when I was in college, he
    went with mom and me to a theme park where I worked. In a short time,
    the walking and heat impacted him so much that he sat down and told us
    to go ahead. He would wait on a bench until we were done. I knew he
    wanted to join us through the park and I knew he couldn't physically.
    Mom and I quickly went to a few places in the park and then returned to
    Dad. He told us he was OK, to stay longer, but we didn't want him to
    suffer. This was not a one-time situation. It was only after he was
    allowed to tell us about the Mustard Gas testing which was done on him
    that we finally understood what Dad had been dealing with most of his
    adult life.
        My Dad, Arla Harrell, and other living soldiers who endured the
    tests, suffer with life-long side effects and have kept the secrets
    that were required of them. They have all done their duty to the
    service and their country. It is now time they are recognized and there
    is a more realistic path to securing approval of their claims. It is
    time our country does their duty to these Veterans.
                Respectfully,
                                         Trish (Harrell) Ayers,
                                                             Berea, KY.
                                     ______

                     Prepared Statement from Beverly Howe,
                         Daughter of Arla Wayne Harrell
        Dear Senator McCaskill: I see my father as an American hero, that
    America has forgotten. The promises made to him as an 18 year old, have
    not been honored. He kept his promise to keep the mustard gas testing
    secret. Once released from his promise some 50 years later . . .
    America has not honored its promises to him.
        My father has felt that with each denial for benefits from the VA,
    he is being called a liar. His disappointment is visible in his being,
    with each denial. My parents quit applying for benefits because of the
    depression that followed each denial. My Dad and Mom never expected
    that after 50 years that the VA would for another 22+ years, deny his
    claims, even with medical evidence to support his claim.
        I want my father to be recognized for the sacrifice he made so long
    ago. He had no way of knowing at the time, how volunteering for the
    secret mustard gas testing would affect him every day of his life after
    the exposures. He has suffered from lung problems, shortness of breath,
    atypical pneumonias, emphysema, asthma, hoarseness, permanent scaring
    on multiple areas of his body, and squamous cell cancer, to name a few.
        At the beginning of this process we were told there was no evidence
    of any mustard gas at Camp Crowder by many VA representatives,
    including Steve Westerfield. He was the Communications Director for the
    VA in the beginning of 2016. There was evidence from the Army Corp of
    Engineers in July 2012 that proved the existence of mustard gas at Camp
    Crowder, as well as memos from the Department of Defense and the
    Department of the Army from October 29th, 1996 that listed Missouri,
    Camp Crowder as a location for known or possible buried chemical
    warfare material-chemical agents.
        My Dad as well as other, now deceased veterans, claimed exposure to
    mustard gas at Camp Crowder. One veteran described nearly identical
    exposures as my father at Camp Crowder at approximately the same time.
    All of his claims and appeals were denied. Common threads are: no
    documents available, possibly due to the fact that a fire occurred at
    the repository for veteran records in St. Louis; not on DOD list or no
    evidence that they were exposed; no credible evidence that mustard gas
    testing occurred or that secret information about the testing was
    removed from their records to be stored elsewhere.
        My father was hospitalized for 6 days right after his exposure to
    mustard gas in the gas chamber. His symptoms were consistent with
    mustard gas exposure.
        These men have been caught in a catch 22:

         Held to 50 year vow of secrecy.
         Secret records stored elsewhere.
         Records destroyed.
         No one knows where or if these records still exist due to
    the time that has passed.
         Preponderance of evidence supports veterans statements.
         VA puts all of the burden of proof on age 90 and up
    veterans.
         No one can say why mustard gas was even at Camp Crowder,
    Even after proof of its existence.
         No one can explain notations on my fathers records that
    are not on other veterans records of that era.
         VA states they must be on DOD list to approve claims.
         DOD says it is up to VA to approve claim.

        I love my father and have watched his suffering for all of my 61
    years. My wish is that he will rightfully receive the recognition and
    honor he deserves while he is alive.
        He is in failing health. His wheelchair recently broke and it took
    several weeks to get the part. My mother paid for it. The VA has
    refused to help with the cost of his wheelchair. He is a tall man and
    requires a special chair. So, his wheelchair had to have the back
    propped up with a chair until it could be repaired.
        The costs of such repairs comes out of my mothers funds. My father
    is on Medicaid. He never wanted to be on Medicaid. He worked and saved
    so that my mother and him could take care of themselves. My mother sold
    their home so there would be money to take care of him and herself. If
    the VA had approved my fathers claim, this would not have had to
    happen.
        So many promises made and broken to my father by the Army have led
    to him living daily with the sadness of so many losses, loss of his
    health, loss of the support of the VA, loss of respect for his word,
    the loss of his home for his wife, the loss of being able to say he
    served this Nation as a proud veteran . . . proud of his country.
        The bureaucracy of the VA has made it easy to deny claims from this
    era, for these men. We received the aid of Senator Claire McCaskill and
    her staff. Even with their assistance we have been met with nothing but
    denials. The VA demands absolute proof to approve a claim. We have
    consistently been told my Dad is not on the DOD list, but as of his
    last NOD denial it noted he was added to a list. I've requested
    detailed explanations of each point in the claims. We received very
    standard forms and no detailed explanations as requested. When I
    question VA staff about things in the case, I often get pat answers or
    silence. When I requested identification of terms, or forms, or
    acronyms, no response is provided except we don't know what it means.
    If the VA cannot assist the veteran when they have access to
    information how is the average person supposed to respond. No one at
    the VA is able to tell me what the full vials of mustard gas was used
    for at Camp Crowder. I was told it could have been used in training. My
    question was you mean they purposely exposed all soldiers in training.
    The response I received was``I hope not''
        I hope that the VA is not waiting for all of these brave men to die
    so their horrific story dies with them.
        Please provide my father with the honor he so deserves, by
    acknowledging the sacrifice he made in 1945.
                Respectfully,
                                                   Beverly Howe

        Chairman Isakson. Well, thank you, Senator McCaskill; your
    tenacity will be noted. You have done a great job of pushing on
    this bill for a long period of time. The Committee will have a
    vote on it before--not today, but in the weeks ahead, and I
    appreciate very much your being here today. Thank you.
        Senator McCaskill. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Chairman Isakson. Senator Boozman is on the way to replace
    me, and while we are waiting for him to arrive, I would like
    our first panel to come forward. We have Mr. Curtis Coy, Deputy
    Under Secretary for Economic Opportunity, Veterans Benefits
    Administration, U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs; and
    Bradley Flohr, Senior Advisor for Compensation Service,
    Department of Veterans Affairs. The order I have is Mr. Coy
    first and Mr. Flohr second, if that is OK with our guests in
    doing testimony.
        Mr. Coy, you are recognized for your testimony.

    STATEMENT OF CURTIS L. COY, DEPUTY UNDER SECRETARY FOR ECONOMIC
    OPPORTUNITY, VETERANS BENEFITS ADMINISTRATION, U.S. DEPARTMENT
       OF VETERANS AFFAIRS; ACCOMPANIED BY BRADLEY FLOHR, SENIOR
          ADVISOR FOR COMPENSATION SERVICE, VETERANS BENEFITS
                             ADMINISTRATION

        Mr. Coy. Good morning, Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member, and
    distinguished guests of the Committee. Thank you for the
    opportunity to be here to discuss legislation pertaining to the
    Department of Veterans Affairs programs. Thank you for your
    passionate interest in our Nation's veterans in working
    diligently to put together today's agenda. If I may, we would
    also like to compliment the Committee staff for their
    professionalism, hard work, and complementary passion to assist
    veterans.
        Accompanying me today is Mr. Brad Flohr, Senior Advisor for
    Compensation Service.
        We are encouraged by the number of bills aimed at improving
    education opportunities for veterans and their beneficiaries.
    Post-9/11 GI Bill is truly transformative. The original GI
    Bill, or the Servicemen's Readjustment Act of 1944, was the
    product of what happens when goodwill and the right thing come
    together in Congress. It created a civic renaissance by
    treating all veterans as first-class citizens. Empowering
    veterans proved and continues to prove to be the catalyst for
    revitalizing and driving America forward.
        The original GI Bill was heralded as a success and major
    contributor to America's stock of human capital that sped long-
    term economic growth across the country.
        Tom Brokaw wrote 8 million World War II veterans used the
    GI Bill, and Tom Brokaw wrote they were the greatest
    generations. Many believe, including me, that we are on the
    precipice of the next greatest generation, and that is no
    slight to the veterans in between, which includes myself.
        I am hopeful that this hearing will be somewhat uneventful,
    as VA has outlined support with some concerns and a caveat that
    they are subject to offsets for almost all of these bills or
    sections of bills that we provided views on. We are happy to
    work with the Committee to ensure we achieve the best possible
    outcome for veterans, servicemembers, and their families.
        We also note that many of these bills would require changes
    to our IT systems and will require staff and resources in order
    to successfully implement them.
        Finally, several bills require relatively short
    implementation times, and we would ask the Committee to
    consider the workload implications of implementing all of the
    bills, should they be signed into law.
        Rather than try and synopsize our views on each bill or
    section, I would like to return some of my time in my oral
    statement in order to have the opportunity for the Committee to
    ask questions and comment on my testimony.
        Additionally, there are a few bills under discussion today,
    which would affect programs or laws administered by other
    agencies. As outlined in my testimony, we respectfully defer
    S. 111 and S. 410 to the Department of Defense and S. 1218 to
    the Office of Personnel Management.
        Mr. Chairman, this concludes my statement. Thank you again
    for your generous interest in improving the lives of veterans
    and their families. I would be pleased to respond to any
    questions you or other Members of the Committee may have.
        As a matter of record, Mr. Flohr does not have an opening
    statement.
        [The prepared statement of Mr. Coy follows:]
     Prepared Statement of Curtis Coy, Deputy Under Secretary for Economic
       Opportunity, Veterans Benefits Administration, U.S. Department of
                                Veterans Affairs
        Good morning, Mr. Chairman and Members of the Committee. Joining me
    today is Brad Flohr, Senior Advisor for Compensation Service, (VBA). We
    are pleased to be here today to provide the views of the Department of
    Veterans Affairs (VA) on the following pending legislation affecting
    VA's compensation, education, and vocational rehabilitation programs:
    S. 75, S. 111, S. 410, S. 473, S. 758, S. 798, S. 844, S. 882, S. 1192,
    S. 1209, S. 1218, S. 1277, and a draft bill that would, among other
    things, consolidate the current amount of qualifying active duty
    service required after September 10, 2001 for payment of educational
    assistance at the 50-percent and 60-percent benefit levels under the
    Post-9/11 Educational Assistance Program, increase the amounts of
    educational assistance payable for pursuit of institutional courses and
    institutional courses with alternate phases of training in a business
    or industrial establishment under the Survivors' and Dependents'
    Educational Assistance Program, and authorize the use of Post-9/11
    educational assistance to pursue independent study programs accredited
    by an accreditor recognized by the Secretary of Education at
    educational institutions that are not institutions of higher learning
    (IHLs), i.e., area career and technical education schools that provide
    postsecondary level education and postsecondary vocational
    institutions.
                                     s. 75
        Section 3(a) of S. 75, the ``Arla Harrell Act,'' would require the
    Secretary of Veterans Affairs, in consultation with the Secretary of
    Defense, to reconsider all claims for compensation based on exposure to
    mustard gas or Lewisite during World War II that were denied before
    enactment of the bill. If the Secretary of Veterans Affairs or Defense
    makes a determination regarding whether a Veteran experienced full-body
    exposure to mustard gas or Lewisite, such Secretary shall presume that
    the Veteran experienced such exposure ``unless proven otherwise,'' and
    may not use information contained in the Department of Defense (DOD)
    and VA Chemical Biological Warfare Data base or any list of known
    testing sites for mustard gas or Lewisite as the sole reason for
    finding that the Veteran did not experience such exposure. Section
    3(a)(4) would require the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to submit a
    report to the appropriate congressional committees every 90 days
    following enactment of the bill specifying the reconsidered claims that
    were denied during the previous 90 days, including the rationale for
    each denial.
        Section 3(b) of the bill would also require the Secretaries of VA
    and Defense to establish a policy for processing future claims in
    connection with exposure to mustard gas or Lewisite within one year
    following enactment. In addition, under section 3(c), the Secretary of
    Defense would be required, within 180 days after enactment, to
    investigate and assess whether a site should be added to the DOD list
    of sites where mustard gas or Lewisite testing occurred based on
    whether the Army Corps of Engineers has uncovered evidence of such
    testing or more than two Veterans have submitted claims for VA
    compensation alleging such exposure and to submit a report to
    appropriate congressional committees on mustard gas and Lewisite
    experiments conducted by DOD during World War II, including a list of
    each location which such an experiment occurred, the dates of such
    experiment and the number of members of the Armed Forces who were
    exposed during such experiment. Section 3(d) would require the
    Secretary of Veterans Affairs, within 180 days after enactment, to
    investigate and assess actions taken to reach out to individuals who
    had mustard gas or Lewisite testing and the claims filed based on such
    testing and the percentage of such claims denied by VA and to submit a
    report on these findings to the appropriate congressional committees,
    along with a list of each location where mustard gas or Lewisite was
    tested.
        VA respects the intent of this legislation and, if it is enacted,
    will do all we can to ensure that Veterans who are determined to have
    been exposed receive every benefit to which they may be entitled.
    Providing Veterans with the care they need when they need it remains
    VA's top priority. We owe it to Veterans to ensure our decisions are
    fair, clear, and consistent across the board. We support the intent of
    the bill but have significant concerns that should be resolved prior to
    moving forward. The suggestion that VA ignore certain evidence, which
    may already be in a Veteran's claims file, would not only be unfair to
    other Veterans, but would conflict with other applicable provisions of
    law. Under 38 U.S.C. Sec. 1154(a), in determining whether a condition
    is related to service, VA must give ``due consideration'' to the
    ``places, types, and circumstances of'' a Veteran's service ``as shown
    by such Veteran's service record, [and] the official history of each
    organization in which such Veteran served.'' In addition, 38 U.S.C.
    Sec. 5107(b) requires VA to ``consider all information and lay and
    medical evidence of record in a case before the Secretary with respect
    to benefits under laws administered by the Secretary.'' Finally, under
    38 U.S.C. Sec. 1154(b), in the case of a Veteran who engaged in combat
    with the enemy, VA must accept lay or other evidence of service
    regarding service incurrence of a disease or injury, notwithstanding
    the absence of an official record of such incurrence. However, the
    Veteran must first establish that he or she engaged in combat with the
    enemy, which usually involves consideration of service department
    records, and the lay or other evidence must be ``consistent with the
    circumstances, conditions, or hardships of such service.''
        The proposed presumption of exposure to mustard gas and Lewisite,
    which would not require support by service department records or other
    objective evidence, would be unprecedented, if enacted. It appears that
    the presumption would be invoked solely on the basis of a Veteran's
    statement that such exposure occurred. Existing presumptions of an in-
    service exposure or event apply to discrete groups of Veterans whose
    service records reflect unique circumstances of service. Examples
    include Vietnam and Korean Veterans who are presumed exposed to Agent
    Orange during certain time periods, Veterans whose records indicate
    participation in World War II and cold war nuclear weapon detonations
    who are presumed exposed to ionizing radiation, and combat Veterans of
    all eras who are presumed exposed to the sort of traumatic stressor
    that can cause Post Traumatic Stress Disorder. Each of these sets of
    Veterans will have service department evidence of an in-service event
    or circumstance that may have triggered post-service disability.
        Under the standard proposed in the bill, any World War II Veteran
    who has claimed participation in a mustard gas or Lewisite test would
    be entitled to a presumption of full body exposure. This includes
    Veterans who may be confusing exposure to mustard gas or lewisite with
    more routine agents such as tear gas, or even to placebo agents. As a
    result, all prior World War II claimants essentially would be presumed
    exposed to mustard gas--even Veterans who participated in no chemical
    testing.
        With regard to a joint VA/DOD policy for processing future
    disability compensation claims based on exposure to mustard gas or
    Lewisite, VA notes that mustard gas and Lewisite claim policies and
    procedures are already in place and have and continue to lead to fair
    and equitable outcomes. VA promulgated a regulation in 1994 to address
    full-body mustard gas and Lewisite claims (see 38 CFR Sec. 3.316) and
    recently updated procedural guidance directing VA claims processors to
    consider all relevant evidence, including both service department data
    and information from outside sources.
        We share the Committee's concern for these Veterans, and we will
    continue to do everything we can, to provide care for those who have
    been identified by DOD as having had full body exposure to mustard gas
    and have been diagnosed with conditions due to that exposure.
    Additionally, we remain eager to work with the Committee to address the
    concerns we have with S. 75 as currently drafted. We value our Veterans
    and want to ensure that each and every Veteran seeking care is treated
    fairly under the law.
                                     s. 111
        S. 111, the ``Filipino Veterans Promise Act,'' would require the
    Secretary of Defense, in consultation with the Secretary of Veterans
    Affairs and military historians, to establish a process to determine
    whether a person who claims service as a member of the Philippine
    organized military forces under 38 U.S.C. Sec. 107(a) or Philippine
    Scouts under 38 U.S.C. Sec. 107(b) but who is not included in the
    Approved Revised Reconstructed Guerilla Roster of 1948 is in fact
    eligible for benefits under section 107(a) or (b).
        VA defers to DOD on S. 111. To address the concerns that prompted
    this legislation, the previous Administration's White House Initiative
    on Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders, in collaboration with the
    Office of Management and Budget and the Domestic Policy Council,
    created the FVEC Fund Interagency Working Group (IWG) in October 2012.
    The IWG was comprised of VA, the Department of Defense (DOD), and the
    National Archives and Record Administration (NARA), and was tasked with
    analyzing the process faced by Filipino Veterans in demonstrating
    eligibility for compensation in order to ensure that all applications
    receive thorough and fair review. This effort culminated in July 2013
    with a report from each member of the IWG and resulted in increased
    transparency and accelerated the processing of appeals within the
    existing framework.
        As a result of the IWG, VA created a special team to expedite the
    processing of FVEC appeals. In addition, VA created a standard
    notification letter for appellants requesting submission of all
    available service records and information. VA personnel also obtain
    copies of the Affidavit for Philippine Army Personnel (AGO Form 23) for
    appeals that are submitted without a Form 23 from the Adjutant General.
    VA anticipates these steps will further expedite the processing of
    appeals for the appellants with advanced age by minimizing the
    turnaround time for service verification requests and hearing requests.
                                     s. 410
        S. 410, the ``Shawna Hill Post-9/11 Education Benefits
    Transferability Act,'' would amend 38 U.S.C. Sec. 3319 to authorize
    transfer of unused Post-9/11 Education Assistance benefits to
    additional dependents upon the death of the originally designated
    dependent. The bill would apply to deaths occurring on or after
    August 1, 2009.
        VA defers to DOD. Currently, an individual cannot designate a new
    dependent to receive a transfer of entitlement to Post-9/11 Education
    Assistance after separating from the Armed Forces.
        Benefit costs are estimated to be $6.3 million in the first year,
    $20.5 million over 5 years, and $31.7 million over 10 years. There are
    no additional full-time equivalents (FTE) or general operating expenses
    (GOE) costs associated with the proposed legislation. There currently
    are no identified costs required for changes to the Long Term Solution
    (LTS).
                                     s. 473
        Section 2 of S. 473, the ``Educational Development for Troops and
    Veterans Act of 2017,'' would amend 38 U.S.C. Sec. 3301(1)(B) to
    include, in the case of members of the Reserve Components of the Armed
    Forces, service on active duty under a call or order to active duty
    under 10 U.S.C. Sec. Sec. 12304a and 12304b as service constituting
    active duty for purposes of Post-9/11 GI Bill benefits.
        VA supports section 2 of the bill, subject to the Congress
    identifying acceptable offsets for the additional benefit costs. Under
    the current law, two Reserve Component members who are serving side-by-
    side on active duty may not receive similar benefits under the Post-9/
    11 GI Bill. The active duty time of a Reserve Component member who
    volunteers for active duty under10 U.S.C. Sec. 12301(d) is counted
    toward the aggregate required for Post-9/11 GI Bill eligibility. By
    contrast, the active duty time of a Reserve Component member who was
    involuntarily activated under 10 U.S.C. Sec. Sec. 12304a or 12304b for
    similar duty does not count toward the aggregate for Post-9/11 GI Bill
    eligibility. This proposal would allow Reserve Component members who
    are involuntarily activated under 10 U.S.C. Sec. Sec. 12304a or 12304b
    to receive the same benefits as those Reserve Component members who
    have volunteered to perform duty under 10 U.S.C. Sec. 12301(d).
        Benefit costs are estimated to be $0 in the first year, $53.7
    million over 5 years, and $140.5 million over 10 years. There are no
    additional FTE or GOE costs associated with section 2. We have not,
    however, fully determined if there would be any costs associated with
    any information technology (IT) changes to support the change.
        VA defers to DOD with regard to sections 3 and 7 of the bill, and
    to the Department of Education on sections 5 and 6 of the bill.
        Section 4 of the bill would amend 38 U.S.C. Sec. 3103(f) to extend
    the eligibility period for participation in a vocational rehabilitation
    program for Reserve Component members who are involuntarily activated
    under 10 U.S.C. Sec. Sec. 12304a or 12304b and are unable to
    participate in such program by length of time the Reserve Component
    member serves on active duty plus four months.
        VA supports section 4. Currently 38 U.S.C. Sec. 3103(f) provides an
    extension of the eligibility period for reservists who are ordered to
    active duty under certain provisions of title 10, United States Code.
    Section 4 would provide the same extended eligibility period for
    reservists who are prevented from participating in a vocational
    rehabilitation program during their period of eligibility because they
    are ordered to active duty to provide assistance in response to a major
    disaster or emergency, or to augment the active forces for a preplanned
    mission in support of a combatant command.
        Section 8 would add a new paragraph to 38 U.S.C. Sec. 3313 to
    provide for payment of the monthly housing allowance (MHA) on a pro
    rata basis for any period in which a reservist or individual pursuing a
    program of education is not performing active duty. This amendment
    would be applicable to a quarter, semester or term commencing on or
    after August 1, 2016.
        VA supports section 8 as it would be equitable to prorate MHA
    payments for each day of the month an individual is not serving on
    active duty. We note, however, that section 8 would result in a
    decrease in the MHA for the month in which a reservist is ordered on
    active duty and in an increase in the MHA for the month in which a
    reservist is released from active duty. As a result, the amount of MHA
    that each reservist receives would depend upon the dates on which the
    reservist entered and was released from active duty. We note as well
    that new section 3313(j) would not apply to other persons on ``active
    duty'' as defined in 38 U.S.C. Sec. 3301(1)(A) and (C). We have not,
    however, fully determined if there were to be any costs associated with
    IT changes.
                                     s. 758
        Section 2(a) of S. 758, the ``Janey Ensminger Act of 2017,'' would
    require, within one year of the date of the enactment of the bill and
    at least once every three years thereafter, the Secretary of Health and
    Human Services, through the Administrator of the Agency for Toxic
    Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR) to review the scientific
    literature relevant to the relationship between the employment or
    residence of individuals at Camp Lejeune, North Carolina, for not fewer
    than 30 days between August 1, 1953, and December 21, 1987, and
    specific illness or conditions incurred by those individuals. ATSDR
    would also be required to determine each illness or condition for which
    there is evidence that exposure to a toxic substance at Camp Lejeune
    during the specified time period may be a cause of such illness or
    condition, and to categorize the evidence of the connection of the
    illness or condition to exposure. ATSDR would be required to publish in
    the Federal Register and online a list of conditions or illnesses for
    which a determination has been made that exposure may be a cause of
    such condition or illness, and to provide bibliographic citations for
    reviewed literature.
        While section 2(a) would impose obligations on to the Department of
    Health and Human Services, we do have several concerns with this
    provision. Specifically, we are concerned that requiring ATSDR to
    evaluate the likely causation between exposures and health effects is
    unnecessary given VA's current reliance on the National Academies of
    Science, Engineering, and Medicine (NASEM). In addition to being
    duplicative, the proposed role of ATSDR would, in our view, be a less
    independent process than what is used by NASEM. Finally, we find the
    evidence bar that would be set for ATSDR's review misleading--the focus
    on causation implies a level of confidence not scientifically possible
    for attributing the low doses likely received in this context with the
    chronic health effects of interest.
        Section 2(b)(1) would amend 38 U.S.C. Sec. 1710(e)(1)(F) to make
    Veterans eligible for care for any condition or illness for which the
    evidence of connection to exposure to toxic substances at Camp Lejeune
    is categorized as sufficient or modest by ATSDR. It would also require
    VA to continue providing hospital care and medical services to Veterans
    who have received such care or services under section 1710(e)(1)(F),
    notwithstanding a determination that the evidence of connection of an
    illness or condition and exposure is not categorized as sufficient or
    modest.
        Section 2(b)(2) would make a similar amendment to 38 U.S.C.
    Sec. 1787 to require VA to continue providing hospital care and medical
    services to eligible individuals notwithstanding that their illness or
    condition is no longer described in section 1710(e)(1)(F). Section
    2(b)(3) would require, for FY 2017 and FY 2018, the Secretary to
    transfer $2 million from funds made available to VA for medical support
    and compliance to the Chief Business Office and Financial Services
    Center of the Department to be used to continue building and enhancing
    the claims processing system, eligibility system, and web portal for
    the Camp Lejeune Family Member Program.
        VA does not support sections 2(b)(1) and (b)(2), as they would
    effectively defer Veteran health care eligibility decisions to ATSDR.
    This is inappropriate for several reasons. First, VA insists that an
    internationally accepted standard of categorization be used to
    characterize the strength of evidence, such as that used by NASEM. A
    consistent standard is necessary to ensure fairness across time,
    population subgroup, chemical, and health endpoint. VA strongly advises
    against the use of the terms ``cause'' or ``causation'' in the context
    of the types of very low exposures received and the prevalence of the
    chronic health effects identified. Additionally, we recommend that
    ATSDR reports be submitted to VA in an advisory capacity only, as has
    been done with previous reports from NASEM. NASEM, in conducting
    independent reviews on behalf of VA, assembles a multidisciplinary
    committee that represents a breadth of knowledge relevant to the
    specific exposure scenario that is significantly more expansive than
    the subject matter expertise within ATSDR. Thus, VA should have the
    opportunity to review these reports and seek external opinions, if
    necessary, to make determinations about policy changes. If VA must rely
    on ATSDR reports in any capacity, we would suggest that the bill
    require that these reports be subjected to a rigorous, external,
    independent peer review process, consistent with OMB's Information
    Quality Bulletin for Peer Review, before being published.
        If enacted, VA would require additional resources to assist the
    Veterans and family members who would become eligible for hospital care
    and medical services, while continuing to care for Veterans who remain
    eligible following a determination that that the evidence of a causal
    connection is not categorized as sufficient or modest. Section 2(b)(3)
    would transfer $2 million to the VA Chief Business Office and Financial
    Services Center to be used to enhance the Camp Lejeune Family Member
    Program's claim processing system, eligibility system, and web portal.
    While these funds could be used to enhance these systems, VA does not
    believe this would be a responsible use of funds. The Camp Lejeune
    Family Member Program is a small program with a volume of claims that
    VA does not believe warrants having separate claims processing and
    eligibility systems. VA prefers to focus on the creation of a single
    standardized claims processing and eligibility system for all programs
    supported by the Office of Community Care. We also note that the
    language does not appropriate additional funds--it merely requires the
    transfer of funds from other sources, which would impede VA's ability
    to furnish services for other Veterans and beneficiaries.
        We have several technical comments on the bill as well. First, we
    note that the time period specified in current 38 U.S.C.
    Sec. 1710(e)(1)(F) ends on December 31, 1987; whereas, the time period
    in proposed 42 U.S.C. Sec. 399V-7(a)(1)(A) of the Public Health Service
    Act would end on December 21, 1987. This should be changed in any
    further revisions of this legislation. Additionally, we note that
    section 2(b)(3) of the bill would apply to Fiscal Year (FY) 2017 and
    2018, but because FY 2017 ends in 3= months, we believe this should be
    updated. Last, we recommend the reference to the Chief Business Office
    be updated to the Office of Community Care.
        VA cannot provide a cost estimate for the bill because we do not
    know for which illnesses and conditions, if any, ASTDR would determine
    there is evidence that exposure to a toxic substance at Camp Lejeune
    during the specified time period may be a cause of such illness or
    condition at the ``sufficient'' or ``modest'' standard. The cost to VA
    of implementing this provision would depend upon which illnesses or
    conditions ATSDR finds satisfy these requirements, how many Veterans
    and family members will qualify for hospital care and medical services
    for those conditions or illnesses, and the average cost for the
    necessary hospital care and medical services of those conditions or
    illnesses.
                                     s. 798
        S. 798, the ``Yellow Ribbon Improvement Act of 2017,'' would amend
    38 U.S.C. Sec. 3317(a) to provide that recipients of the Marine Gunnery
    Sergeant John David Fry scholarship are covered under the Yellow Ribbon
    GI Education Enhancement Program and to expand the Program to include
    instances in which the amount of educational assistance provided to
    covered individuals for pursuit of a program of education leading to a
    degree while on active duty or for pursuit of a program of education on
    a half-time basis or less does not cover the full cost of established
    charges.
        VA supports the intent of S. 798, subject to Congress identifying
    acceptable offsets for the additional benefit costs. Also, VA estimates
    that implementation of the bill would require one year from the date of
    enactment to make the changes to the Benefits Delivery Network, VA
    Online Certification of Enrollment system (VA-ONCE), and Long term
    Solution system (LTS) necessary to implement the bill.
                                     s. 844
        S. 844, the ``GI Bill Fairness Act of 2017,'' would amend 38 U.S.C.
    Sec. 3301(1)(B) to count the time that a reservist is ordered to active
    duty to receive authorized medical care, be medically evaluated for
    disability, or complete a required DOD health care study, as active
    duty for purposes of the Post-9/11 Veterans Educational Assistance Act
    of 2008. The amendment would be retroactive to immediately after
    enactment of the Post-9/11 Veterans Educational Assistance Act of 2008.
        VA supports the intent of the bill, regarding the proposed changes
    to qualifying active duty service under the Post-9/11 GI Bill, subject
    to the Congress identifying acceptable offsets for the additional
    benefit costs. We note, however, that this change to the eligibility
    criteria would require VA to make modifications to the type of data
    exchanged between DOD and VA through the VA/DOD Identity Repository and
    displayed in the Veteran Information System. In addition, new rules
    would need to be programmed into LTS in order to calculate eligibility
    based on service described in new section 3301(1)(B) and to allow for
    retroactive benefit payments. VA estimates that it would need one year
    from enactment to complete these changes.
        Benefit costs for S. 844 would be $39.2 million for the first year,
    $281.5 million over 5 years, and $542.9 million over 10 years. There
    are no additional FTE or GOE costs associated with S. 844.
                                     s. 882
        S. 882 would amend 38 U.S.C. Sec. 3311(b) to provide for payment of
    Post-9/11 GI Bill educational assistance to individuals awarded the
    Purple Heart for service in the Armed Forces occurring on or after
    September 11, 2001, at the same rate (100%) as for individuals entitled
    to Post-9/11 GI Bill educational assistance who served at least 3 years
    on active duty or who served at least 30 days on active duty and were
    discharged for a service-connected disability. The bill would also
    allow such Purple Heart recipients to participate in the Yellow Ribbon
    G.I. Education Enhancement Program.
        VA supports the intent of the proposed bill. However, we note that
    the proposed bill contains no character of discharge requirement for
    payment of Post-9/11 GI Bill educational assistance to individuals
    awarded the Purple Heart. Consequently, an individual who receives the
    Purple Heart for service on or after September 11, 2001, and
    subsequently receives a dishonorable discharge would nonetheless be
    eligible for Post-9/11 GI Bill educational assistance at the 100-
    percent rate. This could be problematic to those recipients of other
    noteworthy medals such as the Medal of Honor, Silver Star, Bronze Star,
    etc. who may have a dishonorable discharge. If Congress wishes to
    address this issue, we recommend that the bill be amended to require
    that the individual also be discharged as described in section 3311(c).
        Because VA would need to modify its existing information technology
    (IT) system to implement this bill, there would be associated IT costs.
    Specifically, VA would need to modify the Long-Term Solution, VA's
    Post-9/11 GI Bill processing system, to verify eligibility for Purple
    Heart recipients. VA would also need to make changes to the VA
    application forms (VA Form 22-1990 and Veterans On-Line Application
    (VONAPP)) to identify Purple Heart recipients. Costs related to this
    bill are not available at this time.
                                    s. 1192
        S. 1192, the ``Veterans To Enhance Studies Through Accessibility
    Act of 2017,'' or ``Veterans TEST Accessibility Act,'' would amend 38
    U.S.C. Sec. Sec. 3315(c) and 3315A to allow for the proration of
    entitlement charges for licensing and certification examinations and
    national tests under the Post-9/11 GI Bill based on the actual amount
    of the fee charged for the test. The bill would also add educational
    assistance for a chapter-33 beneficiary for a ``national test that
    evaluates prior learning and knowledge and provides an opportunity for
    course credit at an institution of higher learning as so described.''
    The amendments made by this section would apply to a test taken more
    than 90 days after the date of the enactment of this legislation.
        VA supports S. 1192 because it would benefit Post-9/11 GI Bill
    beneficiaries by reducing the negative impact of test reimbursement on
    their remaining benefit entitlement and increasing the months of
    training available for the beneficiaries, thus expanding educational
    opportunities. Under current sections 3315 and 3315A, an individual is
    charged a portion of his entitlement for the reimbursement of fees
    associated with a licensing or certification exam, or a national test,
    in whole months. Thus, VA charges an individual one month of
    entitlement for each $1,832.96 reimbursed for the academic year
    beginning on August 1, 2016, rounded to the nearest whole month,
    regardless of the cost of the test.
        As noted in VA's FY 2017 legislative proposal, the Department
    believes the law should be amended to charge entitlement for
    reimbursement of VA approved exams at a prorated number of days of
    entitlement based on the ratio of the cost of the test to the statutory
    amount. However, it should be noted that, as S. 1192 is currently
    drafted, sections 3315 and 3315A would no longer specify the amount of
    benefit payment equaling one month of entitlement. VA suggests that the
    draft language be amended in order to include that amount.
        Benefit costs are estimated to be $125,000 in the first year,
    $676,000 over 5 years, and $1.4 million over 10 years. There are no
    additional FTE or GOE costs associated with the proposed legislation.
    We have not, however, fully determined if there would be any costs
    associated with IT changes.
                                    s. 1209
        S. 1209 would amend 38 U.S.C. Sec. 1562(a) to increase the amount
    of special pension for Medal of Honor recipients to $3000, effective
    180 days after the date of enactment, but if this date is not the first
    day of a month, the first day of the first month beginning after the
    date that is 180 days after enactment. If the effective day is prior to
    December 1, 2018, the monthly rate of the pension would not be
    increased by the cost of living adjustment (COLA) for FY 2019, and the
    annual COLAs would resume effective December 1, 2018.
        VA supports an increase in the pension for these heroes, subject to
    the Congress identifying acceptable offsets for the additional benefit
    costs. Currently our records show there are 72 living recipients of the
    Medal of Honor.
        Benefit costs are estimated to be $717,000 in the first year, $6.5
    million over 5 years, and $14.6 million over 10 years. There are no
    additional FTE or GOE costs associated with the proposed legislation.
                                    s. 1218
        S. 1218, the ``Empowering Federal Employment for Veterans Act of
    2017,'' or the ``Empowering FED Vets Act,'' would establish, at VA and
    other covered agencies, a Veterans Employment Program Office. This
    Office would, among other things, promote employment opportunities for
    Veterans, develop and implement Veterans recruitment programs, and
    training programs for Veterans with disabilities. The Office would also
    provide mandatory annual training on Veterans' employment issues to
    human resources employees and hiring managers, including training on
    Veterans' preference and hiring authorities.
        We defer to the Office of Personnel Management on S. 1218 because
    of the governmentwide impact of the bill.
                                    s. 1277
        S. 1277, the ``Veteran Employment Through Technology Education
    Courses Act,'' would require the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to carry
    out a pilot program for five years under which eligible Veterans who
    are entitled to educational assistance would be able to enroll in high
    technology programs of education. The term ``high technology program of
    education'' would be defined as a program offered by an entity other
    than an IHL that does not lead to a degree and provides instruction in
    computer programming, computer software, media application, data
    processing, or information sciences. Within 180 days after the date of
    enactment, VA, in consultation with the State Approving Agencies VA
    considers applicable, would be required to enter into contracts with
    providers of such programs that have been operational for at least two
    years. Under these contracts, VA would agree to pay 25 percent of the
    cost of providing the program of education upon enrollment of an
    eligible Veteran; 25 percent upon the Veteran's completion of the
    program; and 50 percent upon the employment of the Veteran in a field
    related to the course of study following completion of the program.
    Preference would be given to a qualified provider that offers tuition
    reimbursement for students who complete a program of education offered
    by the provider and do not find full-time meaningful employment within
    180 days after completion of the program. The bill would also authorize
    VA to pay a MHA to eligible Veterans enrolled in this program on a
    full-time basis. The bill would authorize appropriations of $15 million
    for each fiscal year during which the pilot program operates.
        VA has significant concerns regarding implementation and
    administration of the pilot program. The bill would require VA to enter
    into contracts with multiple providers of high technology programs of
    education. However, the bill provides little guidance regarding the
    applicable standards for choosing qualified providers other than
    requiring that the provider have been operational for two years, verify
    that the credentials it plans to offer have demonstrated market value
    based on the employment and earnings of its participants in the
    programs, and has the ability to evaluate job placement rates and
    earnings through means other than survey data or self-reported data.
    This is a departure from VA's current approval criteria for other
    programs of education.
        VA estimates that it would require 12 to 18 months from the date of
    enactment to make the IT system changes necessary to implement the
    proposed legislation and the acquisition timeline for $15 million in
    contracts.
        The costs for S. 1277 are estimated to be $15 million in the first
    year, $75 million over 5 years, and $150 million over 10 years.
                            gi bill discussion draft
        Section 2 would amend 38 U.S.C. Sec. 3311(b) by consolidating the
    current amount of qualifying active duty service required after
    September 10, 2001, for payment of educational assistance at the 50-
    percent and 60-percent benefit levels under the Post-9/11 Educational
    Assistance Program. As a result, the current benefit level requiring at
    least six months but less than twelve months of active-duty service
    would be eliminated. This means that an individual with aggregate
    service of at least six months but less than eighteen months of active
    duty service (excluding entry and skill training) would qualify at the
    60-percent benefit level.
        VA supports the proposed legislation, subject to the Congress
    identifying acceptable offsets for the substantial benefit costs,
    because it would increase benefits for Veterans and Servicemembers.
    However, VA is concerned with the implementation of this bill. As
    drafted, the bill does not contain an effective date. Assuming that
    this increase in rates would be effective on the date of enactment, LTS
    would be unable to immediately accommodate these increases in benefit
    levels. As a result, claims examiners would have to review and make
    manual adjustments to affected claims, which would negatively impact
    claims processing timeliness and the delivery of education benefits. VA
    estimates that it would require one year from the date of enactment to
    make the IT system changes necessary to implement the proposed
    legislation. We have not, however, fully determined if there would be
    any costs associated with IT changes.
        Finally, additional conforming amendments to title 38, United
    States Code, would be required based upon the changes made by amending
    sections 3311(b) and 3313(c)(1).
        Benefits costs for section 2 would be $124.6 million in the first
    year, $677.8 million over 5 years and $1.5 billion over 10 years. There
    are no additional FTE or GOE costs associated with section 2.
        Section 3 would add section 3320 to title 38, United States Code,
    which would authorize VA to provide up to nine months of additional
    Post-9/11 GI Bill benefits to an individual who has used all of his or
    her Post-9/11 GI Bill educational assistance and is enrolled in a
    program of education leading to a post-secondary degree that requires
    more than the standard 128 semester (or 192 quarter) credit hours for
    completion in biological or biomedical science, physical science,
    science technologies or technicians, computer and information science
    and support services, mathematics or statistics, engineering,
    engineering technologies or an engineering-related field, a health
    profession or related program, or medical residency program, or has
    earned a post-secondary degree in one of these fields and is enrolled
    in a program of education leading to a teaching certification. Priority
    would be given to individuals who are entitled to 100 percent of Post-
    9/11 GI Bill benefits and to those who require the most credit hours.
    Each eligible individual would be entitled to a lump sum payment that
    is the lesser of the amount available under 38 U.S.C. Sec. 3313 for
    nine months of the program of education in which the individual is
    enrolled or $30,000. These additional benefits would not be
    transferrable to a dependent. The total amount of benefits paid to all
    eligible individuals could not exceed $100 million for any fiscal year.
        VA supports the intent of the bill subject to the availability of
    funds. However, VA has concerns about the eligibility criteria for the
    additional educational assistance. As currently drafted, individuals
    who have been enrolled in a science, technology, engineering, and
    mathematics (STEM) program of education for only one day, week, or
    month at the point at which they exhaust the 36 months of chapter-33
    entitlement would be eligible for an additional nine months of
    educational assistance. Additionally, individuals who enroll in a STEM
    program for the first time after they have exhausted their chapter-33
    entitlement in a non-STEM program would also be eligible for an
    additional nine months of entitlement. We do not believe that providing
    additional benefits under these circumstances would serve the purpose
    of the legislation. This bill is designed for programs that require
    more than the standard 128 semester (or 192 quarter) credit hours for
    completion. However, the additional nine months of educational
    assistance would not enable individuals who previously enrolled in a
    limited number of STEM classes or have not previously enrolled in a
    STEM program to complete a STEM program.
        To implement this legislation, VA would need to make modifications
    to VA-ONCE and LTS in order to verify eligibility and allow for the
    award of additional months of educational assistance. VA estimates that
    it would require one year from the date of enactment to make the IT
    changes necessary to implement the proposed legislation.
        Benefit costs for section 3 would be $100 million in the first
    year, $500 million over 5 years, and $1 billion over 10 years. There
    are no additional FTE or GOE costs associated with section 3.
        Section 4 would increase the amounts of educational assistance
    payable for pursuit of institutional courses under the Survivors' and
    Dependents' Educational Assistance Program. An eligible person would be
    entitled to a monthly allowance of $1224 for full-time coursework, $967
    for three-quarter time, and $710 for half-time coursework. The
    increases would be effective 540 days after the date of enactment of
    the bill.
        VA supports section 4, subject to the Congress identifying
    acceptable offsets for the additional benefit costs, because it would
    provide additional funding for individuals currently utilizing the
    benefit for pursuit of these types of programs. These rates were last
    increased in 2003 and have only been increased through an annual cost
    of living allowance in subsequent years.
        Benefit costs for section 4 are estimated to be $0 in the first
    year, $586.3 million over 5 years, and $1.7 billion over 10 years.
    There are no FTE or GOE costs associated with section 4.
        Section 5 would amend 38 U.S.C. Sec. 3680A(a)(4) to authorize the
    use of Post-9/11 educational assistance to pursue independent study
    programs accredited by an accreditor recognized by the Secretary of
    Education at the following educational institutions that are not IHLs:
    area career and technical education schools as defined in 20 U.S.C.
    Sec. 2302(3) that provide postsecondary level education and
    postsecondary vocational institutions as defined in 20 U.S.C.
    Sec. 1002(c). Currently, under section 3680A(a)(4), the Secretary may
    only approve enrollment in an ``accredited independent study program
    (including open circuit television) leading (A) to a standard college
    degree, or (B) to a certificate that reflects educational attainment
    offered by an institution of higher learning.'' As such, VA is not
    authorized to pay educational assistance for independent study courses
    at an institution that is not considered to be an IHL.
        VA supports section 5, subject to the Congress identifying
    acceptable offsets for the additional benefit costs. This section would
    expand VA's approval authority to pay Post-9/11 GI Bill benefits for
    enrollment in accredited independent study certificate programs at
    educational institutions that are not IHLs but are accredited by an
    accreditor recognized by the Secretary of Education and at career and
    technical schools that lead to industry-recognized credentials and
    certificates for employment. VA understands and appreciates the
    importance of career and technical education courses and the growth in
    the utilization of online and other 21st century training modalities in
    the delivery of instruction for both degree and non-degree programs. As
    such, expanding the approval authority for certain independent study
    programs would be in the best interests of VA education beneficiaries.
        We note that, because this bill would amend 38 U.S.C. Sec. 3680A,
    the expansion of benefits would not be limited to Post-9/11 GI Bill
    benefits. If the intent of the bill is to limit this expansion to
    chapter-33 beneficiaries, the provision should be codified in chapter
    33 or the bill should be revised to incorporate this limitation. We
    have not, however, fully determined if there would be any costs
    associated with IT changes.
        Benefit costs are estimated to be $49.7 million in the first year,
    $268.4 million over 5 years, and $595.7 million over 10 years. There
    are no additional FTE or GOE costs associated with the proposed
    legislation.
        Section 6 would provide for the calculation of the amount of the
    MHA payable under the Post-9/11 Educational Assistance Program based on
    the location of the campus where the individual physically participates
    in a majority of classes, rather than the location of the IHL at which
    the individual is enrolled. The bill would apply to the initial
    enrollment in a program of education on or after the date of enactment
    of the legislation.
        VA supports section 6 because it would make MHA payments
    commensurate with the cost of housing in the location where students
    actually attend classes. In particular, this bill would address two
    situations in which the current MHA is likely not aligned with the cost
    of living where an individual actually attends classes: (1) courses
    that are held at the branch or satellite location of an IHL rather than
    at the IHL's main campus; and (2) online degree programs that require
    some in-residence courses. We believe that this bill would also remove
    the issue of the amount of the MHA as a factor in choosing a school and
    instead allow students to focus on the educational program when
    choosing an IHL.
        VA is unable to determine if any costs or savings would result from
    this legislation because of a lack of data on trainees who attend
    school at a branch location with a zip code that is different than the
    main campus. There are no additional FTEs or GOE associated with this
    bill.
        Section 7 would amend 38 U.S.C. Sec. 3485(a)(4) by removing the
    expiration date for a qualifying work-study activity for which an
    individual may be paid an additional educational assistance allowance.
    These activities are providing outreach services to Servicemembers and
    Veterans furnished under the supervision of a State approving agency
    (SAA) employee and hospital and domiciliary care and medical treatment
    to Veterans in a State home and any activity relating to administration
    of a national cemetery or state Veterans' cemetery.
        VA supports section 7 because it would permanently authorize work-
    study allowances for individuals who are performing work-study
    activities that involve providing services to or on behalf of
    Servicemembers and Veterans.
        The benefits costs for section 7 are estimated to be $0 for the
    first year, $277,000 over 5 years, and $6.6 million over 10 years.
    There are no FTE or GOE costs associated with section 7.
        Section 8 would amend 38 U.S.C. Sec. 3319(f)(2) to allow dependents
    to whom entitlement to Post-9/11 GI Bill benefits is transferred by an
    individual who subsequently dies to transfer some or all of such
    entitlement to another dependent to whom entitlement was previously
    transferred by such individual.
        VA supports section 8. Currently, if an individual who has
    transferred entitlement subsequently dies, no additional changes to the
    transferred entitlement are authorized. We believe that an eligible
    dependent should be given the authority to transfer entitlement to
    another eligible dependent. However, we interpret section 8 to provide
    that if a Servicemember or Veteran does not transfer the maximum
    entitlement to a dependent, the amount that was not transferred would
    be forfeited. We do not have costs at this time.
        Section 9 would amend chapter 36 of title 38, United States Code,
    to add a new section 3697B, titled ``On-campus educational and
    vocational counseling.'' New section 3697B would: (1) require VA to
    provide educational and vocational counseling services for Veterans at
    locations on IHL campuses as selected by VA; (2) provide criteria for
    the selection of IHLs to participate in these services, and (3) require
    that no later than 180 days after enactment, and each year thereafter,
    VA will submit a report to Congress regarding the average ratio of
    counselors providing these services to Veterans at each location, a
    description of the services provided, and recommendations for improving
    the provision of these services.
        VA supports the objectives of providing veteran students with
    quality, readily available counseling services. However, we believe
    that this bill would duplicate the VetSuccess on Campus (VSOC) program,
    which VA already administers under the Secretary's authority in 38
    U.S.C. Sec. Sec. 3115 and 3116. VSOC aims to help Veterans,
    Servicemembers, and their qualified dependents succeed and thrive
    through a coordinated delivery of on-campus benefits assistance and
    counseling, leading to completion of their education and preparing them
    to enter the labor market in viable careers.
        VA, however, is concerned about the language in section 9 regarding
    the population to be served. Currently as outlined in 38 U.S.C.
    Sec. Sec. 3697 and 3697A, educational and vocational counseling
    services are available to Servicemembers, Veterans, and, in some
    instances, their eligible dependents. If the Congress were to enact
    this bill, VA recommends that Servicemembers and their eligible
    dependents be added to section 9(a), in order to preserve the benefit
    for the full population served by the existing VSOC program. In
    addition, VA does not believe that reporting on the ratio of
    individuals served to counselors would accurately reflect the amount of
    services provided because counselors often have multiple contacts with
    an individual and handle multiple issues for the individual. We believe
    that it would be more accurate to report on the number of contacts in
    which services were provided by a counselor.
        Section 10(a) would amend 38 U.S.C. Sec. 3312 to provide that, if
    VA finds that an individual was forced to discontinue pursuit of a
    course or courses under the Post-9/11 GI Bill as a result of permanent
    closure of an institution or did not receive credit or lost training
    time toward completion of the program for that course or courses, any
    payment of educational assistance to the individual for pursuit of the
    course or courses would not be charged against the individual's
    entitlement to benefits under the Post-9/11 GI Bill or counted against
    the aggregate period for which 38 U.S.C. Sec. 3695 limits the
    individual's receipt of educational assistance. The period for which
    educational assistance will not be charged against entitlement or
    counted toward the aggregate period would not exceed the aggregate
    period permitted under section 3695. This new subsection would apply
    with respect to courses and programs of education discontinued in FY
    2015 or thereafter.
        Section 10(b) would amend 38 U.S.C. Sec. 3680(a) to authorize the
    Secretary of Veterans Affairs to continue to pay a MHA to eligible
    persons during periods when schools are temporarily closed based on an
    Executive order of the President or due to an emergency situation for
    up to four weeks in a 12-month period. The MHA would also be payable
    during periods following a permanent school closure until the earlier
    of the date of the term, quarter, or semester during which the school
    closure occurred and the date that is four months after the date of the
    school closure.
        VA supports section 10. The closure of educational institutions
    while GI Bill beneficiaries are actively pursuing an approved program
    of education or training negatively impacts Veterans and eligible
    dependents. While VA can pay benefits for the term, quarter, or
    semester up to the time of the school's closure, the student is charged
    entitlement for the period prior to the closure for which benefits are
    received, even if the student does not earn any credit toward
    completion of a program. In some instances, this could result in a
    beneficiary exhausting chapter-33 entitlement prior to being able to
    complete a program at another institution. Allowing VA to restore
    entitlement and to continue to pay MHAs in the event of a school
    closure would be in the best interests of Veterans and eligible
    dependents because it would help ensure that they are able to
    successfully complete their educational goals.
        We note that there appears to be a discrepancy between the new
    subsection (d)(2), which applies to an individual who meets the
    criteria of both (A) and (B) of that subsection, and the applicability
    provision in section 2(a)(2) of the bill, which describes new
    subsection (d) as applying if the criteria of either paragraph (A) or
    paragraph (B) of subsection (d)(2) are met.
        We have not, however, fully determined if there were to be any
    costs associated with IT changes.
        Section 11 would amend 38 U.S.C. Sec. 3684(a) to require
    educational institutions to treat courses that begin seven or fewer
    days before or after the first day of an academic term as beginning on
    the first day of the academic term for purposes of reporting enrollment
    under section 3684.
        VA understands that section 11 would eliminate the separate
    reporting requirement for reporting for courses that begin seven or
    fewer days before the first day of an academic term. We note however
    that VA policy guidance currently does not require schools to
    separately certify classes that begin within 7 calendar days after the
    start of the term, quarter, or semester. Nonetheless, it should be
    noted that amended section 3684(a) would not change the period(s) for
    which VA educational assistance can be paid, which are codified in 38
    U.S.C. Sec. 3680(a) and in the various education benefit chapters. As a
    result, the reporting period under amended section 3684(a) would be
    inconsistent with the enrollment period for which VA pays educational
    assistance.
        Section 12(a) would require VA, to the maximum extent possible, to
    make changes and improvements to the VBA IT program to ensure that, to
    the maximum extent possible, original and supplemental claims for
    educational assistance under chapter 33 are adjudicated electronically
    and that rules-based processing is used to make decisions on such
    claims ``with little human intervention.'' Section 12(d) would
    authorize $30 million for FY 2018 through FY 2019 to implement the
    changes.
        VA concurs that there is room to improve the automation of the
    processing of education benefits claims. VBA is currently working with
    the Office of Information and Technology to assess IT capabilities.
    While VA is currently prioritizing replacement of legacy systems due to
    the risk of maintaining these systems, VA is also considering
    additional LTS functionality needed to provide faster and more accurate
    claims processing for those who apply for Post-9/11 GI Bill benefits
    and submit supplemental claims. The current average processing time for
    eligibility claims, which are not automated and are very labor-
    intensive, is 22 days. During calendar year 2017, an average of over
    5,200 supplemental (reenrollment) claims were processed automatically
    each day using LTS, without human intervention. The remainder of
    supplemental claims are processed using partial automation. Section
    12(b) would require VA to submit to Congress an implementation plan
    within 180 days after enactment of the bill and a report on
    implementation within one year of enactment. VA, however, would need at
    least 24 months from the date of enactment to report on changes due to
    the time needed for the procurement process, systems development,
    testing, and deployment.
        Section 13 would add 38 U.S.C. Sec. 3699 to authorize the Secretary
    to make available to educational institutions offering courses of
    education that have been approved for educational assistance to which a
    Veteran or individual is entitled information about the amount of
    assistance to which the Veteran or individual is entitled. The
    information would be provided via a secure IT system accessible by the
    educational institution and would be updated regularly.
        VA supports the intent of section 13. However, section 13 would
    present implementation challenges for VA. Currently, VA provides the
    amount of a Veteran's entitlement (original and remaining) and other
    information such as the delimiting date for educational assistance to
    the educational institution in which the individual is enrolled through
    VA-ONCE. This information is available for individuals training under
    chapter 30 of title 38, United States Code, and chapters 1606 and 1607
    of title 10, United States Code, after VA processes an award for
    education benefits. This functionality is not currently available for
    Veterans or other individuals training under chapters 32, 33, or 35 of
    title 38, United States Code; therefore, VA would need to make
    programming changes to VA-ONCE in order to make this information
    available to these beneficiaries as well. We note in this regard that
    there are very few individuals who remain eligible for chapter 32
    benefits. We have not, however, fully determined if there were to be
    any costs associated with IT changes.
        There are no benefit costs or additional FTE or GOE costs
    associated with section 13.
        Section 14 would amend 38 U.S.C. Sec. 3692(c) to re-authorize the
    Veterans' Advisory Committee on Education (VACOE) through December 31,
    2022. VACOE provides advice to the Secretary on the administration of
    education and training programs for Veterans and Servicemembers,
    members of the National Guard and Reserve Components, and dependents of
    Veterans under chapters 30, 32, 33, and 35 of title 38, United States
    Code, and chapter 1606 of title 10, United States Code.
        VA supports section 14. If reauthorized, the Secretary would be
    able to continue to receive recommendations and seek advice from VACOE
    in order to enhance VA's educational assistance programs.
        GOE costs are $51,000 for the first year and $255,000 for 5 years.
        Section 15 would amend section 3684(c) of title 38, United States
    Code, to revise requirements governing reporting fees payable to
    educational institutions and joint apprenticeship training committees.
    Section 15 would increase the annual fee to $16 for each eligible
    individual enrolled in VA's education and vocational rehabilitation and
    employment programs. Section 15 would prohibit an educational
    institution or joint apprenticeship training committee from using
    reporting fees from VA for or merging such fees with the amounts
    available for the general fund of the educational institution or joint
    apprenticeship training committee.
        As a technical matter, VA notes that both current 38 U.S.C. 3684(c)
    and the proposed revisions to section 3684(c) use the term ``joint
    apprenticeship training committee.'' VA notes (and the Department of
    Labor agrees) that the term ``joint apprenticeship training
    committees'' is specific to the construction industry and refers to a
    subset of the possible universe of entities that could be
    apprenticeship program sponsors. Given that the bill does not focus
    strictly on the construction industry, the use of this term is
    problematic because the bill would exclude other industries which have
    registered apprenticeship programs. VA recommends revising section 15
    of the bill to change the term ``joint apprenticeship training
    committee'' to ``apprenticeship sponsor'' whenever it is used in
    section 15 of the draft bill (amending 38 U.S.C. 3684(c)). With this
    technical change, VA can support section 15 because it would prohibit
    schools from using reporting fees for, or merging such fees with, their
    general funds. Educational institutions are required to use reporting
    fees solely for making certifications or otherwise supporting programs
    for Veterans, and this would ensure that the reporting fees are used
    solely for those purposes.
        Benefit costs for section 15 would be $6.9 million in the first
    year, $34.7 million over 5 years, and $67.3 million over 10 years.
    There would be no FTE or GOE costs associated with enactment of this
    section.
        Section 16 would authorize VA, in consultation with the SAAs, to
    provide training requirements for school certifying officials employed
    by covered educational institutions that offer courses of education
    approved under chapter 36 of title 38, United States Code. If an
    educational institution does not ensure that a school certifying
    official meets the training requirements, VA may disapprove any course
    of education offered by the educational institution. A ``covered
    educational institution'' would refer to an educational institution
    that has enrolled 20 or more individuals using VA educational
    assistance and a ``school certifying official'' would be defined as an
    employee of an educational institution with primary responsibility for
    certifying Veteran enrollment at the educational institution.
        VA supports section 16. VA currently provides guidance and training
    opportunities for school certifying officials via webinars, the School
    Certifying Official Handbook, and on the GI Bill website but does not
    have the authority to require school certifying officials to complete
    this training or to disapprove educational programs if the training is
    not completed. The proposed legislation would provide VA with the
    authority to require school certifying officials to meet certain
    training requirements as determined by VA.
        VA suggests that the proposed requirements be codified in chapter
    36 of title 38, United States Code.
        There are no benefit costs or additional FTE or GOE costs
    associated with section 16.
        Section 17 would amend 38 U.S.C. Sec. 3674(a) to provide that
    reasonable and necessary salary and travel expenses of SAA employees
    and local agencies that VA has agreed to pay would be payable out of
    appropriated amounts as well as from amounts available for payment of
    readjustment expenses. Section 17 would authorize $3 million in
    appropriated funds per fiscal year and the maximum total amount
    available under section 3674 for any fiscal year would be increased
    from $19 million to $21 million. The maximum total amount available for
    these expenses would increase by the same percentage as the annual
    increase in the benefit amounts payable under title II of the Social
    Security Act.
        VA supports section 17. VA suggests a technical change to clarify
    the funding ceiling in this section. As drafted, new section 3674(a)(4)
    would conflict with new section 3674(a)(5)(A) because each appears to
    be setting a new funding ceiling. Also, if enacted as drafted, VA would
    be limited to $21 million per fiscal year for SAA payments.
        Benefit costs for section 17 are estimated to be $2 million in the
    first year, $10 million over 5 years, and $20 million over 10 years.
    There are no additional FTE or GOE costs associated with the proposed
    legislation.
        Section 18 would amend 38 U.S.C. Sec. 3313(c) to provide that
    scholarships or other Federal, State, institutional, or employer-based
    aid or assistance provided directly to the institution, to defray the
    amount of tuition and fees of persons entitled to less than 100 percent
    of the amounts payable under the Post-9/11 GI Bill for pursuing a
    program of education on more than a half-time basis, would not be
    deducted from the amount of tuition and fees assessed by the
    institution for the program of education for purposes of calculating
    the amount of educational assistance payable under the Post-9/11 GI
    Bill.
        VA supports section 18 of this bill because it would reduce the
    out-of-pocket expenses of Veterans and dependents who do not qualify
    for 100-percent educational assistance under the Post-9/11 GI Bill.
    Additionally, section 18 could reduce the amount of educational loans
    that Veterans or dependents need and therefore reduce their financial
    burdens. However, some eligible individuals could receive more Post-9/
    11 educational assistance than the cost of the program in which they
    are enrolled. For example, if a scholarship paid to an institution on
    behalf of an individual who is entitled to VA educational assistance at
    the 90 percent rate exceeds 10 percent of the tuition and fees assessed
    by the institution, and VA is precluded from subtracting the amount of
    the scholarship from the educational assistance, the educational
    institution would refund the surplus to the student, who would receive
    a windfall. In addition, as a result of section 18, some eligible
    individuals who are entitled to educational assistance at less than the
    100-percent rate could receive more funding for their education than an
    individual who is eligible at the 100 percent benefit level.

        This concludes our statement, Mr. Chairman. I would be happy now to
    entertain any questions you or the other Members of the Committee may
    have.

                    STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN BOOZMAN,
                       U.S. SENATOR FROM ARKANSAS

        Senator Boozman [presiding]. Thank you. I apologize. As you
    know, we have votes going on, and we are trying to continue
    forward. So, let me find my questions real quick.
        Let me just say, first of all, that I am proud to sponsor
    two of the bills that were under consideration during today's
    hearing: the GI Fairness Act, cosponsored with my friend and
    colleague, Senator Wyden; and the VET TEC bill that I am proud
    to lead with Senators Heller, Capito, Risch, and Nelson.
        Both bills aim to strengthen and advance education benefits
    provided to our Nation's veterans, the first by correcting
    existing inequalities and disparities in current law and the
    second by expanding the way we think about post-military
    employment skills and educational training.
        The first bill, S. 844, the GI Bill Fairness Act, would
    allow servicemembers to receive GI Bill eligibility credit for
    service periods when Reserve component members are on active
    duty to receive medical care. I think this legislation is the
    fair and right thing to do. Servicemembers should receive
    credit for their time on active duty, particularly when they
    are receiving medical care.
        The second, S. 1277, the Veteran Employment Through
    Technology Education Courses Act, or VET TEC, directs the VA to
    conduct a pilot program focused on nontraditional technology-
    based education. This pilot seeks to provide veterans with
    high-demand, sought-after, and employable IT skills and
    certifications that would not be provided under the traditional
    GI Bill.
        Let us now go to the questions. Your testimony in Section
    13 of the Discussion Draft states that VA currently provides
    information on a veteran's entitlement to certain educational
    benefits through the VA-ONCE processing system, and VA would
    need to make changes to VA-ONCE to provide that capability for
    the Post-9/11 GI Bill. Assuming there would be a significant
    cost to make IT changes to VA-ONCE, is that a system that
    education service plans to invest in or would development of an
    alternative system be preferable?
        Mr. Coy. Thank you for the question, sir. You are right. We
    have long wanted to have a system where schools could go into
    our system, find out how much eligibility a veteran has
    remaining. We have long wanted to have a system where veterans
    could go in and see what their eligibility was, too. This is
    not a desire problem; this is a resource issue. We are working
    with the Office of Technology to be able to put a system like
    that online. We have made some strides, but we are not there
    yet.
        Senator Boozman. Very good. You know, processing times for
    original Post-9/11 GI Bill benefit claims averages 22 days and
    is very labor-intensive. Can you give the Committee an
    approximate idea of how much actual working time VA and DOD
    employees might spend on one of these claims?
        Mr. Coy. That is difficult to measure. We do not measure it
    because we have claims examiners, and they go back and forth.
    Some do supplemental claims, and some do original claims.
        Currently, our system for supplemental claims, about 85
    percent of them go through the system with some information on
    it, and about 50 percent go through the system and are never
    touched by human hands. With respect to original claims, our
    target is 21 days. We are at 22 days. But, original claims done
    manually have to go through every veteran's record to see what
    their eligibilities are.
        So, an opportunity to automate original claims would save a
    lot of time. Our end vision would be, as in our VA Home Loan
    Program, for example, if you wanted to get your certificate of
    eligibility for a VA home loan, you literally go into eBenefits
    and click a few buttons, and it will be printed out right there
    at your own printer or at your realtor's printer.
        Senator Boozman. So, in summary, automation would truly
    save a tremendous amount of time.
        Mr. Coy. Yes, sir. I mean, we have done a lot. When we
    automated supplemental claims back in 2012, we had processing
    times for original claims in the 50 to 60 days and for
    supplemental claims sometimes in the 20 to 30 days. We have got
    our supplemental claims down to about 7 or 8 days, which is
    pretty impressive, and that has relieved a lot of things, such
    that we can get our original claims down to about 22 days. We
    still think that is a little too high, and we are working hard
    to bring that down even further.
        Senator Boozman. Right.
        Senator Rounds?
        Senator Rounds. Mr. Chairman----
        Senator Boozman. Yes, sir.
        Senator Rounds [continuing]. Would you like me to work on
    bills or would----
        Senator Boozman. Are they on the first vote now or the
    second?
        Senator Rounds. Yeah. They are still in the middle of the
    first vote.
        Senator Boozman. OK. Go ahead. If you have your questions
    or Senator Tillis, whichever.
        Senator Rounds. I do not have any questions right now, so I
    will defer at this time.
        Senator Boozman. That is fine.
        Senator Rounds. I will hold my time for discussion on the
    three bills that we have introduced.
        Senator Boozman. Sounds good.
        Senator Tillis, do you have any questions?

                    STATEMENT OF HON. THOM TILLIS,
                    U.S. SENATOR FROM NORTH CAROLINA

        Senator Tillis. I will be very brief so that we--I know we
    have got to get back over to vote.
        The one thing--I want to just get with the VA on the Janey
    Ensminger Act. I appreciate a lot of the work that the VA is
    doing, but I do have a concern with the difference in opinion
    as to ATSDR, which is where I think we should be focusing our
    attention versus the VA's current position. We will talk about
    that offline and not necessarily talk about it today.
        The main thing I wanted to talk about briefly has to do
    with the GI Bill provisions. I am not going to be able to be
    here, I think, for the next panel, so I just want to make the
    statement that I look forward to working with my colleagues on
    the Committee to close the 12304 Bravo and 12304 Hotel
    loopholes. They have been denying our Guardsmen and Reservists
    the benefits that I believe they rightfully earned.
        I appreciate The American Legion in particular for bringing
    the case of a specific North Carolina National Guardsman,
    Captain Lowman, to light. I look forward to supporting and
    cosponsoring Senate 844 of the GI Bill Fairness Act of 2017
    that Senator Boozman and others have sponsored.
        I also want to get the constructive feedback on the
    provisions for the Discussion Draft. I look forward to working
    with the VSOs on this to a successful conclusion.
        Thank you all for being here, and again, I apologize. With
    multiple committees going on at the same time I cannot be here,
    and I think what I may start doing is back-end loading some of
    my VSO panel hearings and move some of the meetings forward,
    with all due respect to the Department. I have got to balance
    it out from time to time, but I thank all the VSOs for the hard
    work you are doing.
        To the extent I never miss an opportunity to do this--I
    said this in the Aging Committee yesterday that had to do with
    caregiver support--we have got a lot of red tape to cut
    through, and until we can get that red tape out of the system
    as it relates to any veteran in North Carolina, let us be the
    scissors. Make sure they contact our office, tillis.senate.gov.
    We have already processed 6,000 claims for veterans in the
    State since I came in, January 2015. I would like for that to
    be another 6,000 more before the end of next year because I
    think the need is out there.
        Thank you, Mr. Chair.
        Senator Boozman. Thank you, Senator.
        Senator Rounds.

                    STATEMENT OF HON. MIKE ROUNDS,
                     U.S. SENATOR FROM SOUTH DAKOTA

        Senator Rounds. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        I would take the opportunity right now to make just a few
    comments on several bills, and then I would like to ask a
    couple questions after that, as long as we have time to do it
    in that order, sir. Thank you.
        I am pleased to have three pieces of legislation that are
    up for consideration at today's legislative hearing. I do
    appreciate the VA's support and technical assistance on Senate
    Bill 882, the Purple Heart GI Bill Act; Senate Bill 1192, the
    Veterans TEST Accessibility Act; and Senate Bill 1330, the
    Increasing Transferability of Entitlement to Post-9/11
    Educational Assistance Act.
        The provisions in S. 1330 was addressed in the VA's
    testimony under Section 8 of the GI Bill Discussion Draft. I
    look forward to working through any necessary technical changes
    in advancing these particular provisions to become law.
        I also appreciate the support of the veterans service
    organizations for working with me to advance these legislative
    proposals, especially the Military Order of the Purple Heart,
    the National Association of Veterans Program Administrators,
    and the Tragedy Assistance Program for Survivors.
        Finally, I would like to thank Congresswoman Susan Brooks
    for leading the Veterans TEST Accessibility Act and Congressman
    Scott Peters for leading the Purple Heart GI Bill Act in the
    House of Representatives.
        My question for Mr. Coy, regarding Senate Bill 1330 on the
    transferability of Post-9/11 GI Bill benefits for surviving
    dependents, could you expand on the VA's interpretation that--
    and I guess I will put this on quotations--``If a servicemember
    or veteran does not transfer the maximum entitlement to a
    dependent, the amount that was not transferred would be
    forfeited?'' Would you care to comment on that, sir?
        Mr. Coy. Yes, sir. The way the bill is written is laid out
    as such. You get 36 months of Post-9/11 GI Bill. The individual
    is still in the service, and he designates 12 months to his
    spouse, he designates 12 months to his daughter, and he keeps
    the rest. He gets out of the service. He is now a veteran, and
    he tragically passes away. Those benefits that are left over
    are not eligible, according to the way the law is and the way
    this bill is written, to be able to use those unused benefits
    to parcel them out to the spouse and daughter.
        Senator Rounds. So then, would you agree that a potential
    fix for this provision could be to add a paragraph that would
    require the VA to perhaps equally distribute any remaining
    Post-9/11 GI benefits from the deceased servicemember or
    veteran to surviving dependents who had benefits previously
    transferred to them?
        Mr. Coy. We would most certainly like to work with you and
    the Committee to come up with that resolution. There are
    nuances that would be interesting to have conversations about;
    in other words, who makes that decision if maybe there is a
    next-of-kin, perhaps both parents perish, who makes those
    decisions? So, those kinds of nuances, we would be happy to sit
    down and talk to you about, but I would suggest that we would
    be in favor of wanting to be able to leverage those unused
    benefits.
        Senator Rounds. That would be reasonable because the way it
    looks to me, anyone associated with that estate, whether it be
    an executor or an administrator, most certainly would be
    willing to work with us, because otherwise they lose them
    entirely. So, it seems to me that a reasonable identification
    as to an administrator or an executive or an executor would be
    the appropriate individual unless otherwise specified within a
    will.
        Mr. Coy. Yes, sir.
        Senator Rounds. Fair? OK.
        Second question would be--and let me just give you a little
    bit of a background. The VA provided the following feedback on
    S. 1192, which is the VA supports S. 1192 because it would
    benefit Post-9/11 GI Bill beneficiaries by reducing the
    negative impact of test reimbursement on the remaining benefit
    entitlement and increasing the months of training available for
    the beneficiaries, thus expanding educational opportunities.
        Under current Sections 3315 and 3315A, an individual is
    charged a portion of his entitlement for the reimbursement of
    fees associated with a licensing or certification exam or a
    national test in whole months; thus, VA charges an individual 1
    month of entitlement for each $1,832.96 reimbursed for the
    academic year beginning on August 1, 2016, rounded to the
    nearest whole month, regardless of the cost of the test. So,
    you could have a $250 test, but you get charged $1,832.
        Mr. Coy, on S. 1192, the Veteran TEST Accessibility Act, in
    your testimony, the VA supports this effort with a few
    suggested technical changes. I do appreciate your feedback.
        My question, I guess, would be when assessing the VA
    support for this legislation, did you look into any statistics
    on how often this test and certification reimbursement
    opportunity is used by veterans? And, do you foresee more
    veterans using their Post-9/11 GI benefits to be reimbursed for
    increasing their qualifications to succeed when transitioning
    to civilian life?
        Mr. Coy. Great question, sir. I do not have the answer in
    terms of how many of our veterans have used their benefits for
    tests. We would be happy to try to get that information back to
    you.
        [The information requested during the hearing follows:]

        For Fiscal Year (FY) 2016, VA paid benefits to 303 beneficiaries
    for the purpose of national tests. The table below provides detailed
    information by education program for FY 2016.

    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                           Number of
                                Education Program                                    Training Type          Students
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Post-9/11 GI Bill (Chapter 33)..........................................  National Exam                   252
    Montgomery GI Bill Active Duty (Chapter 30).............................  National Exam                    18
    Montgomery GI Bill Selective Reserve(Chapter 1606)......................  National Exam                    31
    Reserve Educational Assistance Program(Chapter 1607)....................  National Exam                     2
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Total...............................................................  --                              303
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Mr. Coy. With respect to some of the tests, we could not
    agree more. I went back and looked at some of these tests. A
    GRE test, for example, is $195, which would use a whole month--
    --
        Senator Rounds. Right.
        Mr. Coy [continuing]. For something like that.
        The flip side of that is you have a Cisco licensing or
    certification, and that costs about $1,600, so you are getting
    your money's worth.
        So, I would suggest, and I would agree, sir, that I think
    the way it is set up now, it would be prohibitive for a veteran
    to sign up for a $195 test to use a whole month of benefits.
    So, what this bill does is prorates that, and we support that.
    We think it is a great idea.
        Senator Rounds. Very good. Thank you.
        Mr. Chairman, my time has expired.
        Senator Boozman. Thank you, Senator.
        I just have one more question, and then we will move to the
    next panel, unless Senator Rounds has some others.
        In your testimony, you noted concerns with implementing
    S. 1277, the VET TEC Act, due to limited guidance in the bill
    about how VA should select qualified providers for these high-
    technology education programs.
        Given that this would be a pilot program limited to 5
    years, would it help VA to have authority to develop and
    implement its own guidance for each contract in addition to
    what would be required by in the bill language?
        Mr. Coy. I think that would be great. Yes, sir.
        Part of what this bill does is it develops a series of
    contracts, not the way we do business now. The way we do
    business now is a school is approved by a State approving
    agency to be able to use their GI Bill benefits. What this does
    is set up a series of contracts with respect to that.
        Our concerns or thoughts when we said we have significant
    concerns are some of the provisions in the bill. I went through
    it last night and went through a few of them. One is that a
    veteran has to be entitled to educational assistance. That is
    one of the things that you have to get in the gate to do, and
    my response to that would be maybe we should expand it to
    everyone. What I mean by that is, if you already have
    educational assistance, then what is preventing you from using
    it to go take this course of something like that?
        There is no reference in the bill to the character of
    discharge. Currently, to use the GI Bill, you have to have an
    honorable discharge. There is no reference there, and I would
    suggest that we look at that.
        The $15 million that is a year, it is not identified as to
    whether it is mandatory money or GOE money. In other words,
    what color money is it? That makes a big difference on how we
    budget things.
        There is also no reference to whether or not we look at
    this to see if the $15 million could be part of that used for
    project management and program management. The implementation
    date is seriously a challenge. We are in the government, and
    the acquisition process is long and arduous, so the
    implementation date is a bit challenging.
        Then, when we look at the housing allowance, how we pay out
    housing allowance and where that money comes from; in other
    words, it is not clear that the students in this program are
    supposed to get housing allowance. Does that come out of the
    $15 million, or does that come out of mandatory money?
        So, there are three or four of them, a number of issues
    that we would be happy to work with the Committee to try to
    make this a very successful program and a successful bill.
        Senator Boozman. Thank you. I think those are valid. I
    think those are things we can work through. I do appreciate
    your input.
        Let me ask you one other thing, which if it would be
    possible might be helpful. Could the VA limit the contracts to
    discrete length in order to incorporate lessons learned from
    the pilot program during each of the 5 years?
        Mr. Coy. I apologize. Limit them to discrete?
        Senator Boozman. To discrete lengths, so that you could
    learn as we go forward over the course of the 5 years.
        Mr. Coy. I am still not clear on the question. I apologize.
        Senator Boozman. Well, instead of it being 5 years in
    length, lessen the time.
        Mr. Coy. Oh, discrete length.
        Senator Boozman. Yes, sir. Yes, sir. I am from Arkansas.
    That is my Southern drawl, unless I mumble. [Laughter.]
        Mr. Coy. I spent too much time in the Navy engineering
    spaces, so my ears are not so good.
        Senator Boozman. I am mumbling.
        Mr. Coy. I think that would be useful. I mean, the program
    right now is 5 years. Being able to split it into perhaps 1-
    year increments and be able in most contracting environments--
    and I am an old contracting officer. You have a base year and
    sometimes 3 or 4 or 5 years, which is done because you may not
    want that contractor after a year. So, having a 5-year contract
    sort of limits you, while having the ability or freedom to be
    able to manage through that would be very, very helpful.
        Senator Boozman. OK. Well, thank you very much. Thank you
    for your testimony.
        Mr. Coy. Yes, sir.
        Senator Boozman. It is very helpful.
        Let us go to our next panel. [Pause.]
        We appreciate you all coming over to testify on these
    bills. We appreciate your service to your country and to your
    fellow veterans, which is very, very important.
        Let us start with you, Mr. Hubbard, Will Hubbard, Vice
    President of Government Affairs, Student Veterans of America.

        STATEMENT OF WILL HUBBARD, VICE PRESIDENT OF GOVERNMENT
                  AFFAIRS, STUDENT VETERANS OF AMERICA

        Mr. Hubbard. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and Members of this
    Committee. It is a pleasure, as always, to speak before you.
    Thank you for inviting Student Veterans of America to submit
    our testimony on the modernization of the GI Bill and pending
    legislation. With over 1,400 chapters representing nearly 1.1
    million student veterans across the country, we are pleased to
    share the perspective of those directly impacted by the
    subjects before this Committee today.
        Before sharing our positions, I want to take a moment to
    recognize and wish for the expeditious recovery of Congressman
    Scalise and all those injured in yesterday's vicious attack. I
    would also like to commend the Capitol Police for their
    response and the immediacy of it, which truly saved lives. Our
    thoughts and prayers are with all those affected.
        As we honor the service of these brave Americans, I am
    reminded of the selfless sacrifice of our men and women in
    uniform as well as those who have served our country and uphold
    our Nation's cloth.
        Today, we will discuss our unwavering interest in achieving
    a lifetime GI Bill for veterans along with policy proposals to
    expand education access for Purple Heart recipients, Guard and
    Reserve members, school closure students, and survivors.
        In the groundbreaking research that we published this
    spring, the National Veterans Education Success Tracker, or
    NVEST for short, we demonstrated the high return on investment
    for the GI Bill for veterans and the country, a program worth
    ensuring for all generations to come.
        As the most recently transitioned veterans, the student
    veterans are Ambassadors to the all-volunteer force and
    recognize the value of this investment.
        Last month, we convened nearly 40 military, veteran, and
    higher education organizations for a roundtable discussion at
    the headquarters of our friends at The American Legion. We
    determined that the interest and need to address a wide variety
    of education-related issues could not be ignored.
        Over the course of a 3-hour discussion, the broad coalition
    of organizations identified four priorities, each receiving
    unanimous support. As referenced earlier, these include, first,
    school closures. All students affected in Corinthian and ITT
    Tech closures have a chance for restitution, except for
    veterans, whose benefits come through the VA through the GI
    Bill. We support multiple efforts to address this disparity and
    the interest in making these efforts--these student veterans
    whole.
        Second, Purple Heart recipients. Currently, there are about
    600 Purple Heart recipients who were discharged for nonmedical
    reasons and who got out before earning full GI Bill
    eligibility, mainly Reservists injured in combat. Anyone who
    has bled for this country should minimally have the opportunity
    to go to school.
        Third, Reservists. Reservists on a 12304(b) orders, those
    serving in pre-planned missions of the combatant commands, or
    12301(h) orders, those on medical hold, receive no GI Bill, as
    those mobilization codes were not added to the VA's definition
    of active duty service when those codes were established.
    Approximately 6,000 National Guard and Reserve members are
    ineligible for the GI Bill benefits they earned alongside their
    regular active-duty counterparts.
        And fourth, survivors. All GI Bill users with full
    eligibility can access the Yellow Ribbon Program except for
    survivors. Even though they rate the GI Bill of their
    servicemember who died in the line of duty, this technical
    oversight excludes them from support of the Yellow Ribbon
    Program. This push to secure the GI Bill for future
    generations, why now? Simply put, if not now, then when? When
    it is too late to reverse the threat of losing the program,
    just like all GI Bill benefits that have been cut before?
        Based on our research, conversations with thousands of
    student veterans across the United States and thoughtful
    discussions with many of the policy experts here in this room
    today, we developed the idea that the GI Bill should not be
    considered as a cost of war but instead a component of service.
    That all those who have done service in the defense of our
    Nation should have the opportunity to access education.
        I think we can all anticipate a certain level of
    manufactured outrage from those who just do not get it.
    Nonetheless, please recognize that the veterans and their
    families from groups like the VFW, American Legion, enlisted
    and National Guard associations, TAPS, Vietnam Veterans of
    America, Student Veterans of America, and dozens of others
    stand willing to do the right thing for our men and women who
    earn the right to go to school.
        In addition to the legislation under review today,
    including those four priorities that we have just identified,
    we are urging the consideration of three additional topics,
    including the termination of the arbitrary 15-year time limit
    on using the GI Bill; also allowing veterans with any type of
    discharge to access their earned education, excluding
    dishonorable discharges; and last, the removal of era-specific
    naming conventions for the GI Bill programs.
        We thank the Chairman and the Ranking Member as well as
    Members of this Committee for your time today, and we look
    forward to any feedback or questions that you may have.
        [The prepared statement of Mr. Hubbard follows:]
       Prepared Statement of William Hubbard, Student Veterans of America
        Chairman Isakson, Ranking Member Tester and Members of the
    Committee: Thank you for inviting Student Veterans of America (SVA) to
    submit our testimony on the modernization of the GI Bill and other
    pending legislation. With over 1,400 chapters representing the nearly
    1.1 million student veterans in schools across the country, we are
    pleased to share the perspective of those directly impacted by the
    subjects before this Committee.
        Established in 2008, SVA has grown to become a force and voice for
    the interests of veterans in higher education. With a myriad of
    programs supporting their success, rigorous research development
    seeking ways to improve the landscape, and advocacy throughout the
    Nation, we place the student veteran at the top of our organizational
    pyramid. As the future leaders of this country, fostering the success
    of veterans in school is paramount in their preparation for productive
    and impactful lives.
        We will discuss our unwavering interest in achieving a lifetime GI
    Bill for veterans, along with other policy proposals to expand
    education access for Purple Heart recipients, Guard and Reserve
    members, school closure students, and survivors. Since the passage of
    the Post-9/11 GI Bill in 2008, SVA has been working with a coalition of
    higher education and veteran organizations to improve the GI Bill for
    generations to come, including discussions that began in 2016 with the
    veteran community about making the GI Bill permanent.
        Our National Education Success Tracker (NVEST) research
    demonstrates that the GI Bill has a high return on investment for
    veterans and the country--a program worth ensuring for all generations
    to come.\1\ As the most recently transitioned generation of veterans,
    student veterans are ambassadors to the all-volunteer force, and
    recognize the value of this investment.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \1\ Cate, C. A., Lyon, J. S., Schmeling, J., & Bogue, B. Y. (2017).
    National Veteran Education Success Tracker: A report on the academic
    success of student-veterans using the Post-9/11 GI Bill. Washington,
    D.C.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        SVA and the over 1.1 million student veterans in school today look
    forward to working with Congress and the veteran community in making
    this proposed expansion a reality.
          s. 410, shauna hill post-9/11 education transferability act
    SVA supports as law.
        This bill would authorize the transfer of unused benefits to
    dependents upon death of originally designated dependent. At present,
    in the tragic scenario when a veteran's dependent with transferred GI
    Bill benefits passes away without using the full extent of those
    benefits, the unused benefits become unusable. We believe this is an
    unintended consequence of the way the law is written, and vigorously
    support this correction, which honors the sacrifice of our military
    families.
      s. 473, educational development for troops and veterans act of 2017
    SVA supports as law.

    SECTION 2: ELIGIBILITY OF RESERVE COMPONENT MEMBERS FOR POST-9/11
                        EDUCATIONAL ASSISTANCE

    SECTION 3: ELIGIBILITY OF RESERVE COMPONENT MEMBERS FOR NONREDUCTION IN
                        PAY WHILE SERVING IN THE UNIFORMED SERVICES OR
                        NATIONAL GUARD

    SECTION 4: MODIFICATION OF TIME LIMITATION FOR TRAINING AND
                        REHABILITATION FOR VETERANS WITH SERVICE-CONNECTED
                        DISABILITIES

        These sections recognize the service of National Guard and Reserve
    Members and ensures that an order to serve on active duty under
    sections 12304a and 12304b of title 10, United States Code, is treated
    the same as other orders to serve on active duty for the purposes of
    determining benefits eligibility of servicemembers and veterans. Many
    of these servicemembers perform the exact same duties as their active
    duty counterparts, yet they realize none of the benefits. Fixing this
    discrepancy is a top priority for SVA, as well as nearly 40 other
    military, veteran, and higher education organizations that identified
    this issue with unanimous consent as being an imperative change.\2\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \2\ GI Bill Roundtable meeting, The American Legion Headquarters,
    May 18, 2017.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        SVA encourages the Committee to consider applying these provisions
    to all members of the National Guard and Reserve who have served on
    active duty under all similar authorization codes including: 12301(h),
    12304a, or 12304b of title 10, United States Code, including
    retroactive and future cases.

    SECTION 5: DEFERRAL OF STUDENTS LOANS FOR CERTAIN PERIOD IN CONNECTION
                        WITH RECEIPT OF ORDERS FOR MOBILIZATION FOR WAR OR
                        NATIONAL EMERGENCY

        This section proposes that student veterans could defer certain
    types of loans during a mobilization and up to 180 days after
    returning. Additionally, it would allow loans deferment to begin upon
    receipt of mobilization notice, enabling them the ability to adequately
    execute proper financial planning during the period for which they are
    mobilized. Given the significant strain of a deployment on the
    financial health of a servicemember, especially those with families,
    this basic deference can prevent financial hardship which might
    otherwise be the result of service to a grateful Nation. SVA views this
    as a simple but impactful provision and fully supports it as law.

    SECTION 6: GRANT PROGRAM TO ESTABLISH, MAINTAIN, AND IMPROVE VETERAN
                        STUDENT CENTERS

        This section establishes a grant program within the Department of
    Education (ED) to help institutions of higher education establish,
    maintain, and improve veteran education centers as a dedicated space on
    a campus, providing students veterans, servicemembers, or eligible
    family members a centralized location for services.
        We regularly hear from our student veterans that the support of
    their peers is a crucial factor in the reintegration process and the
    pursuit of a college education. Multiple studies show that student
    veterans are more successful when they connect with their peers while
    facing the day-to-day obstacles on-campus. With access to a veteran's
    center, student veterans have significantly increased opportunities to
    obtain resources and peer support that directly contributes to their
    success.
        SVA has been a long-time supporter of building Vet Centers on
    campuses, and partners with the Home Depot Foundation to create our own
    VetCenter Initiative which over $950,000 in grants to build Vet Centers
    across the country. The proposal outlined by this act is a public
    display that initiatives like these are truly important, and contribute
    to the success of veterans at institutes of higher learning (IHL)
    across the country.

    SECTION 7: MODIFICATION OF BASIS FOR ANNUAL ADJUSTMENTS IN AMOUNTS OF
                        EDUCATIONAL ASSISTANCE FOR MEMBERS OF THE SELECTED
                        RESERVE

        This section seeks to ensure parity in benefits that National Guard
    and Reserve members have earned, entitling them to Montgomery GI Bill
    education benefits. Many Guard and Reservists utilize Chapter 1606, or
    ``Montgomery GI Bill Selected Reserve'' (MGIB-SR) benefits, though
    these benefits have not kept pace with the rising costs of college.
    Currently, then MGIB-SR only affords a monthly stipend of $362, which
    continues to lose value as college costs rise rapidly.\3\\4\ This
    change would be small, but have a significant impact for those veterans
    using this benefit in their educational pursuits.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \3\ Department of Veterans Affairs, (2017), Montgomery GI Selected
    Reserve (MGIB-SR), http://www.benefits.va.gov/gibill/mgib_sr.asp
        \4\ CollegeBoard, (2017), https://trends.collegeboard.org/college-
    pricing/figures-tables/tuition-and-fees-and-room-and-board-over-time-
    1976-77_2016-17-selected-years
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    SECTION 8: MONTHLY STIPEND FOR CERTAIN MEMBERS OF THE RESERVE
                        COMPONENTS OF THE ARMED FORCES

        This section would pro-rate the housing allowance to reflect
    periods when the servicemember is not on active duty and allow them to
    fully partake in their earned housing allowance under their GI Bill
    benefits. While many National Guard and Reserve members continue to
    serve while in IHL, many lose eligibility for GI Bill housing
    allowances when ordered to duty under title 10, United States Code.
    Caught between active duty, though receiving an insufficient housing
    allowance from the active duty service, and coupled with the inability
    to receive GI Bill housing payments, the veteran is punished for their
    continued service. This technical change would address this oversight.
                     s. 798, yellow ribbon improvement act
    SVA supports as law.
        This bill would amend title 38, United States Code, to include the
    Fry Scholarship in the Yellow Ribbon G.I. Education Enhancement
    Program. SVA stands with many other organizations in strong support of
    this legislation that would allow the dependents of a servicemember
    killed in action to access Yellow Ribbon Program benefits.
        The Marine Gunnery Sergeant John David Fry Scholarship goes to
    families that have made the ultimate sacrifice for their country; we
    believe they've more than earned the right to attend a IHL of their
    choice without comparatively minor tuition costs hampering their
    success. This is a common-sense proposal; frankly it is ridiculous that
    that this error has not yet been amended, and we look forward to this
    being expeditiously put into effect. SVA stand in vigorous support for
    this legislation.
                          s. 844, gi bill fairness act
    SVA supports as law.
        This bill proposes amending title 38, United States Code, to
    consider certain time spent by members of reserve components of the
    Armed Forces while receiving medical care from the Secretary of Defense
    as active duty for purposes of eligibility for Post-9/11 Educational
    Assistance. This issue was a known problem as early as October 2014,
    documented in an October 1, 2014 Reserve Forces Policy Board
    memorandum. Consistent with our position on S. 473, sections 2-4, SVA
    maintains a hard stance on addressing this issue immediately, and looks
    forward to seeing a solution passed this year.
                        s. 882, purple heart gi bill act
    SVA supports as law.
        This bill would recognize the sacrifice of men and women who have
    served our country with dignity, sustaining battlefield injuries.
    Currently, only veterans who either served at least 36 months on active
    duty or are medically retired receive Post-9/11 GI Bill benefits at the
    100 percent rate, excluding nearly 3,000 Purple Heart recipients over
    the next ten years who may not meet these administrative requirements.
    In practice, this error penalizes men and women who were wounded before
    they could reach the full term of their contract to receive GI Bill
    eligibility. SVA believes that those who shed blood in our country's
    defense should have the opportunity to go to IHL.
                        s. 1192, test entitlement charge
    SVA supports as law.
        This bill would allow veterans to apply their GI Bill benefits to
    afford the cost of certain licensure and certification tests and
    national tests. Under the current system, veterans who seek to apply
    their GI Bill benefits to the cost of taking certification or licensing
    tests are charged an entire month of their entitlement, regardless of
    how comparatively low the cost of such test is.
        It is common sense that veterans would be able to pro-rate the cost
    of that charge and retain the remaining value of that month's benefit.
    This measure will prevent veterans from being dissuaded by the current
    overcharging inconsistency, and instead encourage taking critical tests
    necessary for career development without paying costs out of pocket.
    SVA is fully in support of this common-sense solution.
        s. 1218, empowering federal employment for disabled veterans act
    SVA supports as law.
        This bill would seek to complement current Federal veteran hiring
    initiatives, and promote career development and training for veteran
    employees. Though current Federal hiring initiatives exist, they are
    often ineffective, or at least unevenly applied, across various
    departments and agencies. The Federal Government should focus on
    matching the skills and career aspirations of veterans to specific
    agency needs while also expanding career development training
    opportunities.
        This expansion would create an environment that improves the long-
    term wellbeing of veterans as well as the overall efficiency of the
    Federal Government. This bill also proposes an expansion of the
    Department of Defense's SkillBridge program to Federal agencies, which
    would provide opportunities to gain relevant work experience within the
    government, while also affording the opportunity to attend IHL. A
    skilled workforce with a demonstrated commitment to service would be
    highly beneficial for the country.
      s. 1277, veteran employment through technology education courses act
    SVA supports as law.
        This bill proposes to direct the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to
    carry out a high technology education pilot program. The proposal would
    operate as a five-year pilot program, funded for up to $15 million
    annually. SVA views this as complimentary to existing education
    programs, and addresses the need to develop innovative programs
    targeted at non-traditional students. The split payment requirement
    incentivizes providers to deliver high quality programs with high-
    impact and successful student outcomes.
        With an increase in innovation in higher education with companies
    like Dog Tag Bakery at Georgetown University, the education industry is
    beginning to recognize the need to adapt to more flexible or hybrid
    models for new generations of students. It is unclear if the contracts
    under this proposal reset annually, or how those funds are to be
    dispersed, however SVA is confident that such logistical details would
    be minor hurdles when compared to the overall benefit of this concept.
        The industry desire for such a program is clear, including support
    from the Information Technology Industry Council (ITI), the global
    voice of the tech sector.\5\ Over 60 members of ITI include technology
    giants such as Google, Twitter, Amazon, Facebook, Adobe, Microsoft,
    IBM, Intel and many others.\6\ Like VA's Accelerated Learning Program
    (ALP), SVA is eager to learn about the outcomes of this proposal.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \5\ ITI letter to the Honorable Kevin McCarthy, ``Re: H.R. 1989,
    the Veteran Employment Through Technology Education Courses Act,''
    April 25, 2017; See appendix for original letter.
        \6\ Information Technology Industry Council, Member Companies,
    http://www.itic.org/about/member-companies, Accessed June 10, 2017.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
          s. 1330, post-9/11 transferability for surviving dependents
    SVA supports as law.
        SVA supports this technical correction for transferred GI Bill
    benefits. Currently, if a servicemember transfers their GI Bill while
    alive and subsequently passes, the allocation of benefits and amount
    allotted to surviving family members is locked in place indefinitely.
    If the servicemember or veteran were still living, they could simply
    adjust the number of months allotted to each family member at will. SVA
    recommends allowing those entitled to the transferred benefits to
    determine the decision and amount of reallocation of benefits as an
    additional component of this proposal.
                    discussion draft, gi bill modernization
    SVA supports as law.

    SECTION 2: CONSOLIDATION OF CERTAIN ELIGIBILITY TIERS UNDER POST-9/11
                        EDUCATIONAL ASSISTANCE PROGRAM OF THE DEPARTMENT OF
                        VETERANS AFFAIRS (VA)

        This section proposes to amend title 38, United States Code, to
    consolidate certain eligibility tiers under the Post-9/11 Educational
    Assistance Program. For reservists, the opportunity to serve on active
    duty and earn GI Bill benefits may be limited for some, while the wider
    reserve components continue to be an integral component of the overall
    global Department of Defense posture. This proposal recognizes the
    importance that National Guard and Reserve Members play in the
    protection of our Nation in service overseas.
        The modified tiers of eligibility would provide 10% increases,
    specifically for those who serve on active duty up to 12 months. The
    minimum threshold of benefits would be increased up to 50% eligibility
    for those who serve between three to six months (see table below for
    reference). Our research indicates that student veterans are
    quintessentially non-traditional students, which often includes
    significant financial obligations and costs associated with raising
    families.\7\ The increase in education benefits at the lower levels
    makes achieving educational success a significantly more attainable
    goal.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \7\ Cate, C.A., Davis, T, (2016), Spotlight Brief, https://
    studentveterans.org/images/SVA SpotlightBrief-1.pdf

    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Percentage of Maximum
                                                                                       Benefit
                                 Member Service                             ----------------------------
                                                                                Current      Proposed
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Service-Connected Disability...........................................         100%          100%
    36+ months.............................................................         100%          100%
    30-36 months...........................................................          90%           90%
    24-30 months...........................................................          80%           80%
    18-24 months...........................................................          70%           70%
    12-18 months...........................................................          60%           60%
    6-12 months............................................................          50%           60%       (+10%)
    3-6 months.............................................................          40%           50%       (+10%)
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    SECTION 3: ADDITIONAL POST-9/11 EDUCATIONAL ASSISTANCE FOR CERTAIN
                        INDIVIDUALS PURSUING PROGRAMS OF EDUCATION IN
                        SCIENCE, TECHNOLOGY, ENGINEERING, MATH, OR
                        HEALTHCARE

        This section would amend title 38, United States Code, to authorize
    the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to provide additional educational
    assistance benefits under the Post-9/11 Educational Assistance Program
    of VA to certain eligible individuals, specifically those seeking STEM
    (science, technology, engineering, and math) degrees. With the current
    resources provided by the GI Bill, the marginal cost of an additional
    academic year for student veterans pursuing STEM will yield the
    essential mass of leaders our country needs. Investing in an additional
    year for STEM-focused student veterans will ultimately result in
    economic gains and tighter national security, and supporting H.R. 748
    is the first step.
        Presently, 16-20% of all undergraduate students are in pursuit of a
    STEM degree. While less than one fifth of current students seek STEM
    degrees, even fewer achieve them since more than one third of the
    general population change their major before they graduate. Compare
    those numbers to what we learned from the research we published this
    year, the National Veteran Education Success Tracker (NVEST), we found
    that 14% sought STEM degrees.
        The aptitude and interest is clear--the resources to deliver more
    STEM graduates in the single major barrier to even greater numbers of
    STEM graduates.\8\ According to a report from Georgetown University's
    Center of Education and the Workforce, ``The Economic Value of College
    Majors,'' top-paying college majors earn a total $3.4 million more than
    the lowest-paying majors over a lifetime; the top ten highest paying
    majors are all in STEM fields, eight of which are in engineering.\9\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \8\ Cate, CA, 2017, National Veteran Education Success Tracker,
    http://nvest.studentveterans.org/
        \9\ Carnevale, Anthony, ``The Economic Value of College Majors,''
    Georgetown University Center for Education and the Workforce, 2015,
    https://cew.georgetown.edu/cew-reports/valueofcollegemajors/
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        In today's economic environment, the highest paying majors will
    earn graduates an average mid-career salary of $136,000. The lowest
    earning potential includes majors such as studio arts or human
    services. Such majors earn a mid-career salary of nearly $100,000 less
    per year. The tax revenue from STEM professionals alone suggests this
    is a beneficial proposal. The need for STEM-focused professionals with
    a commitment to service, and the leadership skills to make a difference
    has never been greater.
        Our country faces a key decision point. We are currently affording
    veterans the opportunity to go to IHL, but we must determine what
    shapes this new and dynamic workforce. After these veterans graduate,
    wouldn't we prefer that our country gains scientists, engineers,
    cybersecurity professionals, physicists, and other high-demand
    professionals? The marginal cost of an additional academic year is
    well-worth the added short-term cost, noting the long-term benefit to
    the economy.
        Veterans should not be forced to decide between continued service
    through a STEM career, and the financial burden that mitigates the
    value of their earned GI Bill benefits. It has long been our goal to
    see every veteran maximize the potential of their GI Bill, and this is
    the answer. It would otherwise take years to find other graduates with
    level of experience and knowledge that veterans already possess--time
    we simply do not have. The ability and expertise of these veterans,
    when coupled with a STEM education, will be an unparalleled force. Our
    servicemembers are routinely exposed to highly technical equipment,
    processes, and environments, often with lives depending on their
    ability to succeed in high-pressure situations. We know they can, and
    do, succeed when given the opportunity.
        When determining our support for this proposal, we consider the
    long-term economic impact of increased tax revenue from higher-paid
    STEM professionals; we consider the national security need for leaders
    in these fields; and we consider how the previous GI Bill prepared our
    country for the most modern workforce of its time. We know veterans
    have a demonstrated commitment to service, and the leadership skills
    necessary to make the country's STEM fields an unmatched force. SVA
    vigorously supports this section.

    SECTION 4: INCREASE IN AMOUNTS OF EDUCATIONAL ASSISTANCE PAYABLE UNDER
                        SURVIVORS' AND DEPENDENTS' EDUCATIONAL ASSISTANCE
                        PROGRAM OF DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS

        This section would increase the amounts of educational assistance
    payable under survivors' and dependents' educational assistance program
    of VA. We strongly support an increase in Chapter 35 Education Benefits
    of amounting to approximately $400 per month. Presently, families
    receive a monthly stipend of between $394 to $788, an amount
    significantly below benefits of the Post-9/11 and Montgomery GI Bills,
    as well as VA Education programs.
        Unfortunately, many survivors are ineligible for the Fry
    Scholarship because the servicemember died prior to September 11, 2001,
    or were separated with a medical discharge and passed away as a
    retiree. It is our unwavering position that family members of the
    fallen utilizing these benefits earned with the ultimate sacrifice
    should be viewed as equal to veterans themselves for the purposes of
    education benefits. SVA vigorously supports this increase.

    SECTION 5: AUTHORIZATION FOR USE OF POST-9/11 EDUCATIONAL ASSISTANCE TO
                        PURSUE INDEPENDENT STUDY PROGRAMS AT CERTAIN
                        EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS THAT ARE NOT INSTITUTIONS
                        OF HIGHER LEARNING

        This section permits veterans to use Post-9/11 Educational
    Assistance for an accredited independent study program (including open
    circuit television) at an educational institution that is an area
    career and technical education IHL or a postsecondary vocational IHL
    providing postsecondary level education.
        We support the intent of this legislation in expanding the
    educational options of veterans, but maintain reservations and
    encourage a stronger definition for the term, ``accredited independent
    study program.'' The loss of recognition of the Accrediting Council for
    Independent Colleges and IHLs (ACICS) under the Department of Education
    (ED) demonstrates that accreditation is a subject that deserves
    additional scrutiny.\10\ We look forward to seeing this legislation
    refined, and seek its eventual passage on the contingency of a stronger
    definition for the definition of ``accredited'' in this instance.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \10\ Department of Education Official Blog, 2016, https://
    blog.ed.gov/2016/06/college-accreditation-changes-mean-students/
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    SECTION 6: CALCULATION OF MONTHLY HOUSING STIPEND UNDER POST-9/11
                        EDUCATIONAL ASSISTANCE PROGRAM BASED ON LOCATION OF
                        CAMPUS WHERE CLASSES ARE ATTENDED

        This section would adjust the calculation of the monthly housing
    stipend under Post-9/11 Educational Assistance Program based on
    location of campus where classes are attended. Currently this disparity
    exists between where a veteran physically attends classes and resides,
    and the monthly stipend provided under the Post-9/11 GI Bill. For
    example, a veteran could be enrolled at an online IHL based in San
    Francisco, while living in a rural district of North Dakota; in such a
    case, the individual would receive substantially higher Basic Allowance
    for Housing (BAH) than necessary, inflating the programs costs
    unnecessarily.
        We have seen instances of this disparity in BAH calculation
    encourage abusive behavior on the part of several institutions of
    higher learning (IHL) who locate the IHL address in a high-BAH
    district, while offering the physical course delivery in a low-BAH
    location while using the lucrative BAH stiped as a recruiting
    incentive. The converse of this situation is also a major point of
    contention, and results in harm to the veteran while enrolled in IHL.
    We support this legislation which would adjust the calculation to
    account for the reality of the living situation.

    SECTION 7: REPEAL OF SUNSET ON WORK-STUDY ALLOWANCE FROM DEPARTMENT OF
                        VETERANS AFFAIRS FOR CERTAIN QUALIFYING WORK-STUDY
                        ACTIVITIES

        This section would amend title 38, United States Code, to extend
    the authority to provide work-study allowance for certain activities by
    individuals receiving educational assistance by the Secretary of
    Veterans Affairs. The VA Work-Study Program is widely accepted as a
    highly beneficial system that provides student veterans the opportunity
    to earn additional income while in IHL, and simultaneously support the
    broader mission of VA.
        The Post-9/11 GI Bill is the most comprehensive and generous
    education benefit ever offered, though it often does not cover the
    total costs student veterans experience. As the quintessential non-
    traditional students, student veterans are often more mature by age and
    experience, 52% have families, and 18% are single parents. Roughly half
    of student veterans work full-time while in IHL, and another 25% work
    part-time. With nearly 780,000 student veterans working while in IHL,
    it is clear that the demand for this opportunity is high.

    SECTION 8: AUTHORIZATION OF TRANSFER OF ENTITLEMENT TO POST-9/11
                        EDUCATIONAL ASSISTANCE BY DEPENDENTS WHO RECEIVE
                        TRANSFERS FROM INDIVIDUALS WHO SUBSEQUENTLY DIE

        In the same spirit as our position on S. 1330, we support this
    common sense technical adjustment.

    SECTION 9: DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS PROVISION OF ON-CAMPUS
                        EDUCATIONAL AND VOCATIONAL COUNSELING FOR VETERANS

        This section would direct the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to
    provide educational and vocational counseling for veterans on campuses
    of institutions of higher learning, and codify the program. SVA has
    been a long-time supporter of the VetSuccess on Campus (VSOC) program,
    which entails the campus having a VSOC Counselor, an expert full-time
    VA detailee, right on campus. We frequently hear student veterans
    identify the VSOC program as a top benefit that they find to be most
    valuable for their higher education experience.
        In providing feedback to SVA regarding the VSOC program, one
    student veteran shared, ``We have a VSOC Counselor from VA come to the
    IHL twice a month so Vets can start a new claim or ask questions
    concerning a claim. This helps immensely as the VA hospital is a 35-
    minute drive from IHL and keeps our Vets on campus. Vets can ask our
    counselor any type of question concerning their benefits. They are also
    a Vocational Rehabilitation (VocRehab) counselor for a few of the Vets
    on campus. We are incredibly lucky to have this program on campus.''
        In addition to appreciating the on-site access to a qualified VA
    counselor, many alluded to a direct personal impact on their academic
    performance. Another student veteran shared, ``The VSOC has been there
    to help me through the transition from soldier to student. Counseling,
    advising, financial help, even tutoring has been afforded to me through
    the VSOC. The VA representative has gone above and beyond to help me
    succeed, especially when IHL and life became overwhelming for me.''
        These comments are indicative of the general feedback we received
    from members over the past several months in our field research on the
    program. In addition to the general support provided by VSOC
    counselors, student veterans noted the ability of counselors to quickly
    correct and process certifications as a major benefit to their campus.
    They often appreciated the connection counselors make with IHL
    administration as well. We believe the VSOC program is highly
    beneficial to student veterans and would like to see it expanded as
    resources allow. SVA is in strong support of this legislation, and
    strongly recommends a 25% annual budget increase for VSOC to expand the
    number of IHLs that offer VSOC Program opportunities to student
    veterans.

    SECTION 10: RESTORATION OF ENTITLEMENT TO POST-9/11 EDUCATIONAL
                        ASSISTANCE AND OTHER RELIEF FOR VETERANS AFFECTED
                        BY IHL CLOSURE

        This section would allow for the restoration of entitlement to GI
    Bill benefits for veterans affected by closures of educational
    institutions. SVA strongly supports the intent of this measure, with
    the condition that the legislation be amended to cover the closure of
    the Corinthian Colleges, Inc. (Corinthian) in 2015.\11\ When 28 IHLs
    administered by Corinthian closed, there were 422 individuals that were
    using Post-9/11 GI Bill benefits to attend one of those IHLs. Many of
    these affected student veterans now find themselves stranded. The VA
    Secretary currently does not have the authority to provide meaningful
    relief to student veterans who find themselves in such a situation.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \11\ Corinthian closure letter, http://www.cci.edu/multimedia/
    closure/CCI-student-letter_ 4.25.15.pdf
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        The proposal will apply to veterans receiving GI Bill benefits
    while pursuing a program of education at an IHL that closed, or who
    withdrew from a closed IHL within 120 days of the closure. Veterans who
    complete their program of education at another IHL pursuant to a teach-
    out plan would not be eligible for relief. VA would also have the
    authority to identify other students who were harmed by their IHL and
    may be eligible for such relief.
        SVA humbly recommends the inclusion of a provision granting VA the
    authority to bring appropriate action against an IHL in an attempt to
    recover the expenses of providing relief. In order to ensure that
    student veterans who have already been harmed can receive relief, the
    bill would retroactively apply to anyone who received Post-9/11 GI Bill
    benefits. Congress must act to ensure that hard-earned GI Bill benefits
    are not squandered because of an IHL's failure to serve its students.
    SVA supports this measure with the conditions of expanding the
    timeframe to restore entitlement to those affected in the Corinthian
    closures.

    SECTION 11: TREATMENT, FOR PURPOSES OF EDUCATIONAL ASSISTANCE
                        ADMINISTERED BY THE SECRETARY OF VETERANS AFFAIRS,
                        OF EDUCATIONAL COURSES THAT BEGIN SEVEN OR FEWER
                        DAYS BEFORE OR AFTER THE FIRST DAY OF AN ACADEMIC
                        TERM

        This section would allow IHL certifying officials (SCO) and
    regional processing officers (RPO) the ability to define a ``calendar
    week'' for the purpose of education benefits as ``the seven-day period
    beginning on the first day of the institution's published academic
    calendar.'' At present, VA defines a calendar week as being from Sunday
    to Sunday, while policy guidance for SCOs necessitates that those
    officials process terms depending on the first date the class meets for
    that period of the week. This minor technical discrepancy has led to
    some confusion in processing benefits, as well as duplicative efforts.
    SVA supports this change to reflect the reality of processing these
    benefits consistent with our interpretation of the congressional intent
    of the benefit.

    SECTION 12: IMPROVEMENT OF INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY OF THE VETERANS
                        BENEFITS ADMINISTRATION

        This bill would direct the VA Secretary to make improvements to the
    information technology system of the Veterans Benefits Administration
    (VBA) of VA. The directs that to the maximum extent possible, VBA
    should access information technology (IT) funding to address critical
    IT infrastructure updates. Presently VA's Office of IT (OIT) functions
    as a collective funding source for the total VA; simply put, individual
    departments have no dedicated resources for IT needs.
        The result of VA's current IT resourcing model structure is that
    OIT must constantly determine the highest priority needs of the VA as a
    whole, leaving some departments with a low level of resources for
    sustained periods of time. The dedication of these resources will allow
    the Veterans Benefits Administration (VBA) with the opportunity to
    receive necessary support in IT upgrade which directly the ability of
    VA to effectively process payments of benefits to student veterans.

    SECTION 13: PROVISION OF INFORMATION REGARDING ENTITLEMENT OF VETERANS
                        TO EDUCATIONAL ASSISTANCE

        This section proposes allowing IHLs to view the total and remaining
    amount of educational benefits of a veteran thereby allowing the IHL to
    properly counsel those veterans on their financial obligation and IHL
    requirements. This is a simple change with a significant impact,
    enabling greater communication between the IHL and the veteran.

    SECTION 14: EXTENSION OF AUTHORITY FOR ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION

        This section extends the authority of the VA Advisory Committee on
    Education (VACOE), an advisory body of subject matter experts that
    provide the Secretary of VA input on veteran issues in higher
    education. Previously, SVA provided input at through this forum to
    highlight necessary reform changes and statute which legally required
    VA to establish an agreement with the Federal Trade Commission (FTC).
    Upon recommendation to the Secretary of VA at the 2015 VACOE meeting,
    the agreement with FTC was reached. This is an example of the
    significant value and detailed level of policy analysis that the VACOE
    can provide to the Secretary.

    SECTION 15: LIMITATION ON USE OF REPORTING FEES PAYABLE TO EDUCATIONAL
                        INSTITUTIONS AND JOINT APPRENTICESHIP TRAINING
                        COMMITTEES

        This section proposes increasing reporting fees as high as $16 per
    number of eligible veterans to execute or offset services required to
    process benefits. It also requires them to use the money for veterans.
    SVA believes the reporting fees to be critical components of offsetting
    the cost of administering GI Bill education benefits at the institution
    level; we also support requiring this reporting fee be accounted for
    appropriately as well as being expended on activities related to the
    execution of veteran benefit processing. Some concern has been
    expressed that IHLs with very few veterans would be cause undue strain
    in establishing a separate account for such a low number of students.
    As such, SVA supports setting a threshold to require IHLs with
    significant populations to adhere to this requirement, to avoid IHLs
    with only several student veterans from experiencing undue accounting
    strain as result of this provision.

    SECTION 16: TRAINING FOR IHL CERTIFYING OFFICIALS AS CONDITION OF
                        APPROVAL OF COURSES FOR VETERANS EDUCATIONAL
                        ASSISTANCE

        This section codifies the requirements for SCO training. SVA
    supports this provision, as the training provided through VA is
    critical for SCO's to maintain a high level of professional aptitude.
    In some cases, IHLs have not allowed SCOs to attend training, alleging
    that it was not required. This requirement removes any doubt about the
    importance of that training.

    SECTION 17: MODIFICATIONS RELATING TO REIMBURSEMENT OF EXPENSES OF
                        STATE APPROVING AGENCIES FOR MATTERS RELATING TO
                        ADMINISTRATION OF VETERANS EDUCATIONAL ASSISTANCE

        This section proposes an increase in resources provided to SAAs.
    SVA believe SAAs are a critical component to ensuring quality
    education, preventing fraud and abuse, and looking out for student
    veterans who may be subject to bad practices at various IHLs. SAAs are
    effectively the gatekeepers of the GI Bill. Yet, the amount of
    resources provided to them has not kept pace with inflation and rising
    costs. We continue to urge Congress to increase support for SAAs, and
    are pleased to see the inclusion of this legislation. The amount of
    resources spent on oversight should reflect the importance of resources
    spent in educational benefits; as such SVA supports the recommendations
    of the National Association of State Approving Agencies to increase
    funding from $19 million to $26 million.

    SECTION 18: MODIFICATION OF CALCULATION OF AMOUNT OF EDUCATIONAL
                        ASSISTANCE FOR INDIVIDUALS PARTIALLY ELIGIBLE FOR
                        POST-9/11 EDUCATIONAL ASSISTANCE

        This section proposes a technical modification of affecting student
    veterans with less than 100% of GI Bill eligibility, primarily National
    Guard and Reserve members. At present, IHLs often do not consider VA to
    be the ``first payer'' in the case of the total financial aid package
    for student veterans. As such, VA only pays up to half of the remaining
    financial cost after the other financial components are factored out.
    This means that student veterans are essentially punished for seeking
    out scholarship or other financial support beyond their earned
    benefits. SVA believes that payments from VA should be calculated based
    on the total tuition cost before other financial aid components are
    taken into account, not merely based on the remaining tuition costs
    that exist after other factors are accounted for in the remaining
    balance.
    Additional Considerations
        Beyond this list of legislation currently under consideration,
    there are three additional proposals which we believe are critical
    components for the modernization of the GI Bill, including: the
    termination of the 15-year benefit usage time limit, allowing veterans
    with discharges other than dishonorable to access their earned
    education benefits, and a removal of era-specific naming conventions
    for GI Bill programs.
        We believe that veteran education benefits are not a cost of war,
    but instead a component of service. We believe that education
    opportunities should be a lifetime benefit, and thus require the
    removal of the current 15-year delimiting date within Chapter 33
    benefits. Such an arbitrary cap on the opportunity to use this earned
    benefit serves only as a hindrance to the success of veterans.
    Additionally, it is imperative that the GI Bill no longer be considered
    through the strict lens of wartime eras. Indeed, tying education
    benefits to wartime eras has historically led to previous iterations of
    the benefit being cut.
        Presently, only veterans with an ``Honorable Discharge'' are
    eligible for Post-9/11 GI Bill education benefits, neglecting more than
    170,000 veterans who have the most to gain from an education. Research
    indicates that nearly 7% of veterans in Post-9/11 conflicts have earned
    ``bad paper'' discharges, with roughly three out of four of those
    individuals facing the challenge of post-traumatic stress (PTS).\12\
    Having fought our Nation's battles, and now often fighting for their
    own healing and personal growth, these men and women should have the
    opportunity to improve their own lives through education. Additional
    considerations such as wrongful discharge and separation for minor
    infractions should not warrant a lifetime denial of education benefits.
    SVA strongly encourages the Committee to review this issue with
    thoughtfulness and foresight.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \12\ Adams, Bradford, (2016), Underserved, https://www.swords-to-
    plowshares.org/sites/default/files/Underserved.pdf
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        As a component of service, there should be one bill that serves all
    current and future veterans, and therefore should be updated in name to
    reflect this timeless concept, as ``The Veterans Education Assistance
    Act'' or referred to simply as the GI Bill. This simplified naming
    convention may seem insignificant, but it's importance is far-reaching
    as the re-naming of the benefit indicates its importance to all
    generations of veterans. Veterans don't decide when their country asks
    them to go to war; student veterans don't believe wartime should
    dictate the opportunity for future generations of veterans to attend
    college.

        We thank the Chairman, Ranking Member, and the Committee members
    for your time, attention, and devotion to the cause of veterans in
    higher education. As always, we welcome your feedback and questions,
    and we look forward to continuing to work with this Committee, the
    Senate Veterans' Affairs Committee, and the entire Congress to ensure
    the success of all generations of veterans through education.

        Senator Boozman. Thank you so much. I think you make some
    excellent points.
        I need to adjourn the meeting for just a few minutes. We
    have another vote going on right now, so I am going to run
    over. Senator Rounds and some others are on their way back.
    But, there are not very many things that I have to do here, but
    I do have to vote, so I am going to run over there. This is a
    very important bill, so I will be back in just a little bit;
    and again, we will have somebody here in just a bit. OK?
        With that, we are going to recess. We are not going to
    adjourn. We are going to recess for a few minutes. [Recess.]

        Senator Rounds [presiding]. OK. We will call this meeting
    back out of recess and into order again.
        I understand that we have already completed the testimony
    of Mr. Will Hubbard. Next in line would be Mr. John Kamin, the
    Assistant Director of Veterans Employment and Education, The
    American Legion. Welcome, sir.

         STATEMENT OF JOHN KAMIN, ASSISTANT DIRECTOR, VETERANS
             EMPLOYMENT AND EDUCATION, THE AMERICAN LEGION

        Mr. Kamin. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. On behalf of National
    Commander Charles E. Schmidt of The American Legion, we thank
    you for the work you do in support of veterans as well as their
    families.
        I would also like to extend our thoughts and prayers with
    Whip Scalise and his family during this tragic time.
        As the largest organization of wartime leaders, the
    Legion's voice is representative of more than 2.2 million
    members. Our positions are guided by nearly 100 years of
    experience and resolutions that originate at the grassroots
    level. We appreciate the opportunity to present The American
    Legion's views regarding these pieces of legislation. These
    issues cannot be put off any longer.
        Due to the allotted time available, I will only speak to
    these three pieces of legislation as well as portions of the
    Discussion Draft.
        S. 844, the GI Bill Fairness Act. This bill would amend
    Title 38 to consider time spent by members of Reserve
    components receiving military medical care as active duty for
    the purpose of eligibility for the GI Bill.
        To understand the need for this bill, I would refer you to
    the story of Captain Bryan Lowman of the North Carolina
    National Guard. On the third month of his deployment to
    Afghanistan in 2010, he became severely ill with typhoid fever,
    lapsed into a coma, and underwent multiple emergency surgeries
    over the course of a year in Afghanistan, Germany, and at
    Walter Reed under 12301(h) orders. After his long recovery,
    Captain Lowman aimed to further his education. However, since
    his activation status was changed to 12301(h), his eligibility
    was cut down to the time he served before he got sick.
        To put a finer point on this, Captain Lowman began to earn
    his GI Bill fighting for our country, but when he was fighting
    for his life, our country pulled the benefit.
        I wish I could report to you that this was an isolated
    issue, but over 20,000 servicemembers have been issued these
    medical orders since 2008.
        S. 844 corrects this oversight and rewards retroactive
    benefits to all servicemembers affected. The American Legion
    supports this bill and stands ready to assist you when
    correcting it.
        Shifting focus to S. 473, the Educational Development for
    Troops and Veterans Act of 2017, we applaud Senator Tester for
    honing in on a critical issue that is escalating in scope:
    unequal education benefits for Reserve and National Guard
    servicemembers.
        The Post-9/11 GI Bill is as close to a perfect benefit that
    has ever existed for active duty personnel. For Reservists, on
    the other hand, eligibility is only gained if you are called to
    active duty service. This is a roll of the dice, and the odds
    just got worse for these servicemembers with the advent of
    12304(b) orders. S. 844 not only corrects this oversight by
    granting 12304(b) orders GI Bill eligibility, but also corrects
    even more technical issues affecting Reservists, such as
    prorating the monthly housing allowance for student Reservists
    and affording loan deferments to servicemembers predeployment.
        We respectfully request, however, that the bill be amended
    to apply to those who served before the date of enactment. The
    American Legion does not believe that servicemembers who have
    already been activated under 12304(b) orders are any less
    deserving of GI Bill benefits. Again, The American Legion
    stands ready to assist in correcting this.
        Furthermore, I would like to discuss the draft bill Section
    10, restoration of entitlement of Post-9/11 educational
    assistance, and Section 17, modifications related to
    reimbursement of expenses of State Approving Agencies.
        When a school closes, non-veterans students have Federal
    protections to support them. Federal loans can be discharged,
    and Pell Grants can have their eligibility periods reset. The
    American Legion strongly believes that a veteran's GI Bill
    benefits should be afforded the same protection. This section
    provides that, but Congress should not forget about the student
    veterans affected by the Corinthian College closures of 2015.
    We believe these student veterans also deserve that protection
    and call for the eligibility date to be amended to the fiscal
    year 2015.
        Additionally, we believe that more effective oversight is
    needed to proactively abate school closures. While student
    veteran protection addresses the symptoms, the root cause is
    financially unstable schools that were not properly identified
    until it was too late. While compliance and oversight is never
    simple, the VA has partners that are uniquely suited to address
    this. They are the State Approving Agencies.
        State Approving Agencies are responsible for approving and
    supervising programs of education for the training of veterans.
    Positioned at every State, they are our first line of defense
    for identifying bad actors. However, their funding has not
    increased since 2005, even as the educational ecosystem has
    compounded in size and complexity. The American Legion, thus,
    believes the $3 million increase is not adequate to cover the
    SAAs' overall scope and encourages Congress to allocate $5
    million annually, additionally, for the SAAs.
        In closing, I briefly draw your attention to S. 1209, a
    bill to increase special pension for Medal of Honor recipients.
    Just this week, it was announced that Mr. James C. McCloughan
    will be receiving the Medal of Honor. These brave
    servicemembers have been awarded the highest military honor for
    valor and deserve this increase. After all, it is the least we
    can do.
        Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the time to present on these
    issues. I would be happy to answer any questions you may have.
    Thank you.
        [The prepared statement of Mr. Kamin follows:]
        Prepared Statement of John Kamin, Assistant Director, Veterans
                 Employment and Education, The American Legion

    ------------------------------------------------------------------------

    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    S.75, Arla Harrell Act (McCaskill, Blunt)  Support
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    S.111, Filipino Veterans Promise Act       No Position
     (Heller, Hirono)
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    S.410, Shauna Hill Post-9/11 Education     Support
     Transferability Act (Crapo, Risch)
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    S.473, Educational Development for Troops  Support with amendments
     and Veterans Act of 2017 (Tester,
     Blumenthal, Brown, Murray)
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    S.758, Janey Ensminger Act of 2017 (Burr,  Support
     Tillis)
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    S.798, Yellow Ribbon Improvement Act       Support
     (Cassidy, Brown, Tillis)
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    S.844, GI Bill Fairness Act (Wyden,        Support
     Boozman)
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    S.882, Purple Heart GI Bill Act (Rounds,   Support
     Boozman)
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    S.1192, Veterans TEST Accessibility Act    Support
     (Rounds, Hirono)
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    S.1209, A bill to increase special         Support
     pension for Medal of Honor recipients
     (Graham, Blumenthal)
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    S.1218, Empowering Federal Employment for  Support
     Disabled Veterans Act (Heitkamp,
     Sullivan)
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    S.1277, Veteran Employment Through         No Position
     Technology Education Courses Act
     (Boozman, Heller)
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Discussion Draft on changes to GI Bill     Please reference section
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Chairman Isakson, Ranking Member Tester, and distinguished Members
    of the Committee; On behalf of Charles E. Schmidt, the National
    Commander of the largest Veteran Service Organization in the United
    States of America, representing more than 2 million members; we thank
    you for this opportunity to present The American Legion's positions on
    pending legislation before this Committee.
                            s. 75: arla harrell act
    To provide for the reconsideration of claims for disability
            compensation for veterans who were the subjects of experiments
            by the Department of Defense during World War II that were
            conducted to assess the effects of mustard gas or lewisite on
            people, and for other purposes.
        S. 75 addresses denied disability compensation claims for
    individuals who were subjects of mustard gas and lewisite tests during
    World War II. Many of the files needed to submit claims to the
    Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) were either classified by the
    military or destroyed in the National Personnel Records Center fire of
    1973.
        For over a decade, Arla Harrell has sought VA disability
    compensation for conditions he attributes to his service in the
    military. While stationed at Camp Crowder, Missouri, during the latter
    days of World War II, he reports being subjected to mustard gas
    exposure as part of a secret experimental program. This exposure led to
    a lifetime of respiratory ailments and adverse medical conditions.
        38 CFR Sec. 3.316 identifies a host of medical conditions, to
    include respiratory conditions that are presumptively related to
    mustard gas exposure; however, without proper Department of Defense
    records, it is difficult for VA to assume that the exposure of mustard
    gas or lewisite was considered ``full-body exposure.'' \1\ S. 75 would
    allow VA to presume that any exposure to mustard gas or lewisite, in
    these cases, were ``full-body exposure'' incidences.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \1\ https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/38/3.316
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        The American Legion has long supported service connecting veterans
    presumptively due to environmental exposures. Through the passage of
    Resolution No. 118, Environmental Exposures, at The American Legion's
    98th National Convention, The American Legion supports ``the
    liberalization of the rules relating to the evaluation of studies
    involving exposure to any environmental hazard and that all necessary
    action be taken by the Federal Government, both administratively and
    legislatively as appropriate, to ensure that veterans are properly
    compensated for diseases and other disabilities scientifically
    associated with a particular exposure.'' \2\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \2\ The American Legion Resolution No. 118 (2016): Environmental
    Exposures
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The American Legion supports S. 75.

                     s. 111: filipino veterans promise act
    To require the Secretary of Defense to establish a process to determine
            whether individuals claiming certain service in the Philippines
            during World War II are eligible for certain benefits despite
            not being on the Missouri List, and for other purposes.
        The provisions in this bill fall outside the scope of established
    resolutions of The American Legion. As a large, grassroots
    organization, The American Legion takes positions on legislation based
    on resolutions passed by our membership. With no resolution addressing
    the provisions of S. 111, The American Legion is researching the
    material and working with our membership to determine the course of
    action that best serves veterans.

    The American Legion has no current position on S. 111.

          s. 410: shauna hill post-9/11 education transferability act
    A bill to amend title 38, United States Code, to authorize the transfer
            of unused Post-9/11 Educational Assistance benefits to
            additional dependents upon the death of the originally
            designated dependent.
        S. 410 would permit reassignment of veterans' education benefits in
    cases where the designated beneficiary passes away. Unfortunately, it
    took a tragic event to realize the necessity for this change.
        In 2012, 16-year old Shauna Hill died in a two-car crash. Her
    father, retired Navy Capt. Edward Hill had granted Shauna his education
    benefits to his daughter to go to college. After her death, Mr. Hill
    had hoped to transfer this education benefit to his younger daughter,
    however, was informed that Federal law prohibits transferring GI Bill
    benefits from one child to another post-retirement. S. 410 is a common
    sense bill aimed at making the lives easier for veterans who have
    chosen to gift their hard-earned education benefit.
        Resolution No. 308: Amending the Eligibility for the Transfer for
    the Post-9/11 GI Bill supports legislation that would authorize all
    servicemembers with ten years or more of active-duty service, who are
    eligible for the Post-9/11 GI Bill educational benefits, be able to use
    the transferability entitlement to give to their immediate family
    members.\3\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \3\ The American Legion Resolution No. 308 (2016): Amending the
    Eligibility for the Transfer for the Post-9/11 GI Bill Educational
    Benefits
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The American Legion supports S. 410.

      s. 473: educational development for troops and veterans act of 2017
    To amend title 38, United States Code, to make qualification
            requirements for entitlement to Post-9/11 Education Assistance
            more equitable, to improve support of veterans receiving such
            educational assistance, and for other purposes.

    SEC. 2. ELIGIBILITY OF RESERVE COMPONENT MEMBERS FOR POST-9/11
                        EDUCATIONAL ASSISTANCE

    SEC. 3. ELIGIBILITY OF RESERVE COMPONENT MEMBERS FOR NONREDUCTION IN
                        PAY WHILE SERVING IN THE UNIFORMED SERVICES OR
                        NATIONAL GUARD

    SEC. 4. MODIFICATION OF TIME LIMITATION FOR TRAINING AND REHABILITATION
                        FOR VETERANS WITH SERVICE-CONNECTED DISABILITIES

        In the 2012 National Defense Authorization Act, authorization
    12304b was created under Title 10, which allowed reserve-component
    troops to meet the challenges around the globe by mobilizing without
    counting against caps on active forces. While this is critical to
    maintaining our national security, existing statutes do not recognize
    the service of Reservists and National Guardsmen called to mobilize on
    these orders.
        According to Title 38 of the U.S. Code, these individuals did not
    serve on ``active duty.'' Even though these troops served side-by-side
    with Active Duty servicemembers, reservists deployed under these orders
    are therefore denied benefits earned for deployments including
    healthcare (pre- and post-mobilization), retirement age reduction, pay
    differentials, and eligibility for the Post-9/11 GI Bill.
        Section 2-4 corrects these oversights via amending U.S.C. Titles 5,
    10, and 38 to include Sec. 12304b mobilization authority in determining
    eligibility for all servicemembers who have mobilized under these
    orders.
        The American Legion applauds the Committee's effort in addressing
    this issue, but Congress must not forget about the servicemembers who
    have already deployed under 12304b orders and the servicemembers who
    have and will be placed on 12301(h) healthcare orders. In present form,
    these section excludes 12301(h) and only applies to servicemembers
    activated after the date of enactment.
        The American Legion does not believe that servicemembers who had
    their orders changed to medical recovery should be penalized by losing
    eligibility to the Post-9/11 GI Bill and concurs with the Office of the
    Secretary of Defense Reserve Forces Policy Board recommendation that
    12301(h) be amended for GI Bill eligibility.
        Further, The American Legion does not believe that servicemembers
    who have already been activated under 12304b orders are any less
    deserving of GI Bill benefits, and requests that they be included in
    any legislative solution.
        Resolution No. 20: GI Bill Fairness for Wounded Servicemembers and
    Activated National Guard and Reservists supports any legislative
    proposal that provides amendments to U.S. Code Titles 5, 10, 37 and 38
    commensurate with U.S. Code Title 10 authorized service, such as 12304b
    and 12301(h), that grant Post-9/11 GI Bill benefits.\4\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \4\ The American Legion Resolution No. 20 (2017): GI Bill Fairness
    for Wounded Servicemembers and Activated National Guard and Reservists
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        The American Legion requests that this section be amended to apply
    with respect to any member of a reserve component of the Armed Forces
    who serves or has served on active duty under section 12301(h), 12304a,
    or 12304b of title 10, United States Code, before, on, or after the
    date of the enactment of this section.

    SEC. 5. DEFERRAL OF STUDENT LOANS FOR CERTAIN PERIOD IN CONNECTION WITH
                        RECEIPT OF ORDERS FOR MOBILIZATION FOR WAR OR
                        NATIONAL EMERGENCY

        Under current law, servicemembers can apply for deferment of their
    Federal student loan repayments while they are deployed, and for up to
    180 days post-deployment. This legislation would allow servicemembers
    to defer their loan repayments for up to 180 days pre-deployment. If
    they receive their first notice of deployment less than 180 days pre-
    deployment, their deferment eligibility would start on the day they
    received such notice. This legislation seeks to provide some economic
    relief to servicemembers whose lives are disrupted by being relocated
    and commencing the training they need for their upcoming deployment.
    The American Legion applauds Senator Tester's spotlighting of this
    issue.
        Resolution No. 318: Ensuring the Quality of Servicemember and
    Veteran Student's Education at Institutions of Higher Education
    supports any legislative proposal that improves the GI Bill, Department
    of Defense Tuition Assistance (TA), Higher Education Title IV funding
    (i.e., Pell Grants, student loans, etc.) and education benefits so
    servicemembers, veterans, and their families can maximize its usage.\5\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \5\ The American Legion Resolution No. 318 (2016): Ensuring the
    Quality of Servicemember and Veteran Student's Education at
    Institutions of Higher Education
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The American Legion supports Section 5.

    SEC. 6. GRANT PROGRAM TO ESTABLISH, MAINTAIN, AND IMPROVE VETERAN
                        STUDENT CENTERS

        This section establishes a grant program within the Department of
    Education (ED) to help institutions of higher education establish,
    maintain, and improve veteran education centers--a dedicated space on a
    college or university campus that provides students who are veterans,
    members of the Armed Forces, or eligible family members a centralized
    location for services. According to ED, federally funded veteran
    student centers and staff have generated improved recruitment,
    retention, and graduation rates, have helped veteran students feel
    better connected across campus, and have directly contributed to
    student veterans' successful academic outcomes.
        Resolution No. 318: Ensuring the Quality of Servicemember and
    Veteran Student's Education at Institutions of Higher Education
    supports any legislative proposal that improves the GI Bill, Department
    of Defense Tuition Assistance (TA), Higher Education Title IV funding
    (i.e., Pell Grants, student loans, etc.) and education benefits so
    servicemembers, veterans, and their families can maximize its usage.\6\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \6\ The American Legion Resolution No. 318 (2016): Ensuring the
    Quality of Servicemember and Veteran Student's Education at
    Institutions of Higher Education
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The American Legion supports Section 6.

    SEC. 7. MODIFICATION OF BASIS FOR ANNUAL ADJUSTMENTS IN AMOUNTS OF
                        EDUCATIONAL ASSISTANCE FOR MEMBERS OF THE SELECTED
                        RESERVE

        Section 7 amends Section 16131 of title 10 to ensure that
    Montgomery GI Bill benefit rates for Guardsmen and Reservists maintain
    their current value by being equal to or greater than the yearly
    increase in the national average cost of tuition.
        The Montgomery GI Bill for the Selected Reserve (MGIB-SR) is an
    important tool for recruiting high quality young men and women into the
    National Guard and Reserves. Those who initially join for six years are
    automatically entitled to MGIB-SR and its current monthly rate for
    full-time study/training of $362. Unfortunately, MGIB-SR benefit rates
    have not kept pace with the rising costs of higher education and are
    effectively losing value each and every year. This trend sends a very
    poor signal that the service of our Guardsmen and Reservists is being
    de-valued, and it fails to make an appropriate investment in their
    education and professional development.
        Resolution No. 318: Ensuring the Quality of Servicemember and
    Veteran Student's Education at Institutions of Higher Education
    supports any legislative proposal that improves the GI Bill, Department
    of Defense Tuition Assistance (TA), Higher Education Title IV funding
    (i.e., Pell Grants, student loans, etc.) and education benefits so
    servicemembers, veterans, and their families can maximize its usage.\7\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \7\ The American Legion Resolution No. 318 (2016): Ensuring the
    Quality of Servicemember and Veteran Student's Education at
    Institutions of Higher Education
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The American Legion supports Section 7.

    SEC. 8. MONTHLY STIPEND FOR CERTAIN MEMBERS OF THE RESERVE COMPONENTS
                        OF THE ARMED FORCES

        Section 8 prorates the monthly housing allowance for the portion of
    the month the servicemember is not on active duty by amending Title 38,
    U.S.C. to clarify the eligibility for monthly stipends paid under the
    Post-9/11 Educational Assistance Program for certain members of the
    reserve components of the Armed Forces.
        Many reservists are required to routinely perform their jobs in a
    Title 10 status due to their specific job requirements and functions.
    These commonly include aircrew, intelligence personnel, and Unmanned
    Aerial Vehicle and Remote Piloted Aircraft operators. While not in a
    drill status, or if in a drill status under Title 38, an individual is
    entitled to their monthly housing allowance (MHA) and book allowance.
    When the drill status is under Title 10, the individual is entitled to
    the MHA and book allowance, but only for the first portion of the month
    up to when they entered active duty under Title 10. Therefore, if an
    individual goes on active duty on the first day of the month for three
    days, the individual does not receive any MHA or book allowance for the
    rest of that month. Just one day of Title 10 service can result in
    forfeiture of MHA and book allowance for all or most of the month. In
    order to maintain combat readiness, many reservists have to commit to a
    minimum of four training days per month in a Title 10 status. Many
    reservists are also full-time students and rely on their MHA to pay
    rent, but as a result of the current rules, they are denied their full
    MHA and book allowance, causing many members to incur thousands of
    dollars of debt. This is compounded by the fact that members of the
    reserve are used more frequently due to the increased tempo of
    operations around the world.
        Resolution No. 318: Ensuring the Quality of Servicemember and
    Veteran Student's Education at Institutions of Higher Education
    supports any legislative proposal that improves the GI Bill, Department
    of Defense Tuition Assistance (TA), Higher Education Title IV funding
    (i.e., Pell Grants, student loans, etc.) and education benefits so
    servicemembers, veterans, and their families can maximize its usage.\8\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \8\ The American Legion Resolution No. 318 (2016): Ensuring the
    Quality of Servicemember and Veteran Student's Education at
    Institutions of Higher Education
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The American Legion supports Section 8.

                      s. 758: janey ensminger act of 2017
    A bill to amend the Public Health Service Act with respect to the
            Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry's review and
            publication of illness and conditions relating to veterans
            stationed at Camp Lejeune, North Carolina, and their family
            members, and for other purposes.
        S. 758 would allow the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease to
    collect information regarding servicemembers, veterans, and family
    members who suffer from a variety of illnesses due to contaminated
    drinking water at Camp Lejeune , NC. Additionally, this bill would
    require the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to allocate two million
    dollars a year to assist servicemembers, veterans, and their families
    affected by contaminated water at Camp Lejeune, in applying for health
    benefits through the VA.
        During the early parts of the 1980s, contaminants were found in two
    wells that provided water at Camp Lejeune. These contaminants included
    the volatile organic compounds trichloroethylene (TCE), a metal
    degreaser, perchloroethylene (PCE), dry cleaning agents, and vinyl
    chloride, as well as benzene, and other compounds. It is estimated that
    the contaminants were in the water supply from the mid-1950's until
    February 1985 when the wells were shut down. Additionally, there is
    evidence of an association between certain diseases and the
    contaminants found in the water supply at Camp Lejeune during the
    period of contamination.
        United States Marine Corps (USMC) servicemembers and their families
    living at the base, between the 1950's to 1985, bathed in and ingested
    tap water contaminated with harmful chemicals at concentrations ranging
    from 240 to 3400 times higher than appropriate safety levels. An
    undetermined number of former base residents later developed cancer or
    other ailments, which may be associated with the contaminated drinking
    water. Victims claim that USMC leaders concealed knowledge of the
    problem and did not act appropriately in resolving it or notifying
    former base residents that their health might be at risk.
        The American Legion is appalled that military members serving our
    Nation, and their families, were exposed to harmful chemical
    contaminants at Camp Lejeune. We are equally shocked that the USMC was
    potentially aware of the issue and did nothing to mitigate the risk
    associated with the water contamination at this military instilation.
    This bill would allow individuals affected by water contamination at
    Camp Lejeune to recivie healthcare provided by the VA and claim any
    benefits due to them.
        Resolution No. 377: Support for Veteran Quality of Life supports
    legislation that would allow access to quality VA health care and
    timely decisions on claims and receipt of earned benefits.\9\ The
    American Legion strongly supports this piece of legislation.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \9\ The American Legion Resolution No. 377 (2016): Support for
    Veteran Quality of Life
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The American Legion supports S. 758.

                     s. 798: yellow ribbon improvement act
    To amend title 38, United States Code, to expand the Yellow Ribbon G.I.
            Education Enhancement Program to apply to individuals pursuing
            programs of education while on active duty, to recipients of
            the Marine Gunnery Sergeant John David Fry scholarship, and to
            programs of education pursued on half-time basis or less, and
            for other purposes.
        This bill would address a current statutory regulation that
    excludes eligible dependents of a servicemember killed in action from
    enhanced tuition reimbursement available through the Yellow Ribbon
    Program. This simple legislative fix will provide Fry Scholarship
    recipients with the same benefits as other Chapter 33 eligible
    beneficiaries and allow scholarship awardees access to education at
    Yellow Ribbon Schools.
        Resolution No. 318: Ensuring the Quality of Servicemember and
    Veteran Student's Education at Institutions of Higher Education
    supports any legislative proposal that improves the Post-9/11 GI
    Bill.\10\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \10\ The American Legion Resolution No. 318 (2016): Ensuring the
    Quality of Servicemember and Veteran Student's Education at
    Institutions of Higher Education
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The American Legion supports S. 798.

                          s. 844: gi bill fairness act
    A bill to amend title 38, United States Code, to consider certain time
            spent by members of reserve components of the Armed Forces
            while receiving medical care from the Secretary of Defense as
            active duty for purposes of eligibility for Post-9/11
            Educational Assistance, and for other purposes.
        Members of the National Guard or Reserve who are wounded in combat
    are often given orders under 10 U.S.C. 12301(h) for their recovery,
    treatment, and rehabilitation. Unfortunately, Federal law does not
    recognize such orders as eligible for Post-9/11 GI Bill education
    assistance, meaning that unlike other members of the military, these
    members of the National Guard and Reserve lose benefits for being
    injured in the line of duty. An example is Captain Bryan Lowman of the
    North Carolina National Guard.
        In 2010, Captain Lowman was deployed to Afghanistan in a detachment
    with the North Carolina National Guard. During the deployment, he
    became severely ill with typhoid fever, lapsed into a coma and
    underwent multiple emergency surgeries over the course of a year in
    Afghanistan, Germany and at Walter Reed Medical Center in Bethesda, MD.
    After his long recovery, Captain Lowman aimed to pursue a college
    degree. Based upon his active-duty time on his DD214, Captain Lowman
    was to be entitled to 90 percent of his Post-9/11 GI Bill benefits.
    However, since his activation status was changed to 12301(h) medical
    orders his eligibility was reduced to only the time he served before
    his illness.
        The GI Bill Fairness Act would end that unequal treatment and
    ensure these servicemembers are eligible for the same GI Bill benefits
    as Active Duty members of the military.
        The American Legion considers it truly unjust to deny wounded and
    injured servicemembers the ability to accrue educational benefits for
    the time they spend receiving medical care. No veteran should lose
    their benefits simply because they were injured while serving this
    Nation.
        Resolution No. 318: Ensuring the Quality of Servicemember and
    Veteran Student's Education at Institutions of Higher Education
    supports any legislative proposal that improves the Post-9/11 GI
    Bill.\11\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \11\ Ibid.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The American Legion supports S. 844.

                        s. 882: purple heart gi bill act
    A bill to amend title 38, United States Code, to provide for the
            entitlement to educational assistance under the Post-9/11
            Educational Assistance Program of the Department of Veterans
            Affairs for members of the Armed Forces awarded the Purple
            Heart, and for other purposes.
        S. 882 would grant full Post-9/11 GI Bill eligibility to all Purple
    Heart veterans who qualify for a portion of the benefit. Currently,
    only veterans who either serve at least 36 months on active-duty or are
    medically retired receive Post-9/11 GI Bill benefits at the 100 percent
    rate. Unfortunately, this leaves out many Purple Heart recipients,
    particularly from the Reserve Components, who fought our country's
    battles, but were activated for less than three years in total. These
    servicemembers should not be penalized for being wounded before they
    could reach the full term of their contract to receive GI Bill
    eligibility.
        Resolution No. 318: Ensuring the Quality of Servicemember and
    Veteran Student's Education at Institutions of Higher Education
    supports any legislative proposal that improves the Post-9/11 GI
    Bill.\12\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \12\ The American Legion Resolution No. 318 (2016): Ensuring the
    Quality of Servicemember and Veteran Student's Education at
    Institutions of Higher Education
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The American Legion supports S. 882.

                    s. 1192: veterans test accessibility act
    A bill to amend title 38, United States Code, to provide for prorated
            charges to entitlement to educational assistance under
            Department of Veterans Affairs Post-
            9/11 Educational Assistance Program for certain licensure and
            certification tests and national tests, and for other purposes.
        After completing their military service, veterans are eligible for
    a limited number of months of GI Bill benefits, which reimburses them
    for educational expenses incurred. Current law requires veterans to use
    a full month of their GI Bill eligibility to be reimbursed for
    licensing, certification, and national tests. Such tests open new doors
    to employment and allow veterans to advance and enhance their education
    and career. Given the relatively low cost of many tests, it often
    simply is not worth losing reimbursement for an entire month of
    touition paymenst for other less exspensive educational expenses.
        S. 1192 allows veterans to be reimbursed for approved licensing,
    certification, and national tests, while still allowing the veteran to
    use their remaining GI Bill benefits for additional educational
    expenses in the same month.
        Resolution No. 318: Ensuring the Quality of Servicemember and
    Veteran Student's Education at Institutions of Higher Education
    supports any legislative proposal that improves the Post-9/11 GI
    Bill.\13\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \13\ The American Legion Resolution No. 318 (2016): Ensuring the
    Quality of Servicemember and Veteran Student's Education at
    Institutions of Higher Education
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The American Legion supports S. 1192.

        s. 1209: a bill to increase special pension for medal of honor
                                   recipients
    To amend title 38, United States Code, to increase the amount of
            special pension for Medal of Honor recipients, and for other
            purposes.
        The American Legion enthusiastically supports an increase in the
    special pension assigned to Medal of Honor recipients. For the 72
    living recipients of this Nation's highest military honor, an increase
    in the monthly pension based upon heroic acts in the face of nearly
    insurmountable challenges is a small token of appreciation and
    gratitude for their sacrifices.\14\ \15\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \14\ http://www.cmohs.org/medal-statistics.php
        \15\ http://www.cmohs.org/living-recipients.php?p=3..
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        The last stipend increase to affect Medal of Honor recipients was
    in the Veterans Benefits Act of 2002, which increased the stipend from
    $600 monthly to $1000 monthly. The current rate is $1,303.51 a month.
        As the Nation's largest wartime veterans service organization, The
    American Legion fully appreciates the service of those awarded the
    Congressional Medal of Honor and supports increasing their monthly
    pension to $3,000. Recognizing the need to improve the pension for
    those Americans that received the highest award for valor in action
    against an enemy force, The American Legion passed Resolution No. 366,
    Honoring those who have earned the Medal of Honor, during our 98th
    National Convention in August 2016, thus we support this
    legislation.\16\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \16\ The American Legion Resolution No. 366 (2016): Honoring Those
    Who Have Earned the Medal of Honor
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The American Legion supports S. 1209.

        s. 1218: empowering federal employment for disabled veterans act
    To promote Federal employment for veterans, and for other purposes.
        S. 1218 would require Federal agencies to have full-time advocates
    for veterans' employment, and would promote career development for
    veterans within agencies. While many Federal agencies have made
    significant strides to improve veteran employment, disparities in
    veteran hiring by agency suggests there is room for improvement.
    Although veterans made up 31 percent of the Federal workforce in 2015,
    only 12 percent of workers at the Department of Agriculture and 7
    percent of workers at the Department of Health and Human Services were
    veterans, according to the Office of Personnel Management.
        S. 1218 addresses these challenges with three unique solutions: the
    codification of veterans employment programs in 24 Federal agencies;
    the establishment of an interagency council on veterans employment; and
    the expansion of the SkillBridge Initiative, one of the Department of
    Defense's most innovative approaches to transition assistance, to
    include participation by Federal agencies. If enacted, The American
    Legion firmly believes this would benefit veterans by establishing a
    point of contact within these agency, support for development, and
    opportunities for mobility if awarded employment. These resources would
    provide a tremendous step forward for the Federal agency and veteran.
        The American Legion reiterates its position that protection of
    veterans' employment rights should be proactive and continuous
    oversight must be emplace to protect them from unfair hiring practices.
    The Federal Government has scores of employment opportunities that
    educated, well-trained, and motivated veterans can fill given a fair
    and equitable chance to compete. Working together, all Federal agencies
    should identify those vocational fields, especially those with high
    turnover rates, for transitioning veterans who are trying to continue
    their service within the Federal Government.\17\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \17\ The American Legion Resolution No. 317: Enforcing Veterans'
    Preference Hiring Practices in Federal Civil Service
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The American Legion Supports S. 1218.

      s. 1277: veteran employment through technology education courses act
    To direct the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to carry out a high
            technology education pilot program under which the Secretary
            shall provide eligible veterans with the opportunity to enroll
            in high technology programs of education.
        S. 1277 would direct the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to carry out
    a pilot program allowing student veterans to attend approved non-
    traditional educational programs with a focus on obtaining technology
    micro-degrees. While the VA has the authority to cover costs of non-
    traditional educational programs, we have seen in the past that this
    approval process has been burdensome. It is important for the VA to
    address new forms of non-traditional learning as the realm of higher
    education evolves.
        Technological micro-degrees are non-traditional degree programs
    that focus on specialized technology disciplines and typically
    comprises an accelerated education model. Veterans are prime candidates
    for the technological degree programs and can see their entire
    education covered using their earned GI Bill benefits. Currently, there
    are only a handful of non-traditional organizations offering classes
    through the current VA GI Bill process; even fewer offer non-
    traditional technology programs forcing veterans to cover these costs
    on their own.
        The American Legion supports efforts in expanding educational
    assistance to non-traditional students attempting to find employment by
    earning a micro-degree in a specific field of study and applauds the
    Committee on its efforts to expand education to non-traditional student
    veterans. Although The American Legion supports the intent of this
    bill, we have concerns with S. 1277.
        Oversight is needed before the VA can approve a non-traditional
    program and the State Approving Agencies (SAAs) are best equipped to
    certify these educational courses. Additionally, the provisions of this
    bill fall outside the scope of established resolutions of The American
    Legion. As a large, grassroots organization, The American Legion takes
    positions on legislation based on resolutions passed by the membership.
    With no resolutions addressing the provisions of the legislation, The
    American Legion is researching the material and working with our
    membership to determine the course of action which best serves
    veterans.

    The American Legion has no current position S. 1277.

                     discussion draft on changes to gi bill
    To amend title 38, United States Code, to improve Post-9/11 Educational
            Assistance, and for other purposes.

    SEC. 2. CONSOLIDATION OF CERTAIN ELIGIBILITY TIERS UNDER POST-9/11
                        EDUCATIONAL ASSISTANCE PROGRAM OF THE DEPARTMENT OF
                        VETERANS AFFAIRS

        Too often, we see that Reservists and National Guard troops incur
    large sums of educational debt due to partial eligibility of GI Bill
    benefits. The American Legion feels that any effort to expand benefits
    to National Guard and Reservists for educational advancement will lead
    to more productive, work ready, and educated veterans. In 2009, the
    U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics showed that there was a direct
    correlation between education and unemployment. 9% of Americans with
    only a high school diploma were unemployed, whereas only 4.3% of
    Americans with a Bachelor's degree or higher were unemployed.\18\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \18\ U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics: https://www.bls.gov/
    spotlight/2010/college/
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        When applied to veterans, we can see an economic argument for
    increasing veteran educational benefits. Additionally, many veterans
    are non-traditional students with families. 52% of student veterans are
    married, and 23% are single parents.\19\ Given these added
    responsibilities, incurring educational debt can be burdensome for a
    family. This draft bill aims at alleviating some of the education
    liability of attending college by adjusting the eligibility tiers under
    the Post-9/11 Educational Assistance program for Reserves and National
    Guard.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \19\ https://studentveterans.org/images/SVASpotlightBrief-1.pdf
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        From 1995 to 2015, the average cost of tuition and fees at a
    private national university increased 179%. The average in-state cost
    for tuition and fees at a public university grew by 296%.\20\ The
    American Legion feels that it is time to adjust the percentage of
    maximum benefit payable to individuals serving our Nation to better
    cover the costs associated with attending higher education. We support
    the following pay structure alignment:
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \20\ U.S. News & World Report: https://www.usnews.com/education/
    best-colleges/paying-for-college/articles/2015/07/29/chart-see-20-
    years-of-tuition-growth-at-national-universities

     Old Tier Structure:
      New Tier Structure:

    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                            Percentage of                                              Percentage of
                                               Maximum                                                    Maximum
                Member Serves                  Benefit                      Member Serves                 Benefit
                                               Payable                                                    Payable
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    At least 36 months                              100%        At least 36 months                             100%
    ------------------------------------------------------     -----------------------------------------------------
    At least 30 continuous days on active                       At least 30 continuous days on
     duty and must be discharged due to                          active duty and must be discharged
     service-connected disability                   100%         due to service-connected disability           100%
    ------------------------------------------------------     -----------------------------------------------------
    At least 30 months, but less than 36                        At least 30 months, but less than 36
     months                                          90%         months                                         90%
    ------------------------------------------------------     -----------------------------------------------------
    At least 24 months, but less than 30                        At least 24 months, but less than 30
     months                                          80%         months                                         80%
    ------------------------------------------------------     -----------------------------------------------------
    At least 18 months, but less than 24                        At least 18 months, but less than 24
     months                                          70%         months                                         70%
    ------------------------------------------------------     -----------------------------------------------------
    At least 12 months, but less than 18                        At least 06 months, but less than 18
     months                                          60%         months                                         60%
    ------------------------------------------------------     -----------------------------------------------------
    At least 06 months, but less than 12                        At least 90 days, but less than 06
     months                                          50%         months                                         50%
    ------------------------------------------------------     -----------------------------------------------------
    At least 90 days, but less than 06
     months                                          40%
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Resolution No. 318: Ensuring the Quality of Servicemember and
    Veteran Student's Education at Institutions of Higher Education
    supports any legislative proposal that improves the Post-9/11 GI
    Bill.\21\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \21\ The American Legion Resolution No. 318 (2016): Ensuring the
    Quality of Servicemember and Veteran Student's Education at
    Institutions of Higher Education
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The American Legion supports Section 2.

    SEC. 3. ADDITIONAL POST-9/11 EDUCATIONAL ASSISTANCE FOR CERTAIN
                        INDIVIDUALS PURSUING PROGRAMS OF EDUCATION IN
                        SCIENCE, TECHNOLOGY, ENGINEERING, MATH, OR HEALTH
                        CARE

        The American Legion wants all veterans to succeed and would like to
    see more veterans enter Science, Technology, Engineering and Math
    (STEM) fields. This draft bill would incentivize veterans to enter
    fields where there are critical shortages and high yearly job growth.
    The American Legion supports this section of the draft bill that would
    allow extension of Title 38 education benefits up to nine months.
        Resolution No. 318: Ensuring the Quality of Servicemember and
    Veteran Student's Education at Institutions of Higher Education
    supports any legislative proposal that improves the Post-9/11 GI
    Bill.\22\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \22\ The American Legion Resolution No. 318 (2016): Ensuring the
    Quality of Servicemember and Veteran Student's Education at
    Institutions of Higher Education
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The American Legion supports Section 3.

    SEC. 4. INCREASE IN AMOUNTS OF EDUCATIONAL ASSISTANCE PAYABLE UNDER
                        SURVIVORS' AND DEPENDENTS' EDUCATIONAL ASSISTANCE
                        PROGRAM OF DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS

        Section 4 of this draft bill would increase education benefits for
    survivors and dependents (Chapter 35), which currently provides the
    least payable educational assistance of any VA program. Currently,
    Chapter 35 recipients are paid at the monthly rate of $788 for full-
    time, $592 for three-quarter-time, or $394 for half-time pursuit of
    education. This is in stark contrast to Montgomery GI Bill payments,
    which receive $1,857 for full-time, $1,392.75 for three-quarter time,
    and $928.50 for half-time enrollment. While survivors and dependents of
    servicemembers who died in the line of duty are eligible for the Post-
    9/11 GI Bill through the Gunnery Sergeant John Fry Scholarship,
    survivors and family members of veterans who are permanently and
    totally disabled due to a service-related condition or of veterans who
    died outside the line of duty have a right to demand more equitable
    benefits.
        However, the provision in this section of the draft bill falls
    outside the scope of established resolutions of The American Legion. As
    a large, grassroots organization, The American Legion takes positions
    on legislation based on resolutions passed by our membership. With no
    resolutions addressing the provisions of the legislation, The American
    Legion is researching the material and working with our membership to
    determine the course of action that best serves veterans.

    The American Legion has no current position on Section 4.

    SEC. 5. AUTHORIZATION FOR USE OF POST-9/11 EDUCATIONAL ASSISTANCE TO
                        PURSUE INDEPENDENT STUDY PROGRAMS AT CERTAIN
                        EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS THAT ARE NOT INSTITUTIONS
                        OF HIGHER LEARNING

        Section 5 authorizes veterans to use their GI Bill education
    benefits to continue their education for independent study programs at
    career technical education (CTE) centers.\23\ In Oklahoma alone,
    veterans have lost access to over 200 accredited educational programs,
    simply because there is a distance learning or online component. This
    section would allow veterans to take independent study programs at CTE
    centers, while using their GI Bill benefits.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \23\ CongressmanMullinPressRelease:http://mullin.house.gov/news/
    documentsingle.aspx? DocumentID=447
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        This draft bill would provide student veterans with an expanded
    scope and usage of the Post-9/11 GI Bill education benefits to other
    forms of postsecondary institutions. This potential legislation adds
    needed options to student-veterans in the pursuit of their educational
    goals.
        Resolution No. 318: Ensuring the Quality of Servicemember and
    Veteran Student's Education at Institutions of Higher Education
    supports any legislative proposal that improves the Post-9/11 GI
    Bill.\24\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \24\ The American Legion Resolution No. 318 (2016): Ensuring the
    Quality of Servicemember and Veteran Student's Education at
    Institutions of Higher Education
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The American Legion supports Section 5.

    SEC. 6. CALCULATION OF MONTHLY HOUSING STIPEND UNDER POST-9/11
                        EDUCATIONAL ASSISTANCE PROGRAM BASED ON LOCATION OF
                        CAMPUS WHERE CLASSES ARE ATTENDED

        This provision of the draft bill corrects a discrepancy in the
    determination of Post-9/11 GI Bill housing payments by calculating the
    payment based on where students attend their classes, rather than where
    the institution of higher learning is certified.
        Currently, the VA determines the Basic Allowance for Housing (BAH)
    amount based on the zip code where the school is certified, not
    necessarily the location of the school. This policy can result in
    monthly BAH payments that fall below or far exceed the cost of living
    in certain zip codes. As a consequence, some schools receive an unfair
    recruiting advantage by paying student veterans more than what was
    intended for BAH in that area.
        The American Legion believes that veterans should not make their
    educational choices based on housing benefit inconsistencies. Section 6
    ensures veterans receive an adequate and fair housing allowance while
    eliminating fraud and abuse of the program.
        Resolution No. 318: Ensuring the Quality of Servicemember and
    Veteran Student's Education at Institutions of Higher Education
    supports any legislative proposal that improves the Post-9/11 GI
    Bill.\25\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \25\ The American Legion Resolution No. 318 (2016): Ensuring the
    Quality of Servicemember and Veteran Student's Education at
    Institutions of Higher Education
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The American Legion supports Section 6.

    SEC. 7. REPEAL OF SUNSET ON WORK-STUDY ALLOWANCE FROM DEPARTMENT OF
                        VETERANS AFFAIRS FOR CERTAIN QUALIFYING WORK-STUDY
                        ACTIVITIES

        This section would extend the authority to provide work-study
    allowance for certain activities by individuals receiving educational
    assistance by the Secretary of Veterans Affairs.
        The VA Work-Study program provides part-time employment to students
    receiving VA education benefits who attend school three-quarter time or
    more. The student may work at the school veterans' office, the VA
    Regional Office, or at approved State employment offices. Work-study
    students are paid either the State or Federal minimum wage, whichever
    is greater. Many student veterans use the work-study program as a
    supplement to pay their bills and other costs not covered by VA
    educational programs. In addition to supporting veterans education
    benefits processing, these student veterans are also establishing
    connections with their peers on campus, thereby fostering greater
    awareness of other veterans.
        Resolution No. 318: Ensuring the Quality of Servicemember and
    Veteran Student's Education at Institutions of Higher Education
    supports any legislative proposal that improves the Post-9/11 GI
    Bill.\26\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \26\ The American Legion Resolution No. 318 (2016): Ensuring the
    Quality of Servicemember and Veteran Student's Education at
    Institutions of Higher Education
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The American Legion supports Section 7.

    SEC. 8. AUTHORIZATION OF TRANSFER OF ENTITLEMENT TO POST-9/11
                        EDUCATIONAL ASSISTANCE BY DEPENDENTS WHO RECEIVE
                        TRANSFERS FROM INDIVIDUALS WHO SUBSEQUENTLY DIE

        Section 8 would permit reassignment of veterans' education benefits
    in cases where the designated beneficiary passes away. This section
    closely mirrors S. 410, Shawna Hill Post-9/11 Education Benefits
    Transferability Act. We support that piece of legislation and support
    this section as well.
        Resolution No. 308: Amending the Eligibility for the Transfer for
    the Post-9/11 GI Bill supports legislation that would authorize all
    servicemembers with ten years or more of active-duty service, who are
    eligible for the Post-9/11 GI Bill educational benefits, be able to use
    the transferability entitlement to give to their immediate family
    members.\27\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \27\ The American Legion Resolution No. 308 (2016): Amending the
    Eligibility for the Transfer for the Post-9/11 GI Bill Educational
    Benefits
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The American Legion supports Section 8.

    SEC. 9. DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS PROVISION OF ON-CAMPUS
                        EDUCATIONAL AND VOCATIONAL COUNSELING FOR VETERANS

        VA created the Veterans Success on Campus (VSOC) program as a pilot
    in 2009 to bring Vocational Rehabilitation Counselors and VA Vet Center
    Outreach Coordinators to college campuses with large veteran
    populations. The program began as a pilot on the University of South
    Florida campus and has since expanded to over 94 schools across the
    country.\28\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \28\ U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs: http://
    www.benefits.va.gov/vocrehab/vsoc.asp
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        The VSOC program is a positive resource for student veterans and
    their dependents as they attend school through either the GI Bill or
    VA's Vocational Rehabilitation and Employment (VR&E) program, and gives
    individuals on-campus access to all-encompassing counseling programs.
        Authorizing on-campus educational and vocational counseling is a
    tried and true method of increasing veterans' educational success.
    However, The American Legion has concerns about its sustainability.
    Since VSOC is currently implemented by VA policy and not a statutorily
    required program, it's future is dependent on VA funding. This section
    would require the Secretary to provide these services at institutions
    of higher learning selected by the Secretary and would codify the VSOC
    program.
        The American Legion would also like to see the same education and
    vocational counseling before a veteran enters into the education realm.
    The best time to instruct a transitioning servicemember about their
    future in education and the workforce is before they transition out of
    the military. We strongly recommend applying this same language to the
    Transition Assistance Program.
        Resolution No. 318: Ensuring the Quality of Servicemember and
    Veteran Student's Education at Institutions of Higher Education
    supports any legislative proposal that improves the Post-9/11 GI
    Bill.\29\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \29\ The American Legion Resolution No. 318 (2016): Ensuring the
    Quality of Servicemember and Veteran Student's Education at
    Institutions of Higher Education
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The American Legion supports Section 9.

    SEC. 10. RESTORATION OF ENTITLEMENT TO POST-9/11 EDUCATIONAL ASSISTANCE
                        AND OTHER RELIEF FOR VETERANS AFFECTED BY SCHOOL
                        CLOSURE

        When a school closes, non-veteran students have Federal protections
    to support them. Affected students with Federal student loans have the
    ability to discharge their student loans. Students who received Pell
    Grants can have their eligibility periods reset for the time spent at a
    closed institution. The American Legion believes strongly that veterans
    are entitled to the same protection as their civilian counterparts.
    Over 6,000 student veterans were attending ITT Tech when they abruptly
    shut down their campuses,\30\ and more school closures will inevitably
    occur.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \30\ http://www.indystar.com/story/money/2016/09/06/why-veterans-
    have-most-lose-if-itt-tech-closes/89710280/ ``Why ITT closing hits
    veterans hardest''
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        The American Legion applauds the Committee's effort in addressing
    this issue, but Congress must not forget about the student veterans
    affected by the Corinthian College closures of 2015. Our best estimate
    is that roughly 400 student veterans were affected by the Corinthian
    College closure. In present form, this bill only applies to courses and
    programs of education discontinued after August 1, 2016. The American
    Legion believes in equal protection for veterans and calls for the
    eligibility date be amended to the fiscal year of 2015.
        Resolution No. 21: Education Benefit Forgiveness and Relief for
    Displaced Student-Veterans supports legislation that restores lost
    benefits to student-veterans attending schools that abruptly shut
    down.\31\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \31\ The American Legion Resolution No 21: Education Benefit
    Forgiveness and Relief for Displaced Student-Veterans
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The American Legion supports Section 10.

    SEC. 11. TREATMENT, FOR PURPOSES OF EDUCATIONAL ASSISTANCE ADMINISTERED
                        BY THE SECRETARY OF VETERANS AFFAIRS, OF
                        EDUCATIONAL COURSES THAT BEGIN SEVEN OR FEWER DAYS
                        BEFORE OR AFTER THE FIRST DAY OF AN ACADEMIC TERM

        The VA defines a calendar week as Sunday to Saturday. According to
    the School Certifying Official Handbook, classes that begin ``after the
    first calendar week'' should be reported separately using the actual
    date each class starts. As an example: if a term starts on a Thursday,
    any course that meets for the first time on Thursday or Friday can be
    reported together, but if a course meets for the first time the
    following Monday, Tuesday or Wednesday it must be reported as a
    separate and unique term.
        This creates excess work for educational institutions and regional
    processing officers (RPOs). Separate book and tuition fee payments must
    be issued, which may lead to improper payments. Defining ``Calendar
    Week'' for education benefits as ``the seven-day period beginning on
    the first day of the institution's published academic calendar'' will
    reduce excess work and eliminate opportunities for errors in tuition
    and fee calculations.
        Resolution No. 318: Ensuring the Quality of Servicemember and
    Veteran Student's Education at Institutions of Higher Education
    supports any legislative proposal that improves the Post-9/11 GI Bill.

    The American Legion supports Section 11.

    SEC. 12. IMPROVEMENT OF INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY OF THE VETERANS BENEFITS
                        ADMINISTRATION

        This section would compel the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to make
    changes and improvements to the information technology system of the
    Veterans Benefits Administration to ensure that all original and
    supplemental claims for education assistance are handled
    electronically. This draft bill authorizes $30 million to the Secretary
    of Veterans Affairs to carry this out during fiscal years 2017 and
    2018.
        Resolution No. 318: Ensuring the Quality of Servicemember and
    Veteran Student's Education at Institutions of Higher Education
    supports any legislative proposal that improves the Post-9/11 GI
    Bill.\32\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \32\ The American Legion Resolution No. 318 (2016): Ensuring the
    Quality of Servicemember and Veteran Student's Education at
    Institutions of Higher Education
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The American Legion supports Section 12.

    SEC. 13. PROVISION OF INFORMATION REGARDING ENTITLEMENT OF VETERANS TO
                        EDUCATIONAL ASSISTANCE

        The provisions in this section of the draft bill fall outside the
    scope of established resolutions of The American Legion. As a large,
    grassroots organization, The American Legion takes positions on
    legislation based on resolutions passed by our membership. With no
    resolutions addressing the provisions of the legislation, The American
    Legion is researching the material and working with our membership to
    determine the course of action that best serves veterans.

    The American Legion has no current position on Section 13.

    SEC. 14. EXTENSION OF AUTHORITY FOR ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION

        The provisions in this section of the draft bill extends the
    authority for the VA Advisory Committee on Education from December 31,
    2017 to December 31, 2022. This Committee provides the VA independent
    analysis and advice on VA programs, and has proven to be an important
    part of streamlining the implementation of changes to the GI Bill by
    taking into account effects on the ground.\33\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \33\ The American Legion Resolution No. 318 (2016): Ensuring the
    Quality of Servicemember and Veteran Student's Education at
    Institutions of Higher Education
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Resolution No. 318: Ensuring the Quality of Servicemember and
    Veteran Student's Education at Institutions of Higher Education
    supports any legislative proposal that improves the Post-9/11 GI Bill.

    The American Legion supports Section 14.

    SEC. 15. LIMITATION ON USE OF REPORTING FEES PAYABLE TO EDUCATIONAL
                        INSTITUTIONS AND JOINT APPRENTICESHIP TRAINING
                        COMMITTEES

        This section increases the school reporting fee to $16 for each
    veteran, or dependent enrolled under Chapter 31, 33, 34, or 35. The
    importance of this in a historical context is important to remember.
    Reporting fees were designed to streamline efficiency, with the VA
    paying schools to certify benefits themselves instead of hiring
    additional employees to process the benefits. Since 2012, this fee has
    fluctuated between $10 and $16. Without speculating on the reasons for
    these changes, it is fair to say that they are not commensurate with
    the actual labor of schools administering these programs.
        While the reporting, reconciliation and overall cost of
    administering all programs has increased, and the burden on the
    educational institution is not business as usual, the added work effort
    has not been calculated. Also, the use of these fees should be
    designated to support the Office of Veterans' Affairs/Services and for
    professional development of the school VA Certification Officials and
    other Veterans' Program Administrators. The American Legion further
    propose that recipients of this reporting fee must match these funds to
    support veterans' services.
        However, it has been difficult to track how schools are using these
    funds. This section addresses this by mandating what shall be utilized
    solely for the making of certifications required under title 38. It
    also mandates that institutions certifying over 75 enrollees may not
    use school reporting fees for general operating funds.
        Resolution No. 333: Support Increase in Reporting Fees for
    Educational Institutions supports any legislation that increases the
    amount of the reporting fees payable to educational institutions for
    certifying officials who assist/enroll veterans receiving educational
    benefits from the Department of Veterans Affairs.\34\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \34\ The American Legion Resolution No. 333: Support Increase in
    Reporting Fees for Educational Institutions
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The American Legion supports Section 15.

    SEC. 16. TRAINING FOR SCHOOL CERTIFYING OFFICIALS AS CONDITION OF
                        APPROVAL OF COURSES FOR VETERANS EDUCATIONAL
                        ASSISTANCE

        The Department of Veterans Affairs identified $416 million in Post-
    9/11 GI Bill overpayments in fiscal year 2014, affecting approximately
    one in four veteran beneficiaries and about 6,000 schools. To identify
    the reasons behind this, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) was
    asked to review these overpayments and published an extensive report
    released in October 2015. Chief among GAO's recommendations was
    granting VA explicit authority to require training for school
    officials.
        Schools cause overpayments when they make processing errors, such
    as reporting the wrong enrollment dates or billing VA for non-allowable
    fees. VA estimated that these errors account for 8% of high-dollar
    overpayment cases in fiscal years 2013 and 2014, while GAO estimated
    that they account for around $28 million of the $280 million in high-
    dollar overpayments VA made in fiscal year 2014. According to
    interviews with staff from VA's Regional Processing Office and Debt
    Management Center, school officials without adequate training were
    cited as the primary source of the errors.
        This section will require the Secretary of Veterans Affairs, in
    consultation with the State Approving Agencies, to set forth
    requirements to train school certifying officials on proper standards
    for certifying veterans benefits.
        Resolution No. 318: Ensuring the Quality of Servicemember and
    Veteran Student's Education at Institutions of Higher Education
    supports any legislative proposal that improves the GI Bill, Department
    of Defense Tuition Assistance (TA), Higher Education Title IV funding
    (i.e., Pell Grants, student loans, etc.) and education benefits so
    servicemembers, veterans, and their families can maximize its
    usage.\35\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \35\ The American Legion Resolution No. 318 (2016): Ensuring the
    Quality of Servicemember and Veteran Student's Education at
    Institutions of Higher Education
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The American Legion supports Section 16.

    SEC. 17. MODIFICATIONS RELATING TO REIMBURSEMENT OF EXPENSES OF STATE
                        APPROVING AGENCIES FOR MATTERS RELATING TO
                        ADMINISTRATION OF VETERANS EDUCATIONAL ASSISTANCE

        State Approving Agencies are responsible for approving and
    supervising programs of education for the training of veterans,
    eligible dependents, and eligible members of the National Guard and
    Reserves. SAAs grew out of the original GI Bill of Rights from 1944.
    Though SAAs have their foundation in Federal law, SAAs operate as part
    of state governments. SAAs approve programs leading to vocational,
    educational or professional objectives. These include vocational
    certificates, high school diplomas, GEDs, degrees, apprenticeships, on-
    the-job training, flight training, correspondence training and programs
    leading to required certification to practice in a profession.
        In accordance with the Jeff Miller and Richard Blumenthal Veterans
    Health Care and Benefits Improvement Act of 2016, SAAs are now
    recognized as a valuable addition to the approval process of GI Bill
    schools. The SAAs ensure that programs meet certain eligibility
    criteria, in order to see that GI Bill funds are not wasted. Their
    unique focus on how GI Bill funds are spent makes their mission
    distinct from all other oversight and approving bodies.
        In order to fulfill their additional requirements for compliance
    reviews, additional funding is required. The SAAs have far more complex
    responsibilities than the across the board certifications that existed
    pre Post-9/11 GI Bill, yet the SAAs funding has not increased since
    2005. In order to rectify this with their greater responsibilities,
    this draft bill authorizes $3 million to be appropriated for each
    fiscal year.
        The American Legion believes the $3 million increase is not
    adequate to cover the SAAs overall scope and encourages Congress to
    allocate $5 million annually for the SAAs.
        Resolution No. 304: Support Accountability for Institutions of
    Higher Education supports any legislative proposal that provides
    additional resources and increased funding for state approving
    agencies.\36\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \36\ The American Legion Resolution No. 304 (2016): Support
    Accountability for Institutions of Higher Education
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The American Legion requests that this section be amended to authorize
    $5 million to be appropriated for each fiscal year.

    SEC. 18. MODIFICATION OF CALCULATION OF AMOUNT OF EDUCATIONAL
                        ASSISTANCE FOR INDIVIDUALS PARTIALLY ELIGIBLE FOR
                        POST-9/11 EDUCATIONAL ASSISTANCE

        For Post-9/11 GI Bill recipients at an eligibility of less than
    100%, tuition and fees are recalculated based on other forms of
    restricted aid, ensuring that the veteran will not be able to fully
    cover their tuition and fee charges. This is because the VA is not the
    first payer.
        As an illustration: suppose a veteran at the 50% tier attends a
    school charging $2,000 for tuition. The veteran is awarded $1,000 in
    scholarships, leaving $1,000 remaining to be paid. Since the VA is not
    the first payer, they receive $1,000 as the reportable charge, and pay
    the school $500, 50% of the charges. If the VA was the first payer,
    however, VA would pay the school $1,000, and the veterans scholarship
    would cover the rest of the charges. This would be clearly advantageous
    to the veteran and would allow the GI Bill benefit to cover more of the
    cost of an education.
        Resolution No. 318: Ensuring the Quality of Servicemember and
    Veteran Student's Education at Institutions of Higher Education
    supports any legislative proposal that improves the GI Bill, Department
    of Defense Tuition Assistance (TA), Higher Education Title IV funding
    (i.e., Pell Grants, student loans, etc.) and education benefits so
    servicemembers, veterans, and their families can maximize its
    usage.\37\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \37\ The American Legion Resolution No. 318 (2016): Ensuring the
    Quality of Servicemember and Veteran Student's Education at
    Institutions of Higher Education
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The American Legion Supports Section 18.

                                   conclusion
        The American Legion thanks this Committee for the opportunity to
    elucidate the position of the over 2.2 million veteran members of this
    organization. For additional information regarding this testimony,
    please contact Mr. Derek Fronabarger, Deputy Director of the
    Legislative Division at The American Legion, at
    dfronabarger@legion.org.

        Senator Rounds. Thank you, sir, for your testimony.
        We will now hear from Mr. Patrick Murray, Associate
    Director, National Legislative Service, Veterans of Foreign
    Wars. Welcome, sir.

       STATEMENT OF PATRICK MURRAY, ASSOCIATE DIRECTOR, NATIONAL
      LEGISLATIVE SERVICE, VETERANS OF FOREIGN WARS OF THE UNITED
                                 STATES

        Mr. Murray. Thank you.
        Mr. Chairman, on behalf of the men and women of the
    Veterans of Foreign Wars of the United States and its
    Auxiliary, we thank you for the opportunity to provide our
    remarks on today's pending legislation.
        The VFW strongly supports the Educational Development for
    Troops and Veterans Act that would correct the mistake of the
    Department of Defense by trying to save money by cutting
    servicemember benefits while on orders. National Guardsmen and
    Reservists were placed on involuntary activation orders that
    did not allow them to accrue benefits through time in service
    like their active duty counterparts. While stationed abroad and
    away from their homes and families, these troops were denied
    the ability to gain educational credit for use after
    demobilization.
        12304(b) and additionally the 12301(h) orders need to be
    amended to keep the activation authority but reinstitute the
    benefits that were removed. Thousands of National Guardsmen and
    reservists have been involuntarily activated under these orders
    and have not received equal benefits as their active duty
    counterparts. More and more, DOD is using our Nation's Reserve
    component to fight our decade-and-a-half war on terror, and
    these men and women to come home without equal benefits is
    something that needs to be changed.
        The VFW supports the Yellow Ribbon Improvement Act that
    would provide additional financial assistance for the children
    of our fallen heroes. The Fry Scholarship gives 100 percent GI
    Bill benefits to the children and spouses of fallen
    servicemembers who gave their lives for our country. While this
    is a great benefit for the families of the fallen, there are
    some cases where it is financially not enough.
        This legislation would bridge the gap so the children or
    spouses who are eligible for the Fry Scholarship would not have
    to pay any out-of-pocket cost to achieve their educational
    goals. Allowing recipients of the Fry Scholarship eligibility
    to the Yellow Ribbon Program is just a very small measure that
    does not even begin to replay the sacrifice their
    servicemembers made for this country.
        The VFW supports the Purple Heart GI Bill Act, which would
    increase the rate of educational benefits for recipients of the
    Purple Heart. For the past decade and a half, our country has
    been sending National Guardsmen and Reservists into harm's way
    at an unprecedented level, and some of them have been wounded
    in line of duty. These citizen soldiers have bled for our
    country but have not accrued enough active duty time to attain
    full GI Bill benefits.
        The VFW thinks servicemen and -women who have bled for this
    country should be compensated for their injuries by granting
    them full education benefits. This is the least as a country we
    can do for those who put their bodies on the line for our
    freedom.
        Finally, I would like to discuss a specific section of the
    draft bill: the restoration of entitlement after school
    closing. The VFW strongly supports this legislation to protect
    student veterans who were negatively affected by school
    closures.
        Recently, ITT Tech and Westech College suddenly shuttered
    their doors after losing accreditation. This left thousands of
    student veterans out of school mid-semester, with no plan for
    what to do for the rest of the term. They had lost weeks or
    months of GI Bill benefits that were wasted at failed
    institutions. Even worse, they lost the monthly housing stipend
    that many relied upon for their living situation.
        After the failure of ITT Tech, the VFW reached out to those
    student veterans affected by the closure and offered them
    assistance through our Unmet Needs Program. The VFW provided
    students with emergency grants in order to keep them afloat for
    a month or so. The impact the school closing had on these
    students was devastating. We received multiple responses to the
    students we reached out to, and the reports of their situations
    was disheartening, to say the least. We have reports of
    veterans being a mere weeks away from living in their cars.
    Some of them had to choose which meals to eat that day, which
    meals to skip, and there was no help from the VA or their
    schools to rectify the situation.
        Thankfully, we were able to reach out and help some of
    these students during their struggle, but the VFW and
    organizations like ours cannot be the only entity stepping up
    to remedy the situation. We provided the student veterans with
    some financial stability to make it through the next month or
    so while they got settled after this major life upheaval. This
    is, however, only a Band-Aid for the real problem. These
    student veterans need protection for the future so issues like
    this do not affect them as badly as it has in these recent
    months.
        This legislation allows our affected student veterans to
    recoup their lost months of GI Bill eligibility. While we
    support this initiative, we do not feel it goes far enough. We
    think student veterans should be able to recoup the months of
    eligibility wasted at the closed institutions just like
    traditional students can with Pell Grants.
        Student veterans who attended schools like ITT now have
    lost those months of eligibility, and they have no credits to
    show for it. The VFW has heard from student veterans at the
    closed schools, and they are now struggling to complete their
    degrees without their previous credits.
        GI Bill eligibility should be allowed to be recouped like
    Chapter 4 Pell Grants can be by traditional students. Student
    veterans deserve the same equity as every other student
    affected by school closures.
        Mr. Chairman, this concludes my testimony. I would be happy
    to answer any questions you or any other members might have.
        [The prepared statement of Mr. Murray follows:]
      Prepared Statement of Patrick Murray, Associate Director, National
       Legislative Service, Veterans of Foreign Wars of the United States
        Chairman Isakson, Ranking Member Tester and Members of the
    Committee, On behalf of the men and women of the Veterans of Foreign
    Wars of the United States (VFW) and its Auxiliary, thank you for the
    opportunity to provide our remarks on today's pending legislation.
                            s. 75, arla harrell act
        During WWII, 60,000 servicemembers were human subjects of the
    military's chemical defense research program and some 4,000 of those
    servicemembers were exposed to high levels of mustard agents. Until the
    early 1990s, these veterans were forbidden to speak of the experiments,
    even though the program was declassified in 1975.
        Because of the classified nature of these exposures and the
    reliance on incomplete and conflicting data, the ability to accurately
    determine the level of exposure to mustard gas and Lewisite each
    veteran endured is difficult at best. Because of these facts, the VFW
    believes those veterans who have previously applied for benefits
    related to exposure to mustard gas and Lewisite and were denied because
    the evidence of ``full body'' exposure could not be proven, should be
    given the benefit of the doubt and have their claims adjudicated with
    the presumption of full body exposure.
        The VFW supports requiring the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA)
    to reconsider previously denied claims for mustard gas and Lewisite
    exposure with the presumption that the exposure was full body, unless
    available evidence proves otherwise.
                     s. 111, filipino veterans promise act
        The VFW has no official position on this legislation.
      s. 410, shauna hill post-9/11 education benefits transferability act
        The VFW agrees with the intent of this bill which would allow for
    the transfer of benefits to a surviving child after the loss of another
    child. The loss of a child is such an unimaginable tragedy that
    allowing the transference of benefits to a surviving child is only a
    small measure of relief that we feel is completely reasonable. If a
    veteran has already transferred their benefits to one child, it should
    be in their right to move the benefit to another child in cases of
    death.
      s. 473, educational development for troops and veterans act of 2017
        The VFW strongly supports this legislation that would correct the
    mistake of the Department of Defense (DOD) trying to save money by
    cutting servicemembers' benefits while on orders. National Guardsmen
    and Reservists were placed on involuntary activation orders that did
    not allow them to accrue benefits through time and service like their
    active duty counterparts. While stationed abroad and away from their
    homes and families, these troops were denied the ability to gain
    educational credit for use after demobilization.
        12304(a) and (b) orders need to be amended to keep the activation
    authority, but reinstitute the benefits that were removed. Thousands of
    National Guardsmen and Reservists have been involuntarily activated
    under these orders and have not received equal benefits as their active
    duty counterparts. More and more, DOD is using our Nation's reserve
    component to fight our decade and a half war against terror, and for
    these men and women to come home without equal benefits is something
    that must change.
    Section 5
        The VFW agrees with the efforts to take care of servicemembers'
    student loans in exchange for time in service. Debt in this country is
    an incredible burden on individual Americans. Making sure that
    servicemembers are financially sound is an important part of force
    readiness, and to not have crippling loans hanging over their heads is
    an important step in that direction.
    Section 6
        The VFW supports adding this grant to further grow the presence of
    student veterans on campuses around the country. Establishing a program
    that would grant funding to individual veteran centers for students is
    a great idea that would continue to promote studious camaraderie among
    our veterans as they lean forward in accomplishing their educational
    goals.
    Section 7
        The VFW supports increasing the amount of money allocated for
    educational assistance for members of the Selected Reserve. The rising
    costs of education need to be adjusted to keep pace with the rest of
    our country.
    Section 8
        The VFW supports prorating the monthly eligibility for those
    servicemembers called up on involuntary orders. National Guardsmen and
    Reservists should not lose an entire month of eligibility if they are
    not using the entire month due to activation orders. These
    servicemembers should have that month prorated so they can still retain
    some of the eligibility.
                      s. 758, janey ensminger act of 2017
        This legislation would require the Agency for Toxic Substances and
    Disease Registry (ATSDR) to conduct periodic literature reviews of the
    existing research regarding the relationship between exposure to toxic
    water at Camp Lejeune and adverse health conditions. The VFW supports
    the intent of this legislation, but has a serious concern with the
    threshold it sets for medical research, which we hope the Committee
    will address before advancing this legislation.
        The approximately 650,000 veterans and family members who served on
    Camp Lejeune between 1953 and 1987 deserve to know if their health care
    conditions are related to water they drank that was contaminated with
    trichloroethylene, tetrachloroethylene, vinyl chloride, and other
    toxins. That is why the VFW fully supports periodic literature reviews
    of the existing body of research on the relationship between
    contaminated water at Camp Lejeune and the health conditions prevalent
    among veterans and family members exposed to such toxic substances.
        However, this legislation would require the ATSDR to evaluate
    whether a health condition is caused by exposure to contaminated Camp
    Lejeune water, which is an unreasonably high bar for determining a
    relationship between adverse health conditions and toxic exposure. This
    legislation would require the ATSDR to categorize related health care
    conditions into three categories: sufficient with reasonable confidence
    that the exposure is a cause of the illness or condition; modest
    supporting causation; or no more than limited supporting causation.
    This would mean that the majority of the health conditions the ATSDR
    considers to be associated with exposure to trichloroethylene,
    tetrachloroethylene and vinyl chloride in drinking water would fail to
    meet this threshold.
        Research regarding toxic exposures has traditionally used the
    Institute of Medicine's (IOM) six categories of associations:
    sufficient evidence of a causal relationship; sufficient evidence of an
    association; limited/suggestive evidence of an association;
    insufficient evidence to determine whether an association exists;
    inadequate/insufficient evidence; and limited/suggestive evidence of no
    association. These six categories are aligned with the nature of
    epidemiological research and can be used to guide future research. The
    VFW strongly urges the Committee to reduce the threshold from causation
    to IOM's six categories of association.
                     s. 798, yellow ribbon improvement act
        The VFW supports this legislation that offers additional financial
    assistance for the children of our fallen heroes. The Fry Scholarship
    gives 100 percent GI Bill benefits to the children and spouses of
    fallen servicemembers who gave their lives serving our country. While
    this is a great benefit for the families of the fallen, there are some
    cases where financially it is not enough.
        This legislation would bridge the gap, so the children or spouses
    who are eligible for the Fry Scholarship would not have to pay any out
    of pocket costs to achieve their educational goals. Allowing recipients
    of the Fry Scholarship eligibility to the Yellow Ribbon Program is just
    a very small measure that does not even begin to repay the sacrifice
    their servicemember made for our country.
                          s. 844, gi bill fairness act
        The VFW supports this legislation which would allow for National
    Guardsmen and Reservists ordered to active duty for medical treatment
    to receive the same educational benefits as their active duty
    counterparts. There are servicemembers who were injured during their
    military service and who are convalescing at military treatment
    facilities throughout the country, but are not accruing the same
    educational benefits as other servicemembers currently on active duty.
    Their time on active duty should be considered no different than any
    others and this legislation will make that possible.
        This bill will rectify the mistake made by DOD in putting National
    Guardsmen and Reservists on 12301(h) orders which exempt them from
    benefits in order to save money. DOD should not have used this cost
    cutting measure because it is detrimental to our troops' morale and
    welfare. The VFW endorses any legislation like this that will ensure
    full benefits for our troops while away from their civilian lives on
    active duty.
                        s. 882, purple heart gi bill act
        The VFW supports this legislation increasing the rate of
    educational benefits for recipients of the Purple Heart. For the past
    decade and a half, our country has been sending National Guardsmen and
    Reservists into harm's way at an unprecedented level, and some of them
    have been wounded in the line of duty. Nearly 3,000 of these Citizen
    Soldiers have bled for this country, but have not accrued enough active
    duty time to attain full GI Bill benefits.
        The VFW thinks that service men and women who have bled for this
    country should be compensated for their injuries by granting them full
    education benefits. This is the least we as a country can do for those
    who put their bodies on the line for our freedoms.
     s. 1192, veterans to enhance studies through accessibility act of 2017
        The VFW supports this bill which would change the structure of
    charging for the costs of the tests and certifications veterans apply
    for, instead of a months' worth of eligibility from their GI Bill. The
    GI Bill pays for books, labs and fees for student veterans attending
    college. This bill would include test fees in the GI Bill payment
    structure, and would provide a savings to the government and also allow
    student veterans to retain GI Bill eligibility instead of having to use
    it for a test fee.
        s. 1209, a bill to increase special pension for medal of honor
                                   recipients
        This legislation would increase the amount of special pension
    granted to Medal of Honor recipients from $1,000 to $3,000 per month,
    adjusted annually for inflation. Medal of Honor recipients are held in
    the highest esteem by the veterans and military community. These men
    have turned the tide of battle against overwhelming enemy forces, and
    saved the lives of their comrades at great risk to themselves. With
    only 72 Medal of Honor recipients alive today, increasing their pension
    would not create a significant cost, but would represent a small but
    meaningful token of our appreciation for their heroic actions.
    Accordingly, the VFW supports this legislation.
        s. 1218, empowering federal employment for disabled veterans act
        The VFW supports this bill as it would expand opportunities for
    veterans who have honorably served our country. This bill would allow
    agencies to target high demand occupations within the Federal
    Government and make a concerted effort to hire veterans into those
    positions. We also support the establishment of an Inter-Agency Council
    to discuss and promote veteran employment issues within the Federal
    Government. Important matters like this deserve to be discussed at the
    highest levels in order for senior leadership to understand the state
    of veteran employment within their agencies.
    s. 1277, veterans employment through technology education course act of
                                      2017
        The VFW supports this legislation as it would provide new job
    opportunities in expanding fields for the future. Creating innovative
    ways that servicemembers and veterans can achieve training and
    proficiency in new technology-related fields is essential for the
    future of our country and those who served it. The VFW would like to
    see this program move forward, but we also think this program needs
    input from the State Approving Agencies (SAA), which are instrumental
    in ensuring the value and validity of programs like this. The SAA is
    tasked with overseeing programs such as VET TEC and we would like their
    agencies' approval before moving completely forward with this.
      discussion draft to improve post-9/11 gi bill educational assistance
    Increased Post-9/11 GI Bill Eligibility for Reservists
        The VFW agrees with the intent of this draft bill which would
    increase the rates of educational benefits provided to National
    Guardsmen and Reservists. Educating our veteran population is one of
    the VFW's highest priorities and we are happy this Committee values
    education as a priority as well.
    Additional Eligibility for Veterans Pursuing STEM Degrees
        The VFW strongly supports this provision to grant additional months
    of GI Bill eligibility for student veterans pursuing degrees in
    Science, Technology, Engineering and Math (STEM). Our nation is making
    a push to encourage more students to pursue STEM degrees in order to be
    competitive and outpace other nations around the world. Student
    veterans should be at the forefront of this initiative. In order to
    make this a possibility, there needs to be some additional eligibility
    granted for those pursuing these degrees, because STEM programs often
    take longer than the traditional four years to complete a bachelor's
    degree. The VFW wants to see student veterans succeed at the highest
    levels and extending school eligibility in this case may be necessary
    to complete these highly important degrees.
    Increase Educational Assistance Payments for Survivors and Dependents
        The VFW supports increasing the payments made to survivors and
    dependents for educational benefits. As the years have gone on, there
    has not been a significant increase in the amount of money survivors
    and dependents receive as their educational benefit. It is beyond time
    to make an increase in payments so as to keep pace with the rising cost
    of present day college tuitions.
    Monthly Housing Stipend Based on Location of Campus
        The VFW would ask that more research be done on how many student
    veterans would be affected by this change and how much money would
    increase or decrease. Making a change to the housing stipend without
    doing the due diligence is a hasty decision, and we would like to see
    additional information before we make a decision to support this
    legislation.
    Repeal of Sunset on Work Study
        This bill is a simple extension of VA's authority to offer work-
    study allowances for student veterans. The VFW has long supported the
    VA work-study program, and we would proudly support this initiative to
    extend the program to 2027. Work-study is a valuable tool for student
    veterans to support valuable initiatives in and around their school
    community and earn extra income while taking classes.
        While the VFW supports this legislation, we would like to see the
    end date for this program extended indefinitely. There should not be
    any time in the foreseeable future where there are not veterans
    attending schools after their enlistments, so we do not see any time
    where work-study would not be an added value to student veterans.
    Restoration of Entitlement after School Closing
        The VFW strongly supports this legislation to protect student
    veterans who were negatively affected by school closures. Recently ITT
    and Westech College suddenly shuttered their doors after losing
    accreditation. This left thousands of student veterans out of school
    mid-semester, with no plan for what to do the rest of the term. They
    had lost weeks or months of GI Bill benefits that were wasted at failed
    institutions. Even worse, they lost the monthly housing stipend many
    relied upon for their living situation. This legislation allows these
    affected student veterans to recoup their lost months of GI Bill
    eligibility.
        While we support this initiative, we do not feel it goes far
    enough. We think student veterans should be able to recoup the months
    of eligibility wasted at the closed institutions just like traditional
    students can with Pell Grants. Student veterans who attended schools
    like ITT have now lost those months of GI Bill eligibility and they
    have no credits to show for it. The VFW has heard from student veterans
    from the closed schools, and they are now struggling to complete their
    degrees without their previous credits. GI Bill eligibility should be
    allowed to be recouped like Chapter Four Pell Grants can be by
    traditional students. Student Veterans deserve the same equity as every
    other student affected by school closures.
        Additionally, these student veterans now have no monthly income
    from their GI Bill benefits. The VFW strongly supports extending the
    Basic Allowance for Housing payments for a maximum of 4 months or until
    the end of the term, whichever is earliest. Our team at the VFW
    immediately reached out to the student veterans affected by each of the
    school closures and offered them a stop gap measure through our Unmet
    Needs Program. We provided the student veterans with some financial
    stability to make it through the next month or so while they got
    settled after this major life upheaval. This was, however, only a band-
    aid for the real problem. These student veterans need protection for
    the future so issues like this do not affect them as badly as these
    past closures have.
    Improvement of VA IT Systems
        The VFW strongly supports the improvement of VA information
    technology (IT) systems. Time and time again, VA has failed to
    accurately account for millions of dollars of wrongful payments due to
    outdated IT systems. Any efforts to enhance the IT systems and bring
    them into the 21st century is strongly supported by the VFW. We would
    like to see this fixed as soon as possible in order to save taxpayer
    money and alleviate repayment burdens from veterans attending school.
    Extension of Advisory Committee on Education
        The VFW supports extending the authority of the Advisory Committee
    on Education until 2022. This is a valuable asset the VA Secretary can
    use to gather information and advice on how student veterans are using
    their education benefits, and the Committee can advise on any changes
    or improvements that may need to be made. While the VFW supports this
    Committee, we would like to see its authority extended indefinitely.
    Student veterans will always be going to school, so we think this
    Committee should always be present.
    Limitation on Use of Reporting Fees
        The VFW supports the limitation of reporting fees for general
    school uses. At the beginning of each term, a School Certifying
    Official (SCO) reports the enrollment of a GI Bill user to VA. This
    enrollment signifies the usage of educational benefits for the
    individual. After this is complete, the school receives a $12 payment
    from VA for certifying the enrollment. Currently, there is no
    limitation on where that money is disbursed within the school's system.
    This legislation would ensure that schools are not using that reporting
    fee for its own general use. The VFW supports the plan to limit the
    usage of those fees for veteran services only. This will add to the
    amount of money available for veteran programs within those
    institutions.
    Training for School Certifying Officials
        The VFW supports mandatory training for School Certifying
    Officials. In 2014 alone, there were $262 million dollars in erroneous
    Post-9/11 GI Bill payments to students and most times the students, not
    the schools, are the ones burdened with repaying the money. Making sure
    the SCO's are properly trained is one step in avoiding overpayments,
    and the VFW supports this action. While this legislation does not
    specifically address the source of funding for this training, the VFW
    thinks the schools themselves should be responsible for the cost of the
    training.
    Modification of Funding for State Approving Agencies
        The VFW supports increasing the funding allocated to the State
    Approving Agencies. These agencies are the first line in ensuring
    schools are properly accredited and providing a high standard of
    education for student veterans. There have been thousands of student
    veterans left out on their own after their schools closed, sometimes
    with little or no notice. The SAA's role is to make sure that
    institutions are accredited and providing the services they claim to.
    For that reason, the VFW endorses additional funding in the hopes that
    school closures like ITT do not affect veterans in the future.

        Mr. Chairman, this concludes my testimony. I am prepared to answer
    any questions you or the Committee members may have.

        Senator Rounds. Thank you, Mr. Murray, for your testimony.
        We will now hear from Brigadier General, Retired, Roy
    Robinson, President, National Guard Association of the United
    States.
        Mr. Robinson, before you begin, let me just explain once
    again to everyone here that the reason why there is not a lot
    of folks that are here with us right now is because we are also
    voting on three significant issues on the floor of the Senate,
    and so we are moving back and forth. This is actually where we
    talk about the Iran sanctions bill, and the final passage will
    be shortly. So, it is an important part, and we want to get it
    done and send a powerful message to some folks in the world
    that sometimes do not really pay attention. Hopefully, this
    will help.
        So, General, if you would like to begin.

        STATEMENT OF BRIG. GEN. ROY ROBINSON (RET.), PRESIDENT,
            NATIONAL GUARD ASSOCIATION OF THE UNITED STATES

        General Robinson. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and other Members
    of the Committee. On behalf of the almost 45,000 members of the
    National Guard Association of the United States and nearly
    500,000 soldiers and airmen of the National Guard, we deeply
    appreciate this opportunity to share with you our thoughts on
    today's hearing topics for the record.
        We also thank you for the tireless oversight you have
    provided to ensure accountability and improve our Nation's
    services to veterans and their families.
        In my testimony, I would like to urge this Committee to
    correct the benefit disparity for members of the National Guard
    when deployed under 12304 Bravo status under Title 10 of the
    U.S. Code. I am also happy to answer your questions on the
    numerous legislative proposals under consideration by this
    Committee today.
        Since our inception in 1878, ensuring benefit eligibility
    and equity for the men and women of the National Guard has been
    one of NGAUS's primary functions. I would be remiss if I did
    not point out that, historically, benefits for servicemembers,
    most notably through the 1944 GI Bill, were not constructed nor
    viewed as entitlements. Rather, the GI Bill and related
    legislative efforts were solely focused on reintegrating the
    men and women of the Armed Forces following the horrors of
    World War II and helping them to become successful,
    contributing members of American society.
        It is in this same light that we remain discouraged that
    there has been no resolution with the numerous benefits
    currently not attributed to Guard and Reserve servicemembers
    deploying under 12304 Bravo status.
        Since establishing the 12304 Bravo authority in 2012 to
    give combatant commanders greater authority to utilize the
    Reserve component, thousands of our members have been deployed
    on operations to support the Multinational Force Observers
    mission in the Sinai, Egypt; NATO's Operation Joint Guardian in
    Kosovo; and most recently the European Reassurance Initiative
    countering Russian aggression in Eastern Europe.
        The Guard and Reserve forces have provided a cost-effective
    means of meeting the needs of combatant commanders and have
    provided important experience and expertise. We are also aware
    of the Department of Defense's continued utilization of this
    authority as evidenced by proposed increases in Guard and
    Reserve deployments under 12304 Bravo. However, when the 12304
    Bravo authority was established, it failed to make important
    changes to Titles 5, 37, 38, and 10 of the U.S. Code. While our
    constituency wants to serve in any capacity, we believe that
    they should be afforded benefits equal to active component
    members, such as tuition assistance, early retirement credit,
    transitional health care access, and Post-9/11 GI Bill
    benefits.
        While we appreciate the Department's ongoing efforts to
    consolidate the authorities by which members of the Reserve
    component may be ordered to perform duty, NGAUS remains deeply
    concerned that the implementation of duty status reform will
    take numerous years and prevent thousands of additional
    Guardsmen and Reservists from receiving the same benefits as
    their active duty counterparts.
        We ask that you support the immediate passage of Ranking
    Member Tester's bill, S. 473, the Educational Development for
    Troops and Veterans Act, introduced in February 2017 with
    Senators Franken, Van Hollen, Hassan, and Klobuchar. This
    commonsense bill would ensure that all deployed Reserve
    component members would receive Post-9/11 GI Bill benefits
    equal to those enjoyed by the active component members. It
    would also protect them from lost wages while deployed and
    allow Guardsmen to defer their Federal student loan payments
    prior to deployments.
        Finally, over the last few months, NGAUS has worked closely
    with our friends at the Reserve Officers Association and the
    Enlisted Association of the National Guard of the United States
    to support the Reserve Component Benefits Parity Act to amend
    Titles 5, 10, 37, and 38 of the U.S. Code to provide full
    benefits to members of the Guard and Reserve deployed under
    12304(b) status as well as 12304(a).
        I would like to acknowledge and thank Congressman Palazzo
    and Congressman Walz for introducing this bill in the House,
    which currently has over 60 cosponsors.
        I would like to also thank Senators Cornyn, Franken,
    Klobuchar, Capito, and Baldwin for championing the Senate
    companion legislation. While I realize that some of the
    provisions of this bill do not fall under this Committee's
    jurisdiction, I would like to ask all of you here today to
    cosponsor S. 667. These are not just benefit parity issues;
    they are questions of fairness.
        I appreciate your invitation to appear before this
    Committee today, and I look forward to answering your
    questions.
        Thank you, Mr. Chair.
        [The prepared statement of General Robinson follows:]
            Prepared Statement of BG (Ret) Roy Robinson, President,
                National Guard Association of the United States
        Dear Chairman Isakson, Ranking Member Tester, and other
    distinguished Members of the Senate Veterans' Affairs Committee:
                                  introduction
        On behalf of the almost 45,000 members of the National Guard
    Association of the United States and the nearly 500,000 soldiers and
    airmen of the National Guard, we deeply appreciate this opportunity to
    share with you our thoughts on today's hearing topics for the record.
    We also thank you for the tireless oversight you have provided to
    ensure accountability and improve our Nation's services to veterans and
    their families.
        In my testimony, I would like to focus on an issue that continues
    to plague the soldiers and airmen of the National Guard, which falls
    under the jurisdiction of this Committee. We urge this Committee to
    correct the benefit disparity for members of the National Guard when
    deployed under 10 U.S.C. Sec. 12304b status. My goal today is to
    highlight this particular issue, as well as provide endorsements for
    numerous legislative proposals also under consideration by this
    Committee.
                     duty status reform and benefit parity
        Since our inception in 1878, ensuring benefit eligibility and
    equity for the men and women of the National Guard has been one of
    NGAUS' primary functions. I would be remiss if I did not point out that
    historically, benefits for servicemembers, most notably through the
    1944 G.I. Bill, were not constructed nor viewed as entitlements.
    Rather, the G.I. Bill and related legislative efforts were solely
    focused on reintegrating the men and women of the Armed Forces
    following the horrors of World War II and helping them to become
    successful, contributing members of American society.
        It is in this same light that we remain discouraged that there has
    been no resolution with the numerous benefits currently not attributed
    to Guard and Reserve Servicemembers deploying under 10 U.S.C.
    Sec. 12304b status. Since establishing the 12304b authority in 2012 to
    give Combatant Commanders greater authority to utilize the Reserve
    Component, thousands of our members have been deployed on operations to
    support the Multinational Force Observers mission in the Sinai, Egypt,
    NATO's Operation Joint Guardian in Kosovo, and most recently the
    European Reassurance Initiative countering Russian aggression in
    Eastern Europe. The Guard and Reserve forces have provided a cost-
    effective means of meeting the needs of Combatant Commanders and have
    provided important experience and expertise. We are also aware of the
    Department of Defense's continued utilization of this authority as
    evidenced by proposed increases in Guard and Reserve deployments under
    12304b.
        However, when the 12304b authority was established, it failed to
    make important changes to 5 U.S.C., 37 U.S.C., 38 U.S.C. and 10 U.S.C.
    As such, health, education, leave, pay, and retirement benefits equal
    with active component troops serving the same functions have been
    denied to Guard and Reserve Component soldiers serving under the 12304b
    authority. While our constituency wants to serve in any capacity, we
    believe that they should be afforded benefits such as: tuition
    assistance, early retirement credit, transitional healthcare access,
    and Post-9/11 G.I. Bill benefits currently not funded under 12304b
    status.
        As you know, the National Defense Authorization Act of 2016
    requires the Department of Defense to consolidate the thirty-two
    statutory authorities by which members of the reserve component may be
    ordered to perform duty. While we appreciate the Department's ongoing
    efforts, NGAUS remains deeply concerned that the implementation of duty
    status reform will take numerous years and prevent thousands of
    additional Guardsmen and Reservists from receiving the same benefits as
    their active duty counterparts.
        To that end, we ask that you support the immediate passage of
    Ranking Member Tester's bill, S. 473, the Educational Development for
    Troops and Veterans Act, introduced in February 2017 with Senators
    Franken, Van Hollen, Hassan, and Klobuchar. This commonsense bill would
    ensure that all deployed reserve-component members would receive Post-
    9/11 G.I. Bill benefits equal to those enjoyed by active component
    members. It would also protect them from lost wages while deployed and
    allow Guardsmen to defer their Federal student loan payments prior to
    deployments. Furthermore, S. 473 would establish a grant program to
    build, maintain, and improve college veteran education centers to help
    student veterans maximize their benefits, receive academic aid, and
    connect with their peers on campus. This is not just a benefit-parity
    issue. It is a question of fairness. Passing this bill will not only
    help ensure the men and women of the National Guard accrue Post-9/11
    G.I. Bill benefits in the same manner as their active duty counterparts
    but will further support the soldiers who protect our Nation.
                        additional supported legislation
        NGAUS strongly supports S. 410, the Shawna Hill Post-9/11 Education
    Transferability Act introduced by Senator Crapo and Senator Risch.
    Named after Shawna Hill, a teenager from Idaho who was tragically
    killed in an automobile accident in 2012, S. 410 would amend 38 U.S.C.
    to allow reassignment of veterans' education benefits in cases where
    the designated beneficiary passes away.
        S. 798, the Yellow Ribbon Improvement Act of 2017, introduced by
    Senator Cassidy, Senator Tillis and Senator Brown, would expand
    eligibility for the Department of Veterans Affairs' (VA) Yellow Ribbon
    Program to recipients of the Marine Gunnery Sergeant John David Fry
    scholarship. The Yellow Ribbon Program is an extremely vital program
    for members of the National Guard by helping students avoid out-of-
    pocket tuition and fees for education programs that cost most than the
    G.I. Bill's allowance. S. 798 would allow eligibility for the Yellow
    Ribbon Program for surviving spouses and the children of servicemembers
    who have died in the line of duty.
        NGAUS also supports S. 882, which would add Purple Heart recipients
    to the list of eligible veterans who can access full Post-9/11 G.I.
    Bill benefits. The legislation, introduced by Senators Rounds, Manchin,
    Warren, and Kaine, would also make Purple Heart recipients eligible for
    participation in the Yellow Ribbon Program. Currently, only veterans
    who served on active duty for 36 months are eligible for Post-9/11 G.I.
    Bill benefits, which disqualifies hundreds of Guardsmen who have been
    awarded the Purple Heart.
        Similarly, we appreciate the recent introduction of S. 1209,
    introduced by Senators Graham, Cotton, Blumenthal and Markey, that
    would increase the monthly pension given to Medal of Honor recipients.
    S. 1209 would increase those pensions from $1,303.51 a month to $3,000
    for the 72 living Medal of Honor recipients.
        S. 1218 would benefit members of the National Guard by requiring
    Federal agencies to have full-time advocates for veterans' employment.
    The Empowering Federal Employment for Veterans Act, introduced by
    Senators Sullivan, Heitkamp, and Harris, would connect veterans with
    Federal jobs that match their skills, as well as promote career
    development. With an unacceptably high rate of unemployed veterans,
    NGAUS appreciates the introduction of this legislation to ensure
    servicemembers are able to build and maintain a sustainable future when
    transitioning out of military service.
        S. 1277, introduced by Senators Boozman, Heller, Risch and Capito,
    would expand the VA's Accelerated Learning pilot program that covers
    the costs for non-traditional technology education programs. The
    Veterans Employment Through Technology Education Courses would allow
    the soldiers and airmen of the National Guard to learn valuable 21st
    century workforce skills including computer coding and programming as a
    VA educational benefit. We applaud the introduction of this legislation
    to help provide IT training that is typically not covered under the
    Post-9/11 G.I. Bill.
                                   conclusion
        I thank you all again for allowing NGAUS to testify before this
    Committee today. I truly appreciate your consideration of the
    aforementioned legislation under this Committee's jurisdiction. I look
    forward to continuing our work together and cannot thank you enough for
    your steadfast leadership in advocating for the men and women of the
    National Guard.

        Senator Rounds. Thank you, General.
        I do have a couple of questions that I would like to begin
    asking. First of all, for Mr. Hubbard, could you address
    briefly S. 1330? That is the transferability of GI Bill
    benefits to surviving dependents and the need for it to be
    enacted. Would you care to comment, sir?
        Mr. Hubbard. Yes. Thank you for the question, Mr. Chairman.
        Well, just to clarify, if you look at issues that are
    related to survivors, in our point of view as an organization,
    survivor of a servicemember who died in the line of duty for us
    is seen, for policy purposes, as exactly the same as a
    servicemember veteran themselves. We believe that very
    strongly, and we see this as a minor technical correction that,
    frankly, I think was mainly an accident and really just an
    oversight in the legislative process when this was put
    together.
        Ultimately, to have the ability to access the full suite of
    benefits that these individuals have earned is of the utmost
    importance to us.
        Senator Rounds. Thank you, sir.
        Mr. Kamin, you noted your support for a provision that
    would restore used GI Bill benefits when a school closed
    permanently. There have been a number of student veterans
    impacted by such closures in the last several years. Do you
    have concerns that we could see a significant number of
    additional school veterans impacted by future school closures?
        Mr. Kamin. Thank you for that question, Senator. I would be
    remiss to not commend your staff as well as the Committee and
    HVAC for their work during the American Council on Independent
    Colleges and Schools crisis of the summer of 2016. We worked
    closely with Student Veterans of America and VFW under the
    presumption that there would be no possible solution that could
    pass both houses of Congress, and so we did our best to rally
    our service officers and get our emergency funds in order
    because we knew that veterans' benefits would go off a cliff as
    soon as this ruling from the Department of Education happened.
        Your staff worked around the clock to craft a solution, and
    I believe the legislation passed to afford Title 38 benefits
    just maybe a week or two before the ruling was issued, so it
    was really remarkable work.
        That being said, the ruling meant that ACICS-certified
    schools have 18 additional months to find additional
    accreditation. We know that there are many schools that will
    not be able to. So, the crisis was averted, but the problem
    still remains, and that is why we view this as very important
    to get done, as well as increasing and boning up our oversight
    components.
        Senator Rounds. Thank you, sir.
        Mr. Murray, in S. 1277--that is the VET TEC Act of 2017--
    the VA would have to consult with State Approving Agencies, or
    SAAs, before contracting with education providers. Since this
    technology training would only be a part of a pilot program and
    not necessarily approved for GI Bill benefits, would that
    address the VFW's desire for SAA involvement?
        Mr. Murray. Yes. Essentially, whenever the Secretary is
    approving, the SAAs are on the front line of making sure that
    these schools are providing value; they are providing validity
    that schools are meeting the proper standards. If there was a
    way that we could incorporate the SAAs' approval and
    recommendations into these new programs, so we are not just
    facing pop-up schools that offer certifications at the expense
    of veterans, that is something we greatly appreciate their
    input before we gave our full support in.
        We would also like a little bit of clarification about the
    employment in the related fields of study and meaningful
    employment. Meaningful employment can mean a lot of different
    things to a lot of different people. A little bit of
    clarification on that would be something we would greatly like
    to see, so that maybe the SAAs can help achieve some kind of a
    standard to set forth. That would reassure us more.
        Senator Rounds. Thank you, sir.
        General Robinson, I have to share with you, after serving
    as Governor of South Dakota for 8 years during a time in which
    our Guardsmen were deployed, we used Title 32 and Title 10.
    When they were deployed, it seems as though I had always
    assumed that the benefits that would accrue to them would be
    just like someone who was a member of the armed services, who
    was not necessarily a member of the Guard and Reserve, but
    full-time, as they call it. But, when they become Title 10,
    they are full-time as well, and it surprised me on several
    different occasions to find that perhaps some of the benefits
    did not accrue in a similar fashion.
        As you know, sir, this Committee acted last Congress to
    correct the benefit disparity for Guard and Reserve troops that
    were deployed under 12304(b) and 12301(h) orders when we passed
    the Veterans First Act out of Committee without opposition.
    Unfortunately, we have not yet been able to pass it through the
    full Senate.
        Can you tell the Committee what the National Guard members
    are being told about these orders by their chain of command?
        General Robinson. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        I think due to the intricacies of the different statuses
    that a soldier or airman can be deployed under, some of the
    leadership is just now coming around to understanding what the
    soldiers do not get when they are in a 12304 Bravo status.
        I think more and more right now, as you read in the press,
    we have got more Reserve members, both National Guard and other
    components, that are finding out the hard way, not through
    their leadership telling them, but when they go through the
    demobilization process they realize that all of those benefits
    are not there at the end of the mobilization like they thought
    it would be. There are various concerns about some of the
    transition benefits that are associated with some of the
    eligibility under TRICARE that those soldiers and airmen should
    be able to access as they reintegrate into their family and
    their job. And that is going to be a much harder task without
    the coverage or the benefits they would normally get with any
    other deployment.
        Senator Rounds. Thank you.
        Mr. Hubbard, based upon your bio, I suspect that you may
    have experienced some of that. Would you care to share your
    personal experiences on this or what your association has
    wanted you to share with us today?
        Mr. Hubbard. Yes. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate
    that point.
        Just for some context, I deployed last year with the Marine
    Corps Reserve, a unit based out of Quantico, VA, with a unit
    that was pulled together from Reserve units across the United
    States, approximately 300 marines or so, of which many, many
    were Reservists. This was kind of a test run of the ability to
    achieve a mission with a COCOM, a preplanned mission with
    Reservists.
        It was a highly successful mission. Unfortunately, many of
    these young men and women were told at the beginning of the
    deployment that they, in fact, would be receiving GI Bill
    benefits upon conclusion of the deployment. They were told this
    falsely, and I believe it was a misunderstanding. Nonetheless,
    these young men and women spent the entirety of their
    deployment in harm's way in Central America doing activities
    and work side by side with active duty counterparts, doing the
    same job. One group was getting GI Bill; one was not. All the
    while, however, these young men and women thought they were
    getting GI Bill. They were planning to come home and go to
    school. These individuals had registered for classes. When they
    got back and toward the end of deployment, they were told,
    ``Sorry, guys. You are actually not getting GI Bill.''
        I cannot tell you the significant harm that that caused to
    these individuals, and consider this. For many of them, they
    were looking to do a 4-year degree. It is not going to be until
    the time this is fixed, in some cases maybe until 2020, 2021,
    even later, that these individuals are able to achieve their
    educational goals. So, it is not just a 3-to-6-month impact; we
    are talking about significant time over even half a decade
    affecting these individuals.
        Senator Rounds. Thank you, sir.
        Gentlemen, I want to thank you all for your service to our
    country. It is time for me now to go to the floor and vote.
    Senator Boozman will handle the gavel, and I believe he has got
    a few questions for you as well. Thank you, gentlemen.
        Senator Boozman [presiding]. Thank you, Senator Rounds,
    very much.
        I do just have a few questions. Mr. Murray, in regard to
    S. 1277, the VET TEC Act, VET TEC Act of 2017, the VA would
    have to consult with State Approving Agencies before
    contracting with education providers. Since this technology
    training would only be a part of a pilot program and not
    necessarily approved for GI Bill benefits, would that address
    the VFW's desire for SAA involvement?
        Mr. Murray. Yes, sir. We would very much like to see the
    SAA involved in this approving.
        Senator Boozman. Very good.
        General Robinson, you support S. 1218 to improve Federal
    hiring of veterans. Can you tell us what some of the biggest
    challenges and concerns are for the National Guard members when
    it comes to employment and navigating the Federal hiring
    bureaucracy, which is truly a chore.
        General Robinson. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Obviously, we do support S. 1218. It ties to several
    different things, one of which is the causes that we see for
    suicides in our ranks. A lot of those causes are linked back to
    problems with employment and money as they transition back to
    their civilian lives. So, we do see a direct connection, and
    that is why we think it is so important to try to help
    Guardsmen go back and be employed and continue on with their
    life as contributing Americans.
        We would like to see a change to the Federal hiring
    preference standards regarding Guardsmen and Reservists from
    180 consecutive days to 180 cumulative days. This would cause
    an increase in eligibility for those Guard members and
    Reservists who may be on--they may be on separate orders over
    the course of several months. Allowing for cumulative days to
    help as far as their eligibility would open that gate even
    wider for some of those people to participate.
        Senator Boozman. Very good.
        That is really all the questions I have. You know, you all
    have done a tremendous job. Anytime we hear about real-life
    stories and how it affects individuals, it is so, so very
    important as opposed to spreadsheets, a lot of technological
    stuff, and a lot of abbreviations that the public does not
    understand and half of us do not understand. So, like I said,
    that is very, very valuable.
        Have you all got any other comments that you would like to
    add before we adjourn? Yes, sir.
        Mr. Hubbard. Thank you for the opportunity, Mr. Chairman.
        One point that we just want to really focus on again is
    making sure that the GI Bill is something that persists for
    future generations. We believe it can be improved and expanded
    with the impressive package that this body has put together and
    the various proposals that this Committee is looking at. We
    think, ultimately, however, we want to move toward this idea of
    education as a component of service.
        For those that have served to defend the Nation, it is
    extremely important that they have the opportunity to then
    transition through school. We have seen this to be an extremely
    effective manner, and right out of the gate, about 50 percent
    are going right to school on the Post-9/11 GI Bill, currently.
    We believe that bringing this forward to future generations,
    not just the Post-9/11 GI Bill, but the GI Bill, bringing it
    across different generations is extremely important.
        Imagine today if, for example, we had the Korean War GI
    Bill. Given the tight budget times, that would be gone in a
    second. So, we think broadening the name is very important, and
    ultimately providing that opportunity to those that have served
    the country is of the utmost critical importance to our
    organization.
        Senator Boozman. I appreciate that. I had the opportunity
    when I was in the House to chair and then become Ranking Member
    when the majority switched on the subcommittee that actually
    was in charge of implementing the GI Bill, which many of you
    remember. I do think that we forget how far we have come.
        Again, that has been the work of Congress, but it has also
    very, very importantly been you all pushing these things
    forward. It simply would not have gotten done without the
    efforts of the organizations that you all represent. So, we
    really do appreciate that and appreciate your efforts in that
    area.
        Now the same is true as we go forward. It is going to take
    all of us working together, trying to sort out the kinks, the
    unintended consequences, the areas that we have not done, but I
    do think we are moving in the right direction and can be proud,
    very proud of the work that you all have done and the work that
    Congress has done to get us where we are.
        Does anyone else have any more comments? General Robinson?
        General Robinson. Mr. Chairman, if I could--and I want to
    reiterate the 12304 Bravo issue and the linkage that it will
    have. If the next 15 years in utilization of the Guard and
    Reserve looks anything like the past 15 years, the likelihood
    is that these soldiers and airmen and the members of the other
    services are going to be very, very busy. Unless people dig
    into the intricacies of all the benefits that they are not
    being awarded through 12304 Bravo, they may not understand----
        Senator Boozman. Sure.
        General Robinson [continuing]. That it actually turns into
    a readiness issue. As these soldiers and airmen come out of one
    mobilization, as they are going through the reintegration, they
    are actually preparing and becoming ready for the next
    mobilization. So, it turns it from not just a National Guard
    and Reserve issue; it is actually an issue that the country
    needs to pick up on because the readiness of those forces are
    tied to the benefits that they are not currently going to
    receive under 12304 Bravo orders. I just wanted to highlight
    that to the Chairman and the Committee. Thank you.
        Senator Boozman. We appreciate that very much. I think you
    make a very, very good point.
        Yes, sir, Mr. Kamin.
        Mr. Kamin. Yes. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        I would like to echo your remarks on the personal stories.
    Personally, I am not smart enough to look at statute and
    understand the human implications, and seeing the full effect
    of that really empowers us to do the right thing and learn what
    we need to sink into.
        With that being said, I would like to point you to Section
    8, authorization of transfer of entitlement to Post-9/11
    educational assistance for the dependents, which TAPS brought
    up, and introduce you to Coleen Bowman, who is sitting back
    there, who is the surviving spouse of Sergeant Major Robert
    Bowman, who has a daughter who very much wants to go to
    college, and the family has earned it. But, right now, they are
    not being afforded that benefit.
        So, we stand with them to say this is an easy thing we can
    fix, and we are ready to work with you on that.
        Senator Boozman. Thank you very much, and thank you for
    bringing that up. We appreciate you. We appreciate you being
    here and putting a face with a story. That is so, so very
    important. So, thank you very much.
        Well, with that, we are going to adjourn. The hearing
    record will be open for 5 business days for Members to revise
    remarks and submit additional questions. I do not want to bang
    on the table or they will get on to me. We are adjourned. Thank
    you.
        [Whereupon, at 12:19 p.m., the Committee was adjourned.]

                                A P P E N D I X

                                  ----------

                   Prepared Statement of Hon. Richard Burr,
                        U.S. Senator from North Carolina
        Chairman Isakson, Ranking Member Tester and Members of the
    Committee, Thank you for the opportunity to present my views on pending
    legislation under consideration by the Committee.
        Today, I would like to discuss the Janey Ensminger Act of 2017 ,
    important legislation sponsored by myself and Senators Thom Tillis (R-
    NC), Bill Nelson (D-FL), and Marco Rubio (R-FL).
        The legislation is named in honor of Master Sergeant Jerry
    Ensminger's daughter, Janey, who was only nine-years-old when she died
    in 1985 from a rare form of leukemia after being exposed to toxic water
    at Camp Lejeune her entire life. Master Sergeant Ensminger has been a
    tireless advocate for the members of the military and families who were
    harmed by toxic exposure at Camp Lejeune.
        Our bill requires the Department of Veterans Affairs to provide
    medical care for all diseases that can be scientifically linked to
    exposure to toxic chemicals at Camp Lejeune.
        The legislation also requires that the Agency for Toxic Substances
    and Disease Registry (ATSDR), a Federal agency within the Centers for
    Disease Control and Prevention, review all relevant scientific
    literature every three years to determine if sufficient or modest
    causal links have been found between toxic exposure at Camp Lejeune and
    additional diseases and conditions. This will ensure that veterans and
    their families will not have to wait to get medical care as researchers
    learn more about the long-term health consequences of the toxins found
    in the water at Camp Lejeune.
        By way of background, the Centers for Disease Control and
    Prevention's Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR)
    at the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) conducts public
    health assessments addressing environmental contamination and analyzing
    the health risks from this exposure for individuals who lived and
    worked at Camp Lejeune, NC. Current law extends health care to veterans
    and their family members who have certain diseases and conditions as a
    result of exposure to contaminated well-water in North Carolina from
    1953 to 1987. ATSDR's scientific analysis has been critical to
    informing the benefits for veterans and their family members who are
    sick as a result of this tragic contamination in North Carolina.
    Despite ATSDR determining that a number of cancers and other health
    conditions were caused by the Camp Lejeune water contamination, the
    Veterans Administration (VA) continues to challenge these findings,
    ultimately delaying and denying care to veterans and their family
    members. For decades, servicemembers and their family members who lived
    and worked at Camp Lejeune, NC were harmed by exposures to toxic
    substances. In the decades since, these men and women who served our
    Nation, have had to fight to receive the care to which they are
    entitled as a result of their service to our country. Veterans and
    their family members should not be further harmed by the VA's failure
    to accept ATSDR's findings.
        The Janey Ensminger Act of 2017 codifies ATSDR's critical work on
    behalf of veterans and their family members who have been sickened by
    the toxic exposures that occurred at Camp Lejeune, in a way that
    ensures and strengthens accountability to these individuals. This bill
    provides critical transparency regarding the HHS and VA's Camp Lejeune-
    related work in a manner that respects and reflects the most current
    scientific understanding of the health risks associated with these
    toxic exposures.
        This bill would require the ATSDR Administrator to review the
    scientific literature relevant to the relationship between the
    employment or residence of individuals at Camp Lejeune, NC for not
    fewer than 30 days between August 1, 1953, and December 21, 1987, and
    the specific illnesses or conditions incurred by those individuals. The
    ATSDR Administrator would also be required to determine each illness or
    condition for which there is evidence that exposure to a toxic
    substance at Camp Lejeune, NC, during this time period may be a cause
    of the illness or condition, categorize the level of evidence for these
    conditions, and publish this information on HHS' Internet website.
    Under this bill, the list of illnesses and conditions, and their
    corresponding evidentiary categorization from exposure to a toxic
    substance at Camp Lejeune, NC, would be regularly updated to ensure
    that this list reflects the most current scientific analysis. This
    transparency is key for ensuring that there is no denying, delaying, or
    disputing the health care benefits owed veterans and their family
    members who are sick because of exposure to a toxic substance at Camp
    Lejeune, North Carolina.
        If future research by ATSDR determines that the casual connection
    between the contaminated water at Camp Lejeune and a medical condition
    is not as strong as once believed, those veterans and their families
    who are being treated for that disease or condition shall continue to
    receive care in order to ensure continuity of care. However, for
    veterans and their families who are not already receiving care for such
    a condition, medical care would no longer be available because the
    causal connection is no longer scientifically supportable.
        I will not stop fighting for justice for the victims of Camp
    Lejeune. There remain many obstacles for us to overcome. I thank Jerry
    for his tireless efforts at holding the VA accountable and improving
    the lives of all who suffer from illnesses incurred at Camp Lejeune. No
    one has been a better advocate for these individuals, and I cannot
    commend him highly enough for his steadfast determination.

        I thank the Committee for its attention to this critical matter.
                                     ______

         Prepared Statement of Hon. Mike Crapo, U.S. Senator from Idaho

    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                                     ______

                  Prepared Statement of Hon. Heidi Heitkamp,
                         U.S. Senator from North Dakota
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for holding this hearing today. I want to
    thank you and Senator Tester for your leadership in advocating for our
    Nation's veterans. Hearings like this one demonstrate this Committee's
    commitment to improving the lives of those who served our country and
    making sure we honor our obligation to care for them.
        That care extends from the treatment veterans receive in hospitals
    and clinics to the benefits they earned, from the education they pursue
    after their service to the employment they seek in the civilian
    workforce. S. 1218, the bipartisan Empowering Federal Employment for
    Veterans Act of 2017 that I introduced with Senator Sullivan, would
    take important steps in caring for our veterans as they try to find
    work that is the right fit for them. I appreciate you including this
    bill on the agenda for today's hearing.
        Although Federal efforts to promote the recruitment of
    transitioning servicemembers and veterans have resulted in significant
    increases in veteran employment throughout the Federal Government, the
    programs in place to enhance veteran recruitment, hiring, retention,
    skills development, and job satisfaction are not always effective in
    finding the most suitable jobs for a veteran's particular skillset.
    Ensuring that there are dedicated advocates for veterans' employment at
    key Federal agencies who are focused on finding jobs that are the right
    fit for veterans would open up more job opportunities for veterans
    across the Federal Government beyond the agencies that typically employ
    veterans in large numbers. Focusing on matching the skills and career
    aspirations of veterans to specific agency needs while also expanding
    career development training opportunities would create an environment
    that improves the long-term wellbeing of veterans as well as the
    overall efficiency of the Federal Government.
        I very much appreciate the Committee's consideration of S. 1218 and
    look forward to working with the Members of the Committee to pass this
    commonsense bill and make it easier for veterans to find the rewarding
    employment they deserve.
                                     ______

                   Prepared Statement of Hon. James Inhofe,
                           U.S. Senator from Oklahoma
        Today I would like to state my support for Senate bill 1356, the
    Veterans Education Improvement Act of 2017, which I introduced along
    with Senator Cornyn on June 14, 2017.
        In 2010, Congress passed the Post-9/11 Veterans Educational
    Assistance Improvements Act. This act authorized veterans to use their
    hard earned educational benefits to pursue a technical or career
    certificate program as an option instead of the traditional liberal
    arts opportunities at a college or university.
        Career technology centers, or CTEs, are public, non-profit, non-
    degree granting institutions that provide skills and certificates
    important to every community and are found in over ten states. CTEs are
    renowned for providing job training for technical careers like welding,
    mechanics, and cosmetology. Here our veterans will be able to obtain
    necessary skills that our U.S. workforce desperately needs.
        The goal of this bill is to give veterans enrolled at postsecondary
    CTE institutions expanded access to innovative education programs that
    utilize technology and online learning opportunities.
        The city of Enid, Oklahoma, has been home to the Autry Technology
    Center since 1967 and serves over 10,000 people annually through
    programs and services that enhance skills and employment opportunities.
        Autry currently offers 26 full-time career programs from air
    conditioning to culinary arts, to radiography, to welding, and several
    other critical, applied skills used nationwide.
        Public, non-profit centers in the Oklahoma Career-Tech system, like
    Autry Technology Center in Enid, are proven to significantly contribute
    to the economic development and quality of life in Oklahoma, especially
    our returning veterans.
        Career and technical education centers are vital as a post-
    secondary education option and workforce training system for our
    veterans, but, under the Obama administration, the VA took action to
    block certain tech center benefits from our vets. Since March 2016, the
    VA has not allowed the Post-9/11 GI Bill to pay for any form of
    independent study from a non-degree producing institution, including
    CTEs. In many cases, this hindrance precludes veterans from utilizing
    these courses or pursing these certificate programs.
        CTEs, much like their college and university counterparts, are
    utilizing internet based courses as a component of their programs to
    provide flexibility for working adults and veterans to better
    accommodate their lifestyles and encourage learning.
        Marcie Mack, the State Director of the Oklahoma Career-Tech system,
    told me last week that, ``Oklahoma's Career-Tech system is committed to
    serving U.S. military veterans; however, with current Federal policy
    there are obstacles for our veterans to be able to participate in
    Oklahoma's Career-Tech system and receive their benefits.''
        To address the current policy issues, I have introduced S. 1356
    along with Senator Cornyn, clarifying the law to ensure accredited CTE
    programs can continue to receive GI Bill benefits even if a portion of
    the program is done by independent study. This language, from section 5
    of the discussion draft, is supported by Student Veterans of America,
    the American Legion, and the United States Department of Veterans
    Affairs.
        In the time since I have been working on this legislation, I have
    heard concerns from this Committee about whether this would open the
    door for bad actors in the education space to take advantage of these
    benefits.
        My staff, along with the staff of this Committee, have explored
    these concerns and have made modifications to the language to ensure
    the bill does not have negative, unintended consequences. While many
    non-degree programs at area CTE centers are already accredited and
    eligible for other Federal financial aid programs outside of the Post-
    9/11 GI Bill, this bill has an additional quality control measure of
    limiting access to only programs that are accredited by a recognized
    accrediting body--which is the standard across higher education. I am
    committed to ensuring positive outcomes for veterans who enroll in
    these programs. It is my hope that the Committee will quickly consider
    this legislation so that veterans in Oklahoma and across the Nation can
    achieve career success after leaving the service.

        I deeply appreciate the attention the Committee has given to my
    bill, and I look forward to continuing my work with you to ensure this
    issue is addressed.
                                     ______

        Letter from Eric Lachica, Executive Director for ACFV Leaders,
                    American Coalition for Filipino Veterans

    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
                                     ______

              Prepared Statement of the U.S. Department of Defense
        Chairman Isakson, Ranking Member Tester, and Members of the
    Committee, The Department of Defense (DOD or the Department)
    appreciates the opportunity to provide this statement for the record
    addressing legislation pending before the Committee. Given that the
    funding and administration of the Post-9/11 GI Bill fall under the
    purview of the Department of Veterans Affairs, this statement will
    focus on only legislation that will affect the Department of Defense;
    we defer to the Department of Veterans Affairs to provide responses on
    those bills with no significant DOD impacts.
                     s. 111. filipino veterans promise act
        This bill would require the Secretary of Defense, in consultation
    with the Secretary of Veterans Affairs and military historians, to
    establish a process to determine whether individuals claiming certain
    service in the Philippines during World War II are eligible for certain
    VA benefits despite not being on the Missouri List. The Department does
    not support any further legislation concerning determining service
    eligibility for the WWII Filipino Guerilla Veterans. The Army has a
    program in place that makes verifications. This program, due to its
    thorough processes, is the foundation for the Army's policy for making
    final service determinations for eligibility. The Department maintains
    complete confidence that the records and files completed in 1948
    provide the best and most accurate determination of service.
      s. 410. shawna hill post-9/11 education benefits transferability act
        This bill would amend title 38, United States Code (U.S.C.), to
    authorize the transfer of unused Post-9/11 educational assistance
    benefits to additional dependents upon the death of an originally
    designated dependent.
        The Department fully supports identifying ways to safeguard
    education benefits for Servicemembers and veterans by ensuring
    additional dependents can use the benefit in the event of the death of
    the dependent originally designated. By closing this potential coverage
    gap, the benefit, which has already been earned, will not go unused.
        However, given that both the funding and administration of this
    benefit fall under the purview of the Department of Veterans Affairs,
    DOD would defer to that agency to determine the costs and effects of
    the bill on their Department.
      s. 473. educational development for troops and veterans act of 2017
        This bill amends title 38, U.S.C., to make qualification
    requirements for entitlement to Post-9/11 Education Assistance more
    equitable, to improve support of veterans receiving such educational
    assistance, and for other purposes. We will only comment on those
    provisions that directly affect DOD.
        Section 2 amends the definition of qualifying active duty for the
    Post-9/11 GI Bill in section 3301(1)(B), title 38, U.S.C. to ensure
    that an order to serve on active duty under sections 12304a and 12304b
    of title 10 is treated identical to other orders to serve on active
    duty for determining the eligibility of members of the uniformed
    services and veterans for certain benefits, and for calculating the
    deadlines for certain benefits.
        This bill would allow National Guard and Reserve Component (RC)
    members who are involuntarily activated under sections 12304a or 12304b
    of title 10 U.S.C., to receive the same benefits as those RC members
    who support comparable operations, but are activated under other
    authorities, such as section 12302.
        Although the Department can support this provision, the Department
    is currently developing a more comprehensive solution as part of our
    Reserve Component Duty Status Reform effort. By enacting this
    legislation this cycle, Congress would resolve some of the most common
    RC duty status pay and benefit inequities in a more expeditious manner.
    However, the Department recommends making the change prospective only,
    due to the expected cost and complexity associated with implementation.
        Given both the funding and administration of this benefit fall
    under the purview of the Department of Veterans Affairs, DOD would
    defer to that agency to determine the costs and effects of the bill on
    their Department.
        Section 7 of the bill would amend the process for adjusting the
    monthly benefit for members of the Selected Reserve training under the
    provision of the Montgomery GI Bill--Selected Reserve (Section
    16131(b)(2) 10 U.S.C.). Currently the Montgomery GI Bill--Selected
    Reserve (MGIB-SR) monthly benefit rate is annually increased by the
    Consumer Price Index (CPI) for the 12-month period ending on the
    June 30, preceding the beginning of the fiscal year for which the
    increase is made, while the Montgomery GI Bill (Chapter 30, 38 U.S.C.),
    monthly benefit is annually increased by the average cost of
    undergraduate tuition in the United States, as determined by the
    National Center for Education Statistics, for the last academic year
    preceding the beginning of the fiscal year for which the increase is
    made. This amendment partially aligns the process to determine the
    annual increase in the monthly benefit for the Montgomery GI Bill--
    Selected Reserve (MGIB-SR) with the process in place for annual
    increases in the Montgomery GI Bill, but rather than establishing the
    annual increase as a fixed rate, it allows a rate adjustment of ``not
    less than the percentage by which.'' This change will require a
    positive determination by the Secretary of Defense each year on the
    rate adjustment--whether to leave it at the rate of education increase,
    or whether a higher increase may be warranted. While the Department
    generally supports provisions that provide us such flexibility, since
    the increase in the cost of education generally outpaces the increase
    in the CPI, we would ask that the effective date be delayed to allow
    the Services to budget for such an increase.
                     s. 844. gi bill fairness act 5 of 2017
        This draft bill would consider active duty performed under the
    authority of title 10, United States Code, section 12301(h), as
    qualifying active duty for the purposes of Post-9/11 GI Bill education
    benefits. Reserve component members wounded in combat often are given
    orders to active duty under this provision to receive authorized
    medical care, to be medically evaluated for disability, or to complete
    a required health care study. However, as currently written, section
    3301(1)(B), of title 38, United States Code, does not include active
    duty performed under 12301(h) as qualifying active duty for purposes of
    Post-9/11 GI Bill educational assistance.
        Currently, when a member of the Reserve Component on active duty
    sustains an injury due to military operations, the Servicemember is not
    discharged, but remains in the Selected Reserve on active duty under
    12301(h), title 10, U.S.C.. None of the time spent in recovery under
    this status is qualifying time for purposes of the Post-9/11 GI Bill.
    In this case, the Servicemember would return to Selected Reserve status
    with less qualifying time than those who served an entire period of
    active duty without an intervening injury. This legislation would
    correct this inequity by simply extending eligibility for the Post-9/11
    GI Bill to service under 12301(h).
        DOD recognizes the inequity of not including this active duty time
    for purposes of Post-9/11 GI Bill benefits, and included a provision
    similar to this bill in our FY 2016 legislative proposal submission.
    However, the DOD proposal would have included only active duty
    performed after enactment. In contrast, this legislation would be
    retroactive, categorizing all duty performed under 12301(h) since
    September 11, 2001, as qualifying active duty for purposes of the Post-
    9/11 GI Bill. We estimate that approximately 5,000 RC members performed
    active duty under 12301(h) each year since September 11, 2001.
    Accordingly, we believe this draft bill would generate an additional
    cost to the Department of Veterans Affairs. Given that both the funding
    and administration of the Post-9/11 GI Bill fall under the purview of
    the Department of Veterans Affairs, DOD would defer to that agency to
    determine the costs and effects of the bill on their agency.
        S. 882. A Bill to provide for the entitlement to educational
    assistance under the Post-9/11 Educational Assistance Program of the
    Department of Veterans Affairs for members of the Armed Forces awarded
    the Purple Heart, and for other purposes
        This Bill would amend title 38, U.S.C., to authorize any member of
    the Armed Forces who is awarded the Purple Heart eligibility for the
    Post-9/11 GI Bill at the 100 percent rate, regardless of months of
    qualifying active duty, and make them eligible to participate in the
    Yellow Ribbon GI Bill Education Enhancement Program (Section 3317(a),
    38 U.S.C.). The Department fully supports recognizing the service and
    sacrifice of our Servicemembers who are wounded and awarded the Purple
    Heart. However, given that both the funding and administration of this
    additional benefit fall under the purview of the Department of Veterans
    Affairs, we would defer to that agency to determine the costs and
    effects of the bill on their Department.
       s. 1218. empowering federal 5 employment for veterans act of 2017
        The Department strongly supports S. 1218, which is in line with
    current strategic recruitment and employment outreach initiatives
    performed by the Department for wounded, ill, injured, and
    transitioning servicemembers and veterans. This bill upholds and will
    strengthen the Department's continuing support to provide specialized
    transition assistance to the civilian workforce and promote the Federal
    Government as an ``Employer of Choice.''
        Consistent with the bill's provisions, the Department has
    designated an employee with full time responsibility for carrying out a
    Veterans Employment Program. DOD's Veterans Employment Program Office
    (VEPO), within the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for
    Personnel and Readiness, established in 2009, is responsible for the
    development and management of DOD's Veterans Employment and Hiring
    Heroes Programs, as well as DOD's Veterans Recruitment and Employment
    Operational Plan, to enhance and promote employment opportunities for
    veterans, and veteran's recruitment programs. As an example, the Hiring
    Heroes program provides job search assistance to wounded, ill, and
    injured servicemembers, transitioning servicemembers, veterans,
    military spouses, and primary caregivers, providing these warriors and
    families specialized transition assistance into the civilian workforce.
    Since April 2005, the Department has conducted 87 highly successful
    ``Hiring Heroes Career Fairs,'' providing opportunities for job seekers
    to network, collect information and speak face-to-face with recruiters
    and employers about civilian career opportunities.
        The provisions of S. 1218 will better enable the Department to
    execute recruitment and outreach activities such as the Hiring Heroes
    Program, along with career readiness programs, which have been
    developed to assist transitioning servicemembers and veterans in their
    search of employment.
        The Department also supports Section 4 of this bill, ``Expansion of
    SkillBridge Initiative to Include Participation by Federal Agencies.''
    This expansion of the successful DOD SkillBridge initiative, to also
    include Federal agencies as participants, would greatly strengthen the
    initiative and its positive impact on transitioning Servicemembers.
    After Congress authorized SkillBridge in the FY 2013 NDAA, the program
    allowed transitioning Servicemembers to participate in employer-driven
    job skills training, apprenticeships, and internship programs,
    beginning up to six months prior to transitioning out of the military.
    Through such participation in private-sector SkillBridge training,
    transitioning Servicemembers have received jobs in dozens of
    industries, from corporate finance to advanced manufacturing,
    information technology, and cyber security. Just as businesses have
    greatly benefited from the program and the talents our highly trained
    Servicemembers bring, so too will Federal agencies. The expansion to
    Federal agencies as eligible employers and trainers under the program
    will provide a true win-win for both the Federal Government and
    transitioning Servicemembers.
                            s. 75. arla harrell act
        This proposed legislation would require DOD and the Department of
    Veterans Affairs to jointly establish a policy on the process future
    claims for mustard gas exposure. In addition, DOD would need to issue a
    policy on sites where such testing occurred, and investigate and report
    to Congress on any new sites where veterans claimed testing occurred.
    The Department opposes this legislation. The legislation is
    inconsistent as to whether it only applies to full-body exposure
    claims. While DOD would agree to a presumption of exposure if limited
    to World War II veterans who participated in testing of full-body
    exposure, for the individuals to whom section 3(a)(1) of this
    legislation would apply, the Department has no evidence of such testing
    that would prove or disprove the exposure. However, use of mustard gas
    during training in World War II was ubiquitous, so the legislation
    needs to be clear to delimit possible claims to those who participated
    in full-body exposure testing and whose claims were previously denied
    by VA.
        Furthermore, the Department would be required to investigate and
    report on possible addition to the list of sites known to have
    conducted full-body exposure testing. However, if full-body exposure is
    presumed based solely upon a veteran's statement, then the number of
    sites at which testing occurred is immaterial. The Department of
    Defense has already investigated, and provided to Congress everything
    we know about testing sites.
        The data this legislation would require DOD to report is
    duplicative of information the Department has already provided to
    Congress. In November 2015, DOD, specifically the Under Secretary of
    Defense for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics, provided the known
    list of sites where testing occurred in response to a request of the
    Senate Committee on Aging. In addition, the Institute of Medicine
    published a report on these tests, ``Veterans at Risk: The Health
    Effects of Mustard Gas and Lewisite,'' National Academy Press (1993).
    Similarly, the Government Accountability Office published two reports
    that included information about these tests, ``VETERANS DISABILITY:
    Information from Military May Help VA Assess Claims Related to Secret
    Tests,'' February 1993, and ``DOD and VA Need to Improve Efforts to
    Identify and Notify Individuals Potentially Exposed during Chemical and
    Biological Tests,'' February 2008.
                                   conclusion
        In conclusion, the Department of Defense fully supports appropriate
    and effective legislative changes that will help our efforts to
    attract, recruit, and retain talented individuals. Post-service
    education benefits have been a cornerstone of our military recruiting
    and retention efforts since 1985, and a major contributor to the
    continued success of the All-Volunteer Force. Higher education benefits
    have been and remain at the forefront of reasons cited by young
    Americans for joining the military. From its inception, we fully
    expected the Post-9/11 GI Bill to continue to have this impact and we
    are seeing that happen in the form of sustained recruiting and
    retention success. The Department thanks the Committee for their
    continuing support of our Servicemembers and Veterans.
                                     ______

     Prepared Statement of Sam Shellenberger, Deputy Assistant Secretary,
      Veterans' Employment and Training Service, U.S. Department of Labor
                                  introduction
        Chairman Isakson, Ranking Member Tester, and distinguished Members
    of the Committee: thank you for the opportunity to provide a statement
    for the record of today's hearing. I commend the Committee for its
    tireless efforts to ensure that America fulfills its obligations to our
    Veterans, their families, and their caregivers. The Department of Labor
    (DOL or the Department) also works each day to help ensure all Veterans
    have the opportunity for meaningful long-term employment.
        The Department is the Federal Government's leader on training and
    employment services. DOL has the expertise and the nationwide network
    to facilitate employment opportunities and skills training for anyone
    who needs them, including Veterans. The Administration relies on the
    Department's integrated network and programs to provide positive
    employment outcomes for the men and women who serve our country.
        While this hearing is focused on several bills under consideration
    by the Committee, I will limit my statement specifically to S. 1218,
    the ``Empowering Federal Employment for Veterans Act.''
    s. 1218, the ``empowering federal employment for veterans act of 2017''
        S. 1218 seeks the establishment of Veteran employment programs
    within Federal agencies. This bill would require each ``covered''
    Federal agency (including DOL) to either establish a Veterans
    Employment Program Office, to be managed by a Veterans employment
    official, or to designate an employee of the covered agency to carry
    out a Veterans Employment Program for the covered agency; the agency
    also must ensure the public availability of contact information for
    Veterans' employment officials to ensure engagement with prospective
    applicants. The bill also would establish an Interagency Council on
    Veterans Employment to handle matters relating to the employment of
    Veterans. The Council would be co-chaired by the Secretaries of Labor
    and Veterans Affairs, with the Director of the Office of Personnel
    Management (OPM) serving as the Vice Chair. The Council's duties would
    include advising and assisting the President and the Director of the
    OPM on matters involving a coordinated Government-wide effort to
    increase the number of Veterans employed by the Federal Government in
    positions that match the skills and career aspirations of Veterans;
    this would involve enhancing recruiting, hiring, retention, training
    and skills development, and job satisfaction. The Council would
    establish performance measures to assess the Federal Government's
    effectiveness in these areas. Additionally, the Council would serve as
    a national forum for promoting employment opportunities for Veterans in
    the executive branch. Finally, the Council would report on the
    effectiveness of these efforts to the President and to Congress within
    one year of the bill's enactment, and annually thereafter.
        DOL, along with other Departments, established a Veterans
    Employment Program Office pursuant to Executive Order 13518 in
    November 2009. Since that time, the Department has increased
    representation of Veterans in its workforce from 17 percent in FY 2009
    to 21.3 percent in FY 2015, and disabled Veterans' representation has
    increased by approximately 5.3 percentage points during the same period
    for the overall workforce.\1\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \1\ See OPM FY 2009 and FY 2015 Reports on Employment of Veterans
    in the Federal executive branch
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        In comparing DOL's workforce representation of Veterans and
    disabled Veterans against Comparable Federal Agencies (CFA), DOL's
    percentages of representation exceed those of the CFA. Since the
    inception of the Veterans Hiring Model, approved in FY 2015 by the
    Council on Veterans Employment (also established pursuant to Executive
    Order 13518), DOL has maintained an Exemplary Performance Rating for
    increasing Veteran hiring. These hiring practices are similar to those
    for private sector employers to receive recognition under the HIRE Vets
    Medallion Program, as established in the HIRE Vets Act of 2017. The
    HIRE Vets Act requires the Department to establish a HIRE Vets
    Medallion Program to recognize employer efforts to: (1) recruit,
    employ, and retain Veterans; and (2) provide community and charitable
    services supporting the Veteran community. The Department continues its
    work to establish this program, and looks forward to updating the
    Committee on its progress.
        We note also that, through the efforts of the existing Interagency
    Council on Veterans Employment, comprising some 24 Federal agencies,
    Veterans' share of new hires in the Executive branch has increased from
    24 percent to 32.5 percent--an unprecedented increase in Veteran
    hiring.\2\ This has been achieved through the Council's establishment
    of a strategic plan and Veterans' hiring model in the Executive branch,
    as well as through establishment of performance measures to gauge the
    success of those efforts. The Council has afforded each of those
    agencies a role in oversight of programs affecting Veteran hiring and
    employment and a forum to discuss topical issues, address and resolve
    problems, and make better informed policy recommendations.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \2\ Id.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Additionally, the Department provides training and employment
    services for Veterans and transitioning servicemembers who may be
    interested in a career with the Federal Government through its
    Veterans' Employment and Training Service (VETS). VETS' mission is
    focused on four key program areas: (1) preparing Transitioning
    Servicemembers for meaningful careers through the Transition Assistance
    Program (TAP) Employment Workshop and Career Technical Training Track;
    (2) providing Veterans with employment resources and expertise at the
    nearly 2,400 American Job Centers across the country; (3) protecting
    Veterans' employment rights with administration of the Uniformed
    Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act (USERRA) and Veterans
    Preference in Federal Hiring; and (4) promoting the employment of
    Veterans and related training opportunities to employers across the
    country through our national employer outreach effort. VETS is able to
    accomplish its mission by working closely with other parts of the
    Department, including, for example, the Employment and Training
    Administration (ETA), which administers programs under the Workforce
    Innovation and Opportunity Act that provide employment and training
    services, and give Veterans (and qualified military spouses) priority
    of service status. DOL's Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs
    also supports the hiring of Veterans through the Vietnam Era Veterans'
    Readjustment Assistance Act (or ``VEVRAA''). VEVRAA prohibits companies
    that are doing business with the Federal Government from discriminating
    in employment against protected Veterans, and requires that these
    employers take affirmative action to recruit, hire, promote, and retain
    these Veterans. The progress of covered contractors is measured against
    an annual hiring benchmark. Together, these DOL programs provide a
    unified approach to serving the employment needs of Veterans,
    transitioning servicemembers, and their families.
        The bill also would require the Secretary of Defense, in
    consultation with the Director of OPM, to make needed modifications to
    the SkillBridge initiative to enable Federal agencies to participate in
    the initiative as employers and trainers--including the provision of
    training by Federal agencies under the initiative to transitioning
    members of the Armed Forces. The Department of Defense's (DOD)
    SkillBridge initiative promotes the civilian job training authority
    available for transitioning servicemembers; servicemembers who qualify
    can participate in civilian job and employment training, including
    apprenticeships and internships. Under the bill, the Director of OPM,
    in consultation with the Secretary of Defense, would be required to
    take necessary actions to ensure that each Federal agency participates
    in the SkillBridge initiative.
        DOL fully supports expanding the SkillBridge initiative to include
    Federal agency participation, as this would further broaden employment
    and training opportunities for transitioning servicemembers, and serve
    as a pipeline to enhance the Federal civilian workforce. Since the
    inception of SkillBridge, the Department has been working with DOD to
    help communicate the program to both transitioning servicemembers and
    employers. The Department supports using the SkillBridge authority to
    provide transitioning servicemembers access to and experience in
    Federal employment opportunities before they transition out of the
    military, which would enhance their ability to successfully reintegrate
    into civilian life.
                                   conclusion
        DOL's focus on employment is part of our core mission and
    competency. Creating opportunities for our Veterans to thrive in the
    civilian economy through meaningful employment is a priority for DOL,
    and we work closely with our partners at the Departments of Veterans
    Affairs and Defense to do so. The Department looks forward to working
    with the Committee to help ensure that our transitioning servicemembers
    and Veterans, and their families, have the resources and training they
    need to successfully transition to the civilian workforce. Chairman
    Isakson, Ranking Member Tester, distinguished Members of the Committee,
    this concludes my statement for the record. Thank you for the
    opportunity to be a part of this hearing.
                                     ______

    Prepared Statement of The Enlisted Association of the National Guard of
                               the United States
      s. 473, educational development for troops and veterans act of 2017
            (sen. tester, sen. blumenthal, sen. brown, sen. murray)
        The Enlisted Association of the National Guard of the United States
    (EANGUS) supports S. 473, ``Educational Development for Troops and
    Veterans Act of 2017.'' S. 473 addresses numerous initiatives effecting
    Reserve Component (RC) Servicemembers in a positive manner. First and
    foremost, if passed S. 473 would extend Post-9/11 GI Bill benefits to
    Servicemembers ordered to active duty status under 10 U.S.C.
    Sec. 12304b status. In Fiscal Year (FY) 2016, DOD requested 10,107 Man-
    years. In FY 2017, DOD requested 11,124 Man-Years, and in its FY 2017
    request for additional appropriations, DOD requested 18,738 Man-Years
    for 10 U.S.C. Sec. 12304b duty status. Many EANGUS members deployed
    under this duty status, did not receive education benefits, and did not
    know they were not getting the benefit until after they returned home.
    The National Guard and Reserves recruit and retain Servicemembers by
    offering Post-9/11 GI Bill benefits, and it is unfair break in faith
    not to provide those very benefits based on a type of duty status.
        EANGUS is supportive of other provisions in S. 473. We applaud
    Section 5 to defer student loans in connection with receiving orders
    for mobilization for war or national emergency. We support section 6
    regarding veteran student centers and grants for veteran student
    centers. Sections 7 and 8 address adjustments and stipends for RC
    Servicemembers aiming to combat recent increases to undergraduate
    tuition costs. EANGUS fully supports these sections. We ask the
    Committee vote in favor of S. 473 and move the legislation forward for
    consideration before the Senate.
        s. 844, gi bill fairness act of 2017 (sen. wyden, sen. boozman)
        EANGUS fully supports S. 844 to extend the time spent receiving
    authorized medical care or medical evaluation for disability as active
    duty for purposes of eligibility for Post-9/11 GI Bill Educational
    Assistance. Reserve Component Servicemembers receiving medical care or
    evaluation are placed on 10 U.S.C. Sec. 12301(h), which is an active
    duty status, and should continue to accrue the same benefits as the
    other active duty statuses. The Servicemember, recovering from service-
    connected wounds, should earn Post-9/11 GI Bill education benefits just
    as they would if they were forward deployed, and had not been wounded
    in the first place. We only support this effort if the member is placed
    on 10 U.S.C. Sec. 12301(h) status for thirty days or longer. We ask the
    Committee vote in favor of S. 844 and move the legislation forward for
    consideration before the Senate.
          s. 882, purple heart gi bill act (sen. rounds, sen. boozman)
        Our organization fully supports S. 822 to extend one-hundred
    percent Post-9/11 GI Bill eligibility to all Purple Heart recipients.
    Currently, only those Servicemembers that serve 36 months or more on
    active duty, or are medically retired, receive one-hundred percent of
    the Post-9/11 GI Bill benefit. EANGUS is particularly concerned that
    current law omits many Purple Heart recipients that deployed with a
    Reserve unit because they were activated for less than three years. Any
    Servicemember that is not medically retired and served fewer than 36
    months receives only a prorated portion of the education benefit, and
    we feel that this is unfair. We ask the Committee vote in favor of
    S. 822 and move the legislation forward for consideration before the
    Senate.
                     discussion draft on changes to gi bill

    SEC. 10. RESTORATION OF ENTITLEMENT TO POST-9/11 EDUCATIONAL ASSISTANCE
                        AND OTHER RELIEF FOR VETERANS AFFECTED BY SCHOOL
                        CLOSURE.

        EANGUS supports the Senate Veteran's Affairs Committee's
    consideration to restore Post-9/11 education benefits to Servicemembers
    suffering a discontinuation of education due to a school closure.
    Furthermore, in the event of a school closure, we are supportive of any
    effort to provide housing stipends to Servicemembers until the end of
    the semester or term. Our association's membership has been negatively
    impacted by a school closure and we would be supportive of any effort
    by the Committee to protect Servicemembers from school closures. We ask
    the Committee to support Section 10 of the GI Bill discussion draft
    before you and move the legislative language forward for consideration
    before the Senate.
         discussion on the guard recruiting assistance program (g-rap)
        We would be remiss if we didn't mention the thousands of veterans
    in the National Guard who have been targeted by Army CID agents who,
    without proper authority, have rounded up and interrogated Guard
    members as if they were on the Ten Most Wanted List, all because of
    their involvement in the Guard Recruiting Assistance Program (from 2005
    to 2012).
        Regrettably there was misconduct within G-RAP; that misconduct was
    widespread across a number of military recruiting programs (not just
    the National Guard) and those individuals were caught and righteously
    punished years ago. Yet, here we are, five years after G-RAP ended, and
    Guard Soldiers are still being interrogated by CID in cases where they
    helped recruit only one person into the Guard under a program with
    confusing and often conflicting rules! Many say this massive
    investigation is simply an effort to justify the wildly inaccurate
    sworn testimony to Congress by Army General Officers. Others have said
    the entire debacle is a massive violation of the Posse Comitatus Act.
        State leaders have been missing in action while Soldiers, who never
    intended to violate any rule, much less a law, keep getting crushed.
    Among other examples of how this defective investigation went wildly
    off the rails:

          Pre-dawn tactical team raids on the homes of 20+
    Guardsmen and former Guardsmen in Puerto Rico.
          CID 24-hour surveillance of Guardsmen suspected of G-RAP
    misconduct (years before) in New Mexico.
          Investigations remaining open and lingering for over 5
    years in Tennessee.
          Highly trained, Special Forces Soldiers being barred from
    re-enlistment in Colorado after findings of innocence in civilian
    court.
          At least one confirmed G-RAP investigation related
    suicide in California.
          Federal lawsuits in Texas demanding three times the G-RAP
    payments.
          Federal Criminal Histories created on thousands of
    Guardsmen nationwide, without criminal charges ever being filed.

        It's true that some Adjutants General and their staffs have quietly
    rejected CID's faulty investigations and sent agents packing. But
    that's done little to stop CID's never ending ADOS funded campaign.
    Long after the Army Reserve CID agents are finally sent home, the
    ramifications and collateral legal consequences to Soldiers will
    continue for years to come; those who were titled have a permanent FBI
    file enumerating the ``crimes'' that they were investigated for--
    regardless of whether or not charges were even filed.
        In the military, we talk about duty. A lot. We like to say that
    above everything else--above politics, above political leaders and
    parties, our sworn duty is to the Constitution. We purportedly stand
    for the bedrock principles found in the Bill of Rights. But the harsh
    truth is that the G-RAP investigations are an misapplication of Due
    Process, and a wholesale trampling of the Presumption of Innocence. And
    yet, the Army CID machine continues to chew up Guardsmen most often
    without leadership even asking a single question. Worse, some Guard
    leaders reflexively accept flawed CID conclusions and partial reports
    as gospel. Collectively, we've become a silent participant by standing
    by, watching and doing nothing.
        G-RAP investigations have shown an abdication of leadership, a
    willingness to leave a fallen soldier behind, an inclination to accept
    false testimony from CID, and a failure to honor the Bill of Rights for
    those who swore on their lives to defend it. Think about this: If
    you're one of the thousands of Guardsmen subjected to a G-RAP
    investigation and the lingering scars, would you encourage young people
    to join the Guard? Betrayal is the wound that cuts the deepest. Our
    association demands that the Army CID investigations immediately cease
    and that restitution be made to those who did no wrong, to include
    expungement of any criminal record.
                                     ______

      Prepared Statement of Scott Crawford, High Ground Veterans Fellow,
                         High Ground Veterans Advocacy

    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                                     ______

       Prepared Statement of Tom Porter, Legislative Director, Iraq and
                        Afghanistan Veterans of America

    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                                     ______

         Prepared Statement of Military Officers Association of America

    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                                     ______

      Prepared Statement of Aleks Morosky, National Legislative Director,
                       Military Order of the Purple Heart
        Chairman Isakson, Ranking Member Tester, and Members of the
    Committee, On behalf of the Military Order of the Purple Heart (MOPH),
    whose membership is comprised entirely of combat wounded veterans, I
    thank you for allowing us to testify today on legislation related to
    veterans' education. While MOPH supports many of the bills being
    considered today, and would particularly like to voice our strong
    support for S. 798, the Yellow Ribbon Improvement Act, and section 10
    of the discussion draft, which would provide for the restoration of
    entitlement to education assistance for veterans affected by school
    closures, we would like to take this opportunity to primarily discuss
    the bill that most specifically affects MOPH members, S. 882. This
    important legislation, introduced by Senator Rounds, would provide full
    entitlement to the Post-9/11 GI Bill to Purple Heart recipients.
        There is no doubt that the Post-9/11 GI Bill is among the most
    significant benefits available to current era veterans. Its popularity
    is also without question. According to research recently published by
    Student Veterans of America, 347,564 student veterans have completed a
    total of 453,508 post-secondary certificates or degrees using the Post-
    9/11 GI Bill since its inception. While it is impossible to know at
    this point what the long-term return on investment will be for the
    program, MOPH is confident that it will eventually prove to have
    contributed significantly to the American economy, similar to previous
    iterations of the GI Bill. Simply put, when a veteran's military
    experience is combined with quality higher education opportunities,
    they are bound for success.
        Still, there is room for improvement in the Post-9/11 GI Bill.
    Since it first went into effect in 2009, there have been multiple
    changes made to the program to address oversights in the original
    legislation. MOPH strongly believes that Congress should act to improve
    the Post-9/11 GI Bill once again to extend 100 percent eligibility to
    all Post-9/11 Purple Heart recipients.
        Currently, only veterans who either serve at least 36 months on
    active duty or are discharged due to a disability receive Post-9/11 GI
    Bill benefits at the 100 percent rate. Those who were not medically
    discharged and serve less than 36 months receive only a portion of the
    benefit on a prorated basis.
        MOPH strongly believes that any veteran who sheds their blood for
    our country on a Post-9/11 battlefield should be automatically granted
    the full benefit of the GI Bill that bears the name of the era in which
    they served. While we fully understand that there must be left and
    right limits on eligibility for any benefit as generous as the Post-9/
    11 GI Bill, we firmly believe that every single current era Purple
    Heart recipient is equally as deserving as any other servicemember,
    regardless of total time served on active duty. Put another way, MOPH
    strongly believes that any veteran who was wounded on the battlefield
    has indeed already met the service requirement for full GI Bill
    eligibility by virtue of their personal sacrifice in our Nation's
    efforts in fighting the Global War on Terror.
        According to the report issued by the Congressional Budget Office
    (CBO) on H.R. 1379, the House companion bill to S. 882, it is estimated
    that 660 Purple Heart recipients would see increased GI Bill benefits
    each year under this bill. While this is a relatively low number as
    compared to overall GI Bill usage, we believe it is certainly
    significant enough to warrant action by Congress. CBO also estimates
    that the cost of the bill would be $65 million over 10 years, or
    approximately $6.5 million per year. While we understand that any
    spending increase in the current fiscal environment presents
    challenges, we strongly urge Congress to do whatever it can to find an
    offset for this relatively modest amount of money.
        MOPH suspects that the majority of Purple Heart recipients who are
    eligible for less than the full benefit are veterans of the Guard and
    Reserve. Often activated only to deploy and then deactivated once they
    return home, it is not unusual for combat veterans of the reserve
    component to amass less than 36 months of active service before they
    are discharged.
        It is also not uncommon for Purple Heart recipients not to receive
    medical discharges, even if their wounds are relatively severe. All too
    often, veterans who are wounded close to the end of their enlistments,
    or while on stop-loss, are simply discharged on schedule rather than
    initiating the lengthy medical board process necessary for a medical
    discharge. Anecdotally, we hear that this is also more common in the
    reserve component.
        To better illustrate our point, please consider the following
    examples:

              Servicemember A enlists in the Air Force for three years. She
            is stationed at Dover Air Force Base where she works as a pay
            distribution specialist. She serves honorably and is discharged
            at the end of her three year term having never left the United
            States. Servicemember A is eligible for the Post-9/11 GI Bill
            at the 100 percent benefit level.
              Servicemember B enlists in the Navy, also for three years. He
            is stationed at Naval Station Norfolk. One year into his
            assignment, he steps in a pothole during a unit run, fracturing
            his ankle. His unit initiates a medical board and it is
            determined that he can no longer perform his duties as an
            electronics technician. Having never left the United States,
            Servicemember B is granted a medical discharge and becomes
            eligible for the Post-9/11 GI Bill at the 100 percent benefit
            level.
              Servicemember C is an infantryman in the National Guard.
            After spending five years drilling with his unit, he is
            activated for the first time to deploy to Iraq at the height of
            the conflict. Ten months into his one year deployment, his
            night patrol is stuck by a command-detonated improvised
            explosive device, signaling the beginning of an ambush by
            insurgents. Shrapnel from the blast rips into his lips, exiting
            through his cheek and causing him to lose three teeth. After he
            and his squad suppress the enemy, he is evacuated to Baghdad
            where he receives two dozen stitches in his face, a partial
            denture, and a Purple Heart. After being allowed to convalesce
            for two weeks, a medical officer determines that he can still
            perform his duties as an infantryman. He rejoins his unit, and
            returns home two months later. Having completed his six year
            enlistment, he is discharged honorably. Since only 12 months of
            his service was spent on active duty, Servicemember C becomes
            eligible for the Post-9/11 GI Bill at only the 60 percent
            benefit level.

        In using these examples, we are in no way implying that
    Servicemembers A and B are somehow undeserving of the benefits for
    which they qualify. All honorable service to our country is commendable
    and should be rewarded. We are only trying to illustrate how a Purple
    Heart recipient who serves less than 36 months on active duty and is
    not medically discharged is at least equally as deserving.
        However, examples of how this legislation would help Purple Heart
    recipients are not only hypothetical. Cosider the case of Sergeant
    Jonanthan Glodman of Boston, Massachusetts, a veteran of the U.S.
    Marine Corps Reserve and Operation Iraqi Freedom. On September 4, 2006
    while serving in Iraq with the 1st Battalion, 25 Marine Regiment,
    Jonathan's vehicle was struck by an improvised explosive device,
    injuring him and two other Marines. For his wounds, included a
    concussion, burns to his face and arm, an ankle injury, and shrapnel to
    his left knee, he was awarded the Purple Heart. Fortunately, he was
    able to remain with his unit, which redployed with in November 2006, at
    which time he was separated from active duty. Although he spent a total
    of six years in the Marine Corps Reserve, less than one year of that
    time was active. As a result, Jonathan qualified for only 60 percent of
    the Post-
    9/11 GI Bill.
        Another example is that of Sergeant Adrian Aranda of El Paso,
    Texas. Adrian served a total of four years on active duty in the United
    States Marine Corps, separating in June 2002, and was among the first
    U.S. servicemembers to deploy to Afghsanistan following 9/11. On
    December 16, 2001, while serving with the 15th Marine Expeditionary
    Unit, his foot patrol was struck by a land mine, wounding him and two
    other Marines. For his injuries, which included shrapnel wounds to his
    left arm, back, and both legs, a fractured left hand, minor burns,
    hearing impairment, and a Traumatic Brain Injury, he was awarded the
    Purple Heart. Following his recovery, Adrain was separated honorably
    from the Marine Corps the following year. Howver, since most of his
    time on active duty was served prior to Sepatember 11, 2001, he was
    awarded only 50 percent of the Post-9/11 GI Bill.
        In our view, our Nation must do better by wounded warriors like
    Jonathan and Adrian. Although they were both eventually able to
    complete degrees using the diminished GI Bill eligibility, they both
    suffered unnecessary financial hardships in doing so. It is also worthy
    to note that being wounded on the battlefield tends to present
    additional physical and emotional readjustment challenges for
    transitioning veterans, and we believe that Congress and the American
    people must do all they can to ensure Purple Heart recipients have
    access to the best educational opportunities possible when they return
    home. In light of this, MOPH strongly supports S. 882, and we deeply
    thank Senator Rounds for its introduction. We urge the Committee to
    advance this important legislation without delay.

        Chairman Isakson, Ranking Member Tester, this concludes my
    statement. On behalf of the Order, I thank you for the opportunity to
    testify today, and I look forward to any questions you or other Members
    of the Committee may have.
                                     ______

         Prepared Statement of the National Association of College and
                          University Business Officers

    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                                     ______

        Prepared Statement of Dr. Joseph Wescott, Legislative Director,
                National Association of State Approving Agencies
        Chairman Isakson, Ranking Member Tester, and Members of the
    Committee, The National Association of State Approving Agencies (NASAA)
    thanks you for your invitation to provide written testimony and we are
    pleased to provide our views on certain education benefits legislation
    under consideration by the Committee today, June 15, 2017.
        NASAA does not receive any grants or contracts directly from the
    Federal Government, though its member organizations are state agencies
    operating in whole or in part under Federal contracts funded by
    Congress and administered by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA).
        On behalf of fifty-two State approving agencies (SAAs), including
    the territory of Puerto Rico and the District of Columbia, NASAA thanks
    the Senate Committee on Veterans Affairs for its strong commitment to a
    better future for all servicemembers, veterans and their families
    through its continued support of the GI Bill educational programs.
        State Approving Agencies (SAAs) were created shortly after the
    inception of the Servicemen's Readjustment Act of 1944, more commonly
    known as the GI Bill of Rights, to insure the creditability of the
    learning experiences in which veterans engage; to assist the Federal
    Government in preventing waste, fraud and abuse; and to assist Veterans
    in making a successful transition from the military to the civilian
    world. The assignment of this responsibility is constitutionally based
    upon the legal principle that the states, and not the Federal
    Government, have the primary responsibility for the education of their
    citizenry. Thus, State Approving Agencies work in concert with the
    Department of Veterans Affairs on behalf of the Congress and the
    President to achieve these objectives.
        SAAs are the guardians and representatives of the GI Bill at the
    state level and they make major contributions to the success of the
    various GI Bills in many ways. Every day across our Nation, the SAAs
    function as the ``gatekeepers of quality' by determining what programs
    will be approved for Veterans to enroll and use their GI Bill
    educational benefits. As such, SAAs make determinations regarding the
    quality and integrity of just about any kind of learning experience
    imaginable (institutional, job training, flight, correspondence, etc.);
    SAAs work with employers to develop and enroll veterans in job training
    programs; SAAs assess and approve tests for professional and
    occupational licensing and certification; SAAs train VA Certifying
    Officials at educational institutions and job training establishments;
    SAAs perform outreach activities to increase the utilization of the GI
    Bills, including briefings during industry conferences and retirement
    seminars, presentations at job fairs and mailings to recently
    discharged Veterans and Selected Reserve personnel; and SAAs provide
    advice and guidance directly to Veterans and other GI Bill eligible
    persons and indirectly through educators, trainers and others who
    counsel Veterans. In addition, SAAs are tireless advocates for Veterans
    at the state and local levels.
        As such, SAAs, through their national organization, the National
    Association of State Approving Agencies, are uniquely situated to
    provide insights to Congress on changes necessary to make the GI Bills
    more relevant and responsive. As such, we appreciate the opportunity to
    provide our views on the following legislation before the committee.
      s. 410, shawna hill post-9/11 education transferability act (crapo,
                                     risch)
        This bill provides for the reassignment of a Veteran's or Armed
    Forces member's Post-9/11 education benefits to another eligible
    dependent in cases where the original designated beneficiary dies
    without having used all of such benefits. State Approving Agencies
    believe that education promises one of the best paths to a better
    future for a Veteran and their dependents. Furthermore, we believe that
    money spent to provide that education is a sound investment in our
    Nation's future. Tragedy should not negate that promise or curtail that
    investment. NASAA supports this bill.
      s. 473, educational development for troops and veterans act of 2017
                      (tester, blumenthal, brown, murray)
        Today, as never before, members of the National Guard and Reserve
    Component play a critical role in our Nation's defense throughout the
    world. Sections 2, 3 and 4 of this bill recognizes the sacrifices and
    service of these members of our military by making sure that an order
    to serve on active duty under sections 12304a and 12304b of Title 10,
    United States Code, is treated equitably with other orders to serve on
    active duty for determining a Veteran's and Servicemember's benefits
    eligibility. This bill will do away with the glaring inequality of
    certain Guard and Reserve servicemembers performing the same services,
    often side by side with other Servicemembers, and yet they do not
    receive any benefits. NASAA strongly supports, along with nearly 40
    other military, veteran and higher education organizations which met at
    the American Legion Headquarters in Washington recently, fixing this
    discrepancy.
        NASAA is also pleased that this bill provides for a grant program
    to establish, maintain, and improve veteran student centers. Throughout
    the past several years, SAAs across the Nation have encouraged
    institutions of higher learning to adequately resource Veterans
    services on their campuses. Working with the Student Veterans of
    America and our other VSO partners, and with the encouragement of the
    VA, SAAs have shared during visits to institutions and during the
    approval or reapproval of programs, data showing that the establishment
    of veteran student centers with knowledgeable staff, most of whom are
    Veterans and/or VA work study students, results in increased
    recruitment, retention and graduation rates. In many of our states, the
    numbers of veteran student centers have grown in the past few years and
    we see this bill encouraging the growth of this important innovation in
    rural and urban areas with significant veteran populations. NASAA
    respectfully requests that only institutions or consortiums that
    possess SAA-approved programs be considered as recipients of these
    grants.
        NASAA strongly supports this bill.
         s. 798, yellow ribbon improvement act (cassidy, brown, tillis)
        The Marine Gunnery Sergeant John David Fry Scholarship is awarded
    to dependents whose families have made the ultimate sacrifice. They
    represent both our Nation's greatest treasure and our greatest
    obligation. These families face much in their daily lives and we cannot
    fill the void in their lives created by the loss of their loved one. We
    can honor that sacrifice by making sure that their dependents can
    attend the school of their choice without the angst and anxiety of
    unforeseen charges and tuition costs adding to the challenges they
    already face. We believe, along with the Tragedy Assistance Program for
    Survivors (TAPS), the SVA and many other veteran and education
    organizations, that it is important that we address this need.
        NASAA strongly supports this bill.
             s. 844, gi bill fairness act of 2017 (wyden, boozman)
        This bill would amend title 38 of the United States Code such that
    certain time spent by members of the reserve components of the Armed
    Forces, while receiving medical care from the Department of Defense on
    active duty, could get credit for this time for purposes of eligibility
    for GI Bill benefits. Certainly injury sustained while serving our
    Nation which results in hospitalization or rehabilitation in a medical
    facility should count toward the Servicemember's eligibility for GI
    Bill educational benefits. That is only fair.
        NASAA supports this bill.
        s. 882, a bill to provide entitlement to post-9/11 educational
      assistance for members of the armed forces awarded the purple heart
                               (rounds, boozman)
        This bill would amend title 38 so that the sacrifice of brave men
    and women who sustain battlefield injuries in the service of our
    country would be entitled to the same GI Bill benefits as those who
    have served at least 36 months on active duty or are medically retired.
        Congress passed the Post-9/11 GI Bill to expand education benefits
    so they would match the 21st century challenges that our Veterans face
    when they come home. Approximately 3,000 Purple Heart recipients will
    not qualify for this important benefit over the next ten years unless
    Congress passes this bill. NASAA considers that it is extremely
    important that any Purple Heart Veteran who suffered a life-changing
    injury in the line of duty should be entitled to full benefits. Our
    nation cannot completely restore life and limb, but we can provide this
    important lifeline to a better future.
        NASAA supports this bill.
           s. 1192, veterans test accessibility act (rounds, hirono)
        SAAs approve licensure and certification testing costs for
    reimbursement as a part of the benefits of the GI Bill. Certainly, the
    acquisition of certain certifications and licenses can lead to
    meaningful employment and advancement in certain fields for our
    Veterans. Under present law, veterans who seek reimbursement for
    approved testing are charged an entire month of their entitlement,
    regardless of the cost of this test. This bill would allow that
    reimbursement to be pro-rated such that the entitlement charges are
    based on the actual cost and the Veterans are able to conserve their
    benefits. This change would encourage Veterans to take needed tests
    without fear of loss of benefits due to today's reimbursement formula,
    increase the months of training left and provide better stewardship of
    taxpayer dollars.
        NASAA supports this bill.
     s. 1277, veteran employment through technology education courses act
                           of 2017 (boozman, heller)
        This bill would direct the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to
    establish a high technology education pilot program, which would
    operate for five years and be funded for up to $15 million dollars
    annually. This program could be complementary to existing programs and
    could be an innovative way to address the needs of non-traditional
    students in this sector. The program would be administered by
    contracting with providers, so SAA involvement would be minimal or non-
    existent. However, the split payment requirement built into the
    contract will hopefully serve as an incentive for companies to deliver
    high quality impactful programs which will result in rewarding and
    meaningful employment. NASAA respectfully requests that the language of
    this bill be changed so that safeguards are retained or written into
    the bill requiring contracted providers to show previous proficiency
    providing training in the high technology education field and
    successful employment by the graduates in that same field after their
    graduation from the program.
        NASAA supports this bill
          discussion draft to improve post-9/11 educational assistance
        State approving agencies take seriously our role as ``the
    gatekeepers of quality'' and the ``boots on the ground'' defending the
    integrity of the GI Bill and making sure that only quality programs are
    approved by applying Federal and state law and regulation. An
    additional and equally important role is the continued oversight of
    these programs after their initial approval. We do so in conjunction
    with other stakeholders in veteran organizations and higher education,
    including state licensing agencies, state higher education departments,
    the Department of Veterans Affairs, the Department of Education and
    national and regional accrediting agencies. This proposed bill makes
    important changes in existing law to provide for the modernization and
    enhancement of the GI Bill educational program, and NASAA supports
    these changes, but we do want to address certain concerns raised by
    certain provisions, and respectfully ask for needed amendments in
    others.
        We support the extension of the GI Bill to provide certain
    additional benefits for veterans and their dependents seeking STEM
    (science, technology, engineering, and math) degrees (Section3). Our
    nation needs more students to consider careers in these fields, and
    certainly Veterans, with their demonstrated preference for service and
    enhanced leadership skills, could provide the manpower to fuel American
    innovation and progress in the years to come. They should not be
    deterred from their decision to enroll in these programs by either
    curriculum length or greater cost. The return for this small additional
    investment could be large in terms of increased revenue and continued
    leadership in these critical fields.
        NASAA also supports the other sections of the draft which would
    consolidate certain eligibility tiers under the Post-9/11 Educational
    Assistance Program, increase the amounts payable under the survivors
    and dependents' education assistance programs (Chapter 35) by
    approximately $400 per month, and expand and codify the highly
    successful Vet Success on Campus program. We certainly support the
    permanent authorization of work study allowances for individuals who
    are performing outreach services to Servicemembers and Veterans
    furnished under the supervision of a State approving agency employee,
    as well as certain medical treatment and domiciliary care in State
    Homes and administrative activities at a state or national Veterans
    cemetery. Likewise, we support the increase of school certifying
    official fees, but with additional safeguards built in to ensure that
    schools are only using these funds in such a fashion as to directly
    benefit GI Bill recipients. And we strongly support education
    requirements for certifying officials, but equally believe that SAAs
    should be involved in the development of that requirement and the
    provision of that training.
        NASAA also supports the restoration of entitlement to Post-9/11 GI
    Bill Educational Assistance and other relief for veterans affected by
    school closures. We saw firsthand the impact of school closures on the
    veterans in our states and we believe that entitlement, which Veterans
    lost through no fault of their own, should be partially or completely
    restored. However, we also believe that SAAs should be given enhanced
    measures for approval and oversight, such as allowing SAAs to suspend
    programs for longer than 60 days, and to require evidence of financial
    stability even from accredited institutions when circumstances dictate.
        We appreciate and support the provision of additional financial
    resources to allow SAAs to take on an enhanced role in the protection
    of the GI Bill and the future of our veterans. Over the past several
    years, NASAA has supported and even applauded the expansion of benefits
    for Veterans along with increased safeguards which Congress has
    provided. And we have taken on a greater role in assuring compliance
    with Congressional mandates as well as VA and state regulations.
    However, SAAs have been flat-funded for the past decade, and in order
    to continue effectively to provide the important services to approved
    institutions and Veterans, we would respectfully request an increase of
    $7 million dollars to our allocation. It should be noted that this
    increase would only cover the cost of increase in personnel salary and
    benefits, inflation and our increased workload over the past ten years.
    The result would be a total allocation of $26 million dollars provided
    to support the important work of state agencies throughout the Nation.
    We estimate that at least $7 million dollars of the total amount is
    required to do the compliance surveys for the VA, of which we have
    historically performed 50 percent.
        Finally, section 5 of the draft seeks to expand the Post-9/11 GI
    Bill to provide for the approval of independent study programs at
    certain educational institutions that are not institutions of higher
    learning, namely stand-alone non-degree granting institutions. Though
    this bill does include language to restrict the extent of this
    expansion somewhat, some of that language could be problematical. As
    this is a radical departure from the inherent safeguard provided in the
    code of disallowing the approval of ``any independent study program
    except an accredited independent study program (including open circuit
    television) leading (A) to a standard college degree, or (B) to a
    certificate that reflects educational attainment offered by an
    institution of higher learning,'' NASAA cannot support this
    legislation. However, we would not oppose it as long as the following
    concerns are addressed.
        First, as regards proposed subsection (C)(ii): The definition of a
    ``postsecondary vocational institution'' as defined in the Higher
    Education Act, does seem to contain adequate parameters to protect the
    integrity of the GI Bill. The institution must be limited to high
    school graduates or equivalent, and to students in an eligible career
    pathway program who have been determined to have an ability to benefit;
    it must be authorized by the State to offer the program; is public or
    nonprofit; and is accredited by a nationally recognized accrediting
    agency or granted preaccreditation status by an agency authorized to
    grant such status. This definition would seem to bar predatory
    institutions providing training of questionable quality which might or
    might not lead to a job or career from seeking approval.
        However, NASAA is concerned that proposed subsection (C)(i) is
    problematical. If you solely look at the definition that is cited, the
    Perkins Act does not require that the institutions be accredited, and
    only requires that the institution be authorized by the State if it is
    an institution of higher learning. So, upon reviewing the definition
    that the proposed language cites, the non-IHL schools might not be
    required to have a license to operate. Also, although the lead-in
    provision in 3680A(4) requires the independent study program to be
    accredited, there is nothing that requires the accrediting agency for
    career and technical education schools to be nationally or regionally
    recognized, as, unlike the definition of a ``postsecondary vocational
    institution,'' the definition of an ``area career and technical
    education school'' does not mention accreditation. Therefore, as the
    proposed language currently stands, an area career and technical
    education school could be accredited by an unrecognized accrediting
    entity, and still be able to qualify for the GI Bill. Finally, the
    Perkins Act definition of ``career and technical education'' includes
    entrepreneurship, which is currently restricted under the GI Bill when
    the program is a non-degree program. For the reasons cited here, NASAA
    respectfully requests that the language of this bill be changed to
    limit the eligibility of non-degree institutions to those that are
    either public or not-for-profit institutions AND are accredited by a
    national or regionally recognized accrediting agency.
        NASAA supports this bill, in particular with the proposed
    revisions.

        Today, SAAs throughout our Nation, composed of approximately 175
    professional and support personnel, are supervising over 10,000 active
    facilities and over 100,000 programs. We pledge to you that we will not
    fail in our critical mission and in our commitment to safeguard the
    public trust, to protect the GI Bill, and to defend the future of those
    who have so nobly defended us. Mr. Chairman, NASAA thanks the Committee
    for the opportunity to share our concerns and suggestions, and we
    commit to working together with you and your staff to enhance the
    pending legislation.
                                     ______

        Prepared Statement of Phil Gore, Legislative Director, National
                Association of Veterans' Program Administrators

    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                                     ______

         Prepared Statement of the National Military Family Association

    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                                     ______

              Prepared Statement of Paralyzed Veterans of America
        Chairman Isakson, Ranking Member Tester, and Members of the
    Committee, Paralyzed Veterans of America (PVA) would like to thank you
    for the opportunity to submit our views for the record on the important
    legislation pending before the Committee. The bills considered today
    can have a significant positive impact on veterans who rely on various
    benefits services provided by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA).
    Our comments will be limited to those bills which PVA has a specific
    interest in or position.
                        s. 75, ``the arla harrell act''
        PVA supports S. 75, the ``Arla Harrell Act.'' Veterans who have for
    so long quietly suffered the effects of Mustard Gas or Lewisite
    exposure as a result of Department of Defense testing deserve to
    receive critically need care from the VA. Senator McCaskill's report
    indicates that the number of servicemembers exposed numbers around
    4,000, and yet only 610 have been identified. Currently, only 40
    veterans have successfully filed claims and are receiving related
    benefits. The fact that only 1 percent of the veterans exposed are
    receiving benefits is attributed to the 90 percent rejection rate of
    claims. Shifting the burden of proof relating to events that occurred
    so long ago from the veteran to VA is an appropriate and deserved step
    toward rectifying the failure to fully identify this population and
    ensure they are receiving their earned benefits. We would also note
    that with a new presumption comes increased stress on VA resources. It
    is imperative that Congress ensure resources are appropriately adjusted
    to prevent VA from having to rob Peter to pay Paul.
                 s. 111, the ``filipino veterans promise act''
        Following World War II, the U.S. Army created what became known as
    the ``Missouri List'' to identify Filipino soldiers who fought
    alongside U.S. troops. These individuals are entitled to VA benefits,
    but their eligibility has been primarily determined by whether their
    name appears on this list. Many Filipino veterans who served did not
    end up on this list, for a variety of reasons, but one of them being
    fear of enemy retaliation. This legislation would require VA to develop
    a process for vetting individuals who claim eligibility but do not
    appear on the list. Just because the task of determining eligibility is
    difficult should no longer be an excuse to deny deserving veterans'
    benefits. PVA understands and supports the intent of this legislation.
      s. 410, the ``shawna hill post-9/11 education transferability act''
        PVA supports this legislation which would help veterans or
    servicemembers who assigned education benefits to a dependent who
    became deceased prior to utilizing the full amount of benefits. In such
    a circumstance, the servicemember or veteran would be able to reassign
    the remaining benefits to another dependent. Current law is inequitable
    and forces veterans who suffer such a loss to also forfeit a
    significant benefit. We are pleased to support this fix.
                  s. 758, the ``janey ensminger act of 2017''
        PVA understands and supports the intent of S. 758, the ``Janey
    Ensminger Act of 2016.'' This legislation would amend the Public Health
    Service Act with respect to the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease
    Registry's (ATSDR) review and publication of illness and conditions
    relating to veterans stationed at Camp Lejeune, North Carolina, and
    their families. The bill would require the ATSDR Administrator to
    review the scientific data pertaining to the relationship between
    individuals at Camp Lejeune and the suspected resulting illness or
    condition. The ATSDR Administrator would be required to determine each
    condition that may be caused by toxic exposure, categorize the level of
    evidence or these conditions into three categories; sufficient with
    reasonable confidence that the exposure is a cause of the illness or
    condition, modest supporting causation, or no more than limited
    supporting causation. This information would then be published and
    continually updated on HHS' website. If these evidentiary
    categorizations are different from previous categorizations those
    veterans and their families currently receiving care under them would
    continue to receive that care. Newly registered veterans and family
    members would receive care based on the list provided by the ATSDR
    Administrator. Research regarding toxic exposures and the subsequent
    credibility of presumptive conditions has traditionally been the charge
    of the Institute of Medicine (IOM). The bill does not discuss the
    processes should the ATSDR conflict with the findings of the IOM.
                 s. 798, the ``yellow ribbon improvement act''
        PVA fully supports this legislation. Recipients of the Marine
    Gunnery Sergeant John David Fry Scholarship were inadvertently left out
    of eligibility for the Yellow Ribbon Program. This bill would fix this
    disparity and allow scholarship recipients the full benefits of the
    program. Children and surviving spouses of servicemembers who died in
    the line of duty should not have to wait any longer to be included in
    this program.
      s. 882, post-9/11 educational assistance for purple heart recipients
        PVA supports this legislation. Members of the Armed Forces must
    currently serve for a requisite period of time on active duty before
    becoming eligible for Post-9/11 G.I. Bill benefits. It is a great
    travesty that servicemembers who are wounded in action and receive the
    Purple Heart lose the chance to earn this benefit if their injury
    forces them to leave the service before meeting eligibility
    requirements. Surely those who have suffered harm on behalf of their
    country are at least as deserving as a servicemember who merely stayed
    on active duty for six months or more. We support this measure which
    would make all Purple Heart recipients eligible for education benefits
    regardless of time served.
      s. 1209, a bill to increase the special pension for medal of honor
                                   recipients
        It has been close to fifteen years since the pension amount for
    Medal of Honor recipients was increased. With the great honor of this
    award comes a responsibility to share their stories and inspire their
    fellow citizens. Often times this requires traveling and participating
    in events around the country. This responsibility should never become a
    financial burden on those who have already sacrificed so much. We
    support this bill which more than doubles the current pension amount to
    $3,000.00 per month.

        Again, PVA thanks you for the opportunity to present our views on
    these bills. We would be happy to take any questions you have for the
    record.
                                     ______

           Prepared Statement of the Reserve Officers Association of
                               the United States
        ROA has a membership of 50,000 and is the only national military
    association that exclusively supports all 1,085,155 Ready Reserve
    members of the Army National Guard, Army Reserve, Navy Reserve, Marine
    Corps Reserve, Air National Guard, Air Force Reserve and Coast Guard
    Reserve. We appreciate the opportunity to provide written testimony on
    the proposed bills related to the Post-9/11 G.I. Bill. The bills or
    sections that affect the Reserve Components are addressed by ROA. The
    additional bills, not included in this statement, have merit and will
    be or have been addressed by other Veteran or Military Service
    Organizations.
                              proposed legislation
        S. 410, Shauna Hill Post-9/11 Education Benefits Transferability
    Act, to authorize the transfer of unused Post-9/11 Educational
    Assistance benefits to additional dependents upon the death of the
    originally designated dependent. ROA views this as a technical change
    that is required.

        S. 473, Educational Development for Troops and Veterans Act of
    2017, to make qualification requirements for entitlement to Post-9/11
    Education Assistance more equitable, to improve support of veterans
    receiving such educational assistance.
        ROA appreciates the proposed sections that bring 12304a and 12304b
    in line with other deployment authorities. Additionally, we believe
    support of Veteran Student Centers is necessary since veteran students
    are non-traditional students. Veterans have different needs then those
    who went straight from high school to college and are 18-23 years old.
    According to VA:

         Only 15% of Student Veterans are traditionally aged
    college students (18-23). Most are between the ages of 24 and 40
         47% of Student Veterans have children
         47.3% of Student Veterans are married

        S. 758, Janey Ensminger Act of 2017, to amend the Public Health
    Service Act with respect to the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease
    Registry's review and publication of illness and conditions relating to
    veterans stationed at Camp Lejeune, North Carolina, and their family
    members.
        ROA supports this effort to more closely monitor the toxic
    exposure. Additionally, we believe a national toxic register must be
    established for individuals to self-identify toxic exposure. This way
    data can be compiled earlier in the cycle of service-connected medical
    conditions to determine health problems resulting from exposure. This
    will ultimately be more cost effective than relying on ``presumptive
    conditions'' decades after exposure.

        S. 844, GI Bill Fairness Act of 2017, to consider certain time
    spent by members of reserve components of the Armed Forces while
    receiving medical care from the Secretary of Defense as active duty for
    purposes of eligibility for Post-9/11 Educational Assistance, and for
    other purposes.
        This bill would include service provided under 10 United States
    Code, Section 12301(h), for individuals receiving medical care. It
    would enable them to receive education benefits just as their Active
    Component counterparts do today. ROA agrees with the Reserve Forces
    Policy Board which stated, ``If the member is not discharged because of
    the injury and instead returns to service--either deployed or as a
    Selected Reservist--none of the time spent in recovery is considered
    qualifying time. The servicemember would earn less qualifying time than
    those who served the entire time without an injury, and would not
    receive an equal benefit. In effect, this servicemember is penalized
    for being wounded or injured in theater. Ironically, if that same
    member was discharged from service because of the injury, the member
    would earn 100% of the benefit (assuming 30 days of continuous active
    duty service) . . .''

        S. 882, provides for the entitlement to educational assistance
    under the Post-9/11 Educational Assistance Program of the Department of
    Veterans Affairs for members of the Armed Forces awarded the Purple
    Heart.
        ROA supports this change and believe these individuals have
    provided a service to our country that deserves this benefit.

        S. 1192, Veterans TEST Accessibility Act, to provide for pro-rated
    charges to entitlement to educational assistance under Department of
    Veterans Affairs Post-9/11 Educational Assistance Program for certain
    licensure and certification tests and national tests, and for other
    purposes.
        We support legislation that would be based on actual costs,
    especially when it would save the servicemember a portion of their
    education entitlement.

        S. 1209, to increase the amount of special pension for Medal of
    Honor recipients.
        ROA supports this change and believes these individuals have
    provided a service to our country that deserves this benefit and is
    more reflective of past cost of living increases.

        S. 1218, Empowering FED Vets Act, to promote Federal employment for
    veterans.
        ROA urges Congress to change the Federal Hiring Preference
    standards for National Guard and Reserve members from ``180 consecutive
    days'' to ``180 cumulative days.'' This would fulfil the intent of the
    bill to ``enhance employment opportunities'' by extending it to the
    Reserve Component. It has been found that unemployment contributes to
    the high suicide rate in the RC. By the end of 2016 123 National Guard
    and 80 Reserve servicemembers were lost to suicide--one person every
    two days.

        S. 1277, Veteran Employment Through Technology Education Courses
    Act of 2017 (VET TEC Act of 2017), to require the Secretary of Veterans
    Affairs to carry out a high technology education pilot program.
        This bill would apply to certificate programs that provide
    instruction in computer programming, computer software, media
    application, data processing, or information sciences. It would help
    National Guard and Reserve members, as veterans, who are not always
    eligible for tuition assistance programs because they are not on active
    duty in a full-time status. Additionally, the services would get the
    benefit of Reserve Component members maintaining certificates while
    still performing military duty.
    Additional Proposals by Section Number

    SEC. 2. CONSOLIDATION OF CERTAIN ELIGIBILITY TIERS UNDER THE POST-9/11
                        EDUCATIONAL ASSISTANCE PROGRAM OF DEPARTMENT OF
                        VETERANS AFFAIRS. THIS WOULD INCREASE THE LOWER
                        TIERS FROM 40 PERCENT TO 50 PERCENT AND 50 PERCENT
                        TO 60 PERCENT.

        We support this change because it reduces out-of-pocket tuition for
    the National Guard and Reserve. This takes into consideration that they
    provide operational support on an ``as needed'' basis to the services
    and often never earn the entire 36 months of entitlement.

    SEC. 3. ADDITIONAL POST-9/11 EDUCATIONAL ASSISTANCE FOR CERTAIN
                        INDIVIDUALS PURSUING PROGRAMS OF EDUCATION IN
                        SCIENCE, TECHNOLOGY, ENGINEERING, MATH, OR HEALTH
                        CARE.

        This proposal could be setting a precedent for other degree
    programs to seek additional education benefits. With that as a
    possibility, Congress should amend the bill so that individuals who
    qualify for these benefits thereby incur a service commitment to the
    National Guard or Reserve. This approach is in keeping with the intent
    of the G.I. Bill being an earned entitlement. Additionally, there is a
    direct benefit to the Federal Government to help fill critical
    vacancies.
                                   conclusion
        The Reserve Components bring essential capabilities to the total
    force. Adequately resourced, as they have since the Guard's advent in
    the 17th century, Citizen-Soldiers provide our Nation a unique and
    affordable augmentation of its military capability. We appreciate the
    Committee considering legislation that positively affects the National
    Guard and Reserve, as well as, family members who support their
    efforts.
                                     ______

     Prepared Statement of Tragedy Assistance Program for Survivors (TAPS)
        Chairman Isakson, Ranking Member Tester and distinguished members
    of the Senate Committee on Veterans Affairs, The Tragedy Assistance
    Program for Survivors (TAPS) thanks you for the opportunity to make you
    aware of issues and concerns of importance to the families we serve,
    the families of the fallen.
        While the mission of TAPS is to offer comfort and support for
    surviving families, we are also committed to improving support provided
    by the Federal Government through the Department of Defense (DOD) and
    the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), state governments and local
    communities for the families of the fallen--those who fall in combat,
    those who fall from invisible wounds and those who die from illness or
    disease.
        We thank you for the provisions included in the Jeff Miller and
    Richard Blumenthal Veterans Health Care and Benefits Improvement Act of
    2016 including the expansion of eligibility for the Marine Gunnery
    Sergeant John David Fry Scholarship for spouses and clarification of
    eligibility for in-state tuition benefits for those using the Fry
    Scholarship. We are grateful for the Committee's focus on improving
    survivor benefits.
        TAPS would like to recognize the outstanding support we receive
    from the Department of Veteran Affairs (VA) on behalf of the survivors
    we serve. We were honored to have a Memorandum of Agreement (MoA) with
    the education specialists in the office of Economic Opportunity in the
    Veterans Benefits Administration enabling TAPS and the VA to work most
    efficiently in solving problems that surviving spouses and children
    encountered while accessing their VA education benefits. This
    relationship also allowed the VA to discover areas where policy or
    procedural processes could be improved so they could serve survivors
    more effectively.
        TAPS was recently honored to enter into a new and expanded
    Memorandum of Agreement with the Department of Veterans Affairs. VA
    Secretary Shulkin and TAPS President Bonnie Carroll signed the MOA on
    April 12, 2017, at a ceremony attended by many of the same survivors
    who will benefit from it. This agreement formalizes what has been a
    long-standing, informal working relationship between TAPS and the VA.
    The services provided by TAPS and VA are complimentary, and in this
    public-private partnership each will continue to provide extraordinary
    services through closer collaboration.
        The VA Office of Survivor Assistance, including director Moira
    Flanders and her staff, works closely with TAPS to answer questions and
    concerns that are raised by surviving family members. We also
    appreciate the opportunities provided by the DOD/VA Survivors Forum,
    held quarterly, which works as a clearinghouse for information on
    government and private sector programs and policies affecting surviving
    families. This is ably facilitated by Craig Zaroff of the VA Benefits
    Assistance Service.
        Under this agreement, TAPS continues to work with surviving
    families to identify resources available to them both within the VA and
    through private sources. TAPS will also collaborate with the VA in the
    areas of education, burial, benefits and entitlements, grief counseling
    and other areas of interest.
                               education benefits
        TAPS appreciates the attention that the Committee has paid to
    making sure that veterans and surviving family members have access to
    quality education. Surviving family members using their education
    benefits often fall prey to many of the same challenges facing veterans
    using their benefits, whether it be unscrupulous recruiting practices
    or questionable and confusing financial aid packages. TAPS is proud to
    work with other organizations, including the American Legion, Veterans
    of Foreign Wars, Veterans Education Success, Student Veterans of
    America and the Department of Education to ensure that safeguards are
    in place to protect all recipients of education benefits from the VA.
        Indicative of the specialized support that TAPS provides is the
    education portal and individualized support on the education benefits
    available for the children of America's fallen heroes. TAPS staff
    members work with each individual to maximize the financial support
    they can receive to complete their education from both government and
    private agencies.
    Working to Improve the GI Bill and the Fry Scholarship
        Most beneficial in the early months of the 115th Congress have been
    a series of meetings between committee staff from both the House and
    Senate and interested parties from the Veterans Service Organizations
    (VSOs), Military Service Organizations (MSOs), and Military Family
    Organizations (MFOs). These meetings prompted in depth discussions on
    how the GI Bill and Fry scholarship could be improved, in a forum where
    all opinions were welcome. We appreciate that improvements discussed
    for education benefits for survivors included:

         expansion of the Yellow Ribbon Program to surviving spouse
    and children,
         increases to the amount of the tuition assistance provided
    by the VA's Dependents Educational Assistance program, and
         technical corrections to allow a realignment of
    transferred GI Bill benefits after the veteran has passed away or the
    primary designee has passed away.

        Expanded discussions in informal forums bring all organizations in
    on solving the problems and raise alternatives and possible solutions
    that could not be discovered alone. We hope these dialogs continue.
    Expansion of the Yellow Ribbon Program
        TAPS supports extending eligibility for the Yellow Ribbon program,
    which allows approved institutions of higher learning and the VA to
    partially or fully fund tuition and fee expenses that exceed the
    established thresholds under the Post-9/11 GI Bill to those survivors
    eligible for the Marine Gunnery Sergeant John Fry Scholarship. TAPS
    supports S. 798 and H.R. 2103.
        We hear from surviving family members about the importance of the
    Yellow Ribbon program:
                From Emily McClimans, surviving child
            As a child of a fallen soldier that attends a school that
            accepts the Yellow Ribbon Program, I was ecstatic. I was so
            excited that there was a program to cover the hefty expenses
            that were not covered with the Fry Scholarship. Unfortunately,
            I was denied the Yellow Ribbon program because my father was
            killed in action and he's not currently serving. I, as a
            student of TCU, attend college alongside children of active
            duty children that have no worries as to how they're going to
            pay for their college education. If the Yellow Ribbon Program
            was extended to support children of fallen soldiers, I wouldn't
            have to worry about my education or whether or not I'll have
            enough funds for the next semester. Children of fallen soldiers
            deserve to not be overlooked, as our fathers and mothers are
            just as significant as those who are currently fighting. Having
            the opportunity to be sponsored by this program would alleviate
            stress and allow me to know that my family is just as important
            as the families with parents still fighting in the war.
                From Stephanie Orasing, surviving spouse
            I have been a military widow since 2005. When my husband passed
            away I had a 7-month-old, 3-year-old, and a 6-year-old son. I
            have had to put many things on hold so that I could be there
            for my kids and raise them. Now that they are 12, 15, & 18, I
            feel it is time for me to go to school to get my degree so that
            I can show my kids that education is important. I have spent
            the past 1 year & 9 months attending a community college in the
            area and I will graduate with my Associates of Applied Science
            degree next month. But the closest University or College is 30
            minutes away and it is private. I have applied to this
            university but the tuition is $30,000. I have been accepted but
            I am filling the paper work for financial aid because I don't
            know if I can do it financially. I am grateful for the Fry
            Scholarship that will pay $21,000 but there is a remaining
            balance of $9,000 that I must take a loan out for and I have
            spent my life raising my kids and don't even have a job to pay
            back this loan. I would appreciate the Yellow Ribbon program if
            they would consider helping military widows out so that we may
            have the chance to attend school and not have to have a
            financial burden held over our head.
                From LaNita Herlem, surviving spouse
            Concerning the Yellow Ribbon, one of the issues I ran into was
            when I received the Fry Scholarship (which is VERY much
            appreciated!), I immediately wanted to get my masters in
            political science but none of the NC state schools near me
            offered it. I even looked at several around the state, which
            would have meant moving, but the closest I could get was Public
            Administration which is not what I am interested in. Private
            schools within driving distance did offer what I wanted but
            being nearly 50, I am not interested in having a mortgage-sized
            school loan, nor can I afford to pay it anyway. So I decided to
            take business classes at the local community college. Instead
            of a master's degree in political science, I will graduate next
            month with an associate degree in business which in reality
            means very little. . . .  If I had access to the Yellow Ribbon
            program, I would have had the option of considering a private
            school and getting the degree I wanted.
    Improve Chapter 35 Survivors' and Dependents' Educational Assistance
            (DEA) and other Educational Benefits
        Not all survivors are eligible for the Fry scholarship. Survivors
    of those veterans who die of a service-connected disability or
    dependents of those who are 100 percent disabled are eligible for
    support through the Dependents' Educational Assistance (DEA) program.
    Current payments for the DEA benefits have not been increased when
    there have been significant increases to the Montgomery GI Bill or
    Post-9/11 GI Bill benefits. While increases to the DEA payment are
    increased each year a percentage point or two when there is an increase
    in other Federal benefits (i.e. Social Security, VA Dependency and
    Indemnity Compensation, VA Disability payments), the current payment of
    $1,024 a month does not go far in covering ever spiraling tuition
    costs. We appreciate the proposed increase to the DEA payment as a
    great start toward parity. TAPS supports H.R. 1956.
                From Carla Stumpf Patton, surviving spouse
            As a surviving family of an active duty Marine who died prior
            to 9/11, an increase in Chapter 35 benefits would make a
            dramatic a difference in alleviating the financial strain
            associated with the increasing rates of college expenses for
            families of the fallen. Families like ours are often excluded
            from other funding programs that offer tremendous assistance to
            families post-9/11; on top of the loss we have experienced,
            this financial burden can be overwhelming. Because I was
            pregnant at the time of my husband's death and our child was
            born posthumously, it would be eighteen years before our child
            needed educational assistance and while there was some funding,
            it was not nearly enough to cover tuition rates associated with
            his school. We were excluded from other sources of funding
            either due to the date of death or due to the manner of death,
            leaving very few options for financial assistance other than
            private scholarships and having to take out large personal
            loans. Increasing the current benefit will address the cost of
            living and sky-rocketing college expenses our families our
            facing in the 21st century.
    Waiver for Distribution of the Transferred Post-9/11 GI Bill Benefits
        TAPS requests a technical correction for transferred GI Bill
    Benefits. If a servicemember transfers their GI Bill while alive and
    subsequently passes, no change in the number of months of the benefit
    amount allotted each family member can be made. If the servicemember or
    veteran were still living, they could adjust the number of months
    allotted to each family member at will. TAPS supports S. 1330.
                From Coleen Bowman, surviving spouse
            I am the widow of SGM Robert Bowman. Realizing the importance
            of education, when the opportunity for transferring the Post-9/
            11 GI Bill arose, my husband took advantage of the opportunity
            and designated myself and our 4 daughters to be recipients of
            the benefit, being told her could reapportion the benefit when
            the time for their education came about. Unfortunately, after
            exposure to environmental toxins, my husband succumbed to
            cancer in January 2013. Before he died, our then 13 year old
            daughter told him ``Dad, I promise you I am going to go to
            college and do great things and make you proud.'' This daughter
            is now almost 18 years old, in her junior year of high school
            and doing very well. She is in the top 20 percent of her class
            and talks almost daily about how excited she is to go to
            college and the things she needs to do in order to get there.

            I called the VA about 8 to 10 months ago and spoke to someone
            about changing the allotted months from one child to another,
            or myself to my daughters. We had 19 months of benefits that
            neither I nor her sister would use. I was told ``The only
            person that can move the months of benefits around is the
            servicemember/veteran.'' I said ``You do understand he passed
            away in 2013?'' She said to me again ``Yes, ma'am, I understand
            but again the only person who can move the months is Robert
            Bowman.''

            I was able to deal with all of my late husband's estate, I am
            entrusted with all financial benefits for our two youngest
            daughters, I certainly should be able to manage their education
            benefits as well. My hope is that this issue can be resolved
            and survivors like me will be able to have some relief of
            stress in this area.
                From Tammy McCracken, surviving spouse
            Colonel David McCracken served honorably in the Army and Army
            Reserves for over 20 years. During his military career, he was
            deployed multiple times; during his last tour he was activated
            as a reservist to deploy to the Middle East. Upon return from
            his deployment, he was diagnosed with brain cancer which was
            found to be service-connected by the VA because of the link to
            burn pit exposure in the Middle East. He was not on active-duty
            orders nor training at the time of his death due to illness,
            and his children are not eligible for the Fry Scholarship. As
            he already had a Masters degree, Col. McCracken knew he was
            never going to use his own GI Bill benefits so when
            transferability became an option he immediately transferred it
            to his 2 young children. He transferred 35 months to his son
            and 1 month to his daughter thinking he could go back and split
            it as they needed it later, but because he died of wounds from
            his service it is stuck split that way. Col. McCracken's son,
            Connor has received an ROTC scholarship to Embry-Riddle
            Aeronautical University and would like to give all 35 of his
            months to his sister to use but because only the servicemember
            can make adjustments to the amount of months each dependent
            receives, Connor will have to let the 35 months he has go to
            waste.

        The technical fix would be to allow survivors of those who had
    transferred the GI Bill and passed to adjust the months amongst those
    designated. In discussion with committee staff, the quandary of who
    should decide on the division was raised. We suggest it could be up to
    the current possessor of the benefit to determine if and how many
    months would be transferred. This will also only impact those already
    listed as transferees; no new transferees could be added.
        TAPS also supports S. 410 and H.R. 1112, which would authorize the
    transfer of unused Post-9/11 Educational Assistance benefits to
    additional dependents upon the death of the originally designated
    dependent.

        It is the responsibility of the Nation to provide for the support
    of the loved ones of those who have paid the highest price for freedom.
    Thank you for allowing us to speak on their behalf.
                                     ______

               Prepared Statement of Veterans Educations Success
        Chairman Isakson, Ranking Member Tester and Members of the
    Committee on Veterans Affairs, Veterans Education Success (VES)
    appreciates the opportunity to share its views on legislation under
    consideration at today's hearing.
        A Summary of VES' positions on the bills and Discussion Draft
    legislation before the Committee follows. ``No Position'' means the
    measure is outside our expertise or legislative area of interest.

    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                   Veterans
                                                       Subject/    Education
                             AGENDA ITEM               Key Word     Success
                                                                   Position
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
          S.7Arla Harrell Act                       Mustard     No
                                                     Gas         position
                                                    Claims
                                                    WWII
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
         S.11Filipino Veterans Promise Act          WWII        No
                                                    Claims       position
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
         S.41Shauna Hill Post-9/11 Education        Transfer    Support
              Transferability Act                    GI Bill
                                                     at
                                                     Dependent
                                                     's Death
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
         S.47Educational Development for Troops     Guard-      Strongly
              and Veterans Act of 2017               Reserve     support
                                                     Call-ups
                                                    Entitlemen
                                                     t
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
         S.75Janey Ensminger Act of 2017            Toxic       No
                                                     Substance   Position
                                                     s
                                                    Exposure-
                                                     Related
                                                     Care
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
         S.79Yellow Ribbon Improvement Act          Fry         Strongly
                                                     Scholarsh   support
                                                     ip Fix
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
         S.88Purple Heart GI Bill Act               --          Strongly
                                                                 support
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
         S.84GI Bill Fairness Act                   Reserves'   Strongly
                                                     Medical     support
                                                     Hold--GI
                                                     Bill
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
        S.119Veterans TEST Accessibility Act        Licensure   Support
                                                     & Test
                                                    GI Bill
                                                    Consumptio
                                                     n
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
        S.120A bill to increase special pension     MOH         No
              for medal of honor recipients          Stipend     Position
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
        S.121Empowering Federal Employment for      --          No
              Veterans Act of 2017                               Position
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
        S.127Veterans Employment TEC Act of 2017    Coding      Provisiona
                                                     Boot        l support
                                                     Camps
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
       SectioGI Bill Discussion Draft BAG17503
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Consolidation of certain eligibility   Raise       Support
              tiers under Post-9/11 Educational      Certain     with
              Assistance Program of the Department   GI Bill     comment
              of Veterans Affairs                    Rates for
                                                     Guard-
                                                     Reserve
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Additional Post-9/11 Educational       GI Bill     Oppose
              Assistance for certain individuals     Hike for
              pursuing programs of education in      STEM
              science, technology, engineering,      Degrees
              math, or health care.
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Increase in amounts of educational     Raise DEA   Support
              assistance payable under Survivors'    Rates
              and Dependents' Educational            Comparabl
              Assistance Program of Department of    e to MGIB
              Veterans Affairs
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Authorization for use of Post-9/11     Modify      Provisiona
              Educational Assistance to pursue       Independe   l support
              independent study programs at          nt Study
              certain educational institutions
              that are not institutions of higher
              learning
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Calculation of monthly housing         BAH Rate    Support
              stipend under Post-9/11 Educational    on          with
              Assistance program based on location   Facilitie   Comment
              of campus where classes are attended   s'
                                                     zipcode
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Repeal of sunset on work-study                     No
              allowance from Department of                       position
              Veterans Affairs for certain
              qualifying work-study activities
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Authorization of transfer of                       Support
              entitlement to Post-9/11 Educational
              Assistance by dependents who receive
              transfers from individuals who
              subsequently die
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Department of Veterans Affairs                     Support
              provision of on-campus educational
              and vocational counseling for
              veterans
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
            1Restoration of entitlement to Post-9/              Support
              11 Educational Assistance and other
              relief for veterans affected by
              school closure
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
            1Treatment, for purposes of                         Support
              educational assistance administered
              by the Secretary of Veterans
              Affairs, of educational courses that
              begin seven or fewer days before or
              after the first day of an academic
              term
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
            1Improvement of information technology              Support
              of the Veterans Benefits
              Administration
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
            1Provision of information regarding                 Support
              entitlement of veterans to
              educational assistance
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
            1Extension of authority for Advisory                Support
              Committee on Education
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
            1Limitation on use of reporting fees                Support
              payable to educational institutions
              and joint apprenticeship training
              committees
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
            1Training for school certifying                     Support
              officials as condition of approval
              of courses for veterans educational
              assistance
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
            1Modifications relating to                          Support
              reimbursement of expenses of State
              approving agencies for matters
              relating to administration of
              veterans educational assistance
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
            1Modification of calculation of amount              Support
              of educational assistance for
              individuals partially eligible for
              Post-9/11 Educational Assistance
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------

       comment on selected bills and gi bill discussion draft provisions
        S. 473 The Educational Development Act for Troops and Veterans Act
    (Senators Tester, Blumenthal, Brown, Murray). The bill would provide
    education benefits to National Guard and Reserve members called to
    active Federal service under orders that don't qualify them for Post-9/
    11 GI Bill benefits, and for other purposes.
        VES strongly supports the educational benefits provisions in the
    bill.
        Sections 2-4 of this legislation would ensure that any time spent
    activated on mobilization authorization orders 12304a, 12304b, and
    12301d of Title 10, U.S.C. counts toward eligibility for Post-9/11 GI
    Bill benefits for Guardsmen and reservists.
        In 2012 Congress authorized the Secretary of Defense and Service
    Secretaries to more easily access the Reserve forces. In addition to
    call-ups in law for ``national emergencies'' and ``contingency
    operations,'' the Pentagon may call Guard and Reserve formations to
    active duty for missions that are ``pre-planned and budgeted,'' i.e.,
    such missions do not require formal action by Congress or the Commander
    in Chief.
        VES assumes the exclusion of veterans benefits for the G-R
    mobilized under Section 12304b and perhaps the other sections of law
    cited above were an oversight in the fog of enacting new deployment
    authorities and not an intentional slight against these servicemembers.
        Since enactment of the law-change, the Services have steadily
    increased their reliance on pre-planned and budgeted call-ups of the
    Guard and Reserve.
        As a matter of principle and fairness to our Nation's ``operational
    Guard and Reserve'' men and women, there is no reason to exclude them
    from GI Bill entitlement simply because they serve under ``wrong''
    orders. VES strongly endorses Sections 2-4 of S. 473.
        Section 6 would create a grant program with the Department of
    Education to help institutions of higher education establish, maintain,
    and improve veteran education centers--a dedicated space on a college
    or university campus that provides students who are veterans, members
    of the Armed Forces, or eligible family members a centralized location
    for services.
        VES supports the provision. We note that the VA operates 94
    VetSuccess on Campus programs at designated colleges and universities
    across the Nation that provide VA counselors and support to veterans
    eligible for Vocational Rehabilitation and Employment benefits. VES
    recommends coordination between the VA and Dept. of Education on the
    new program envisioned in Sec. 6.
        Section 8 of S. 473 would prorate the monthly housing allowance for
    the portion of the month the servicemember is not on active duty by
    amending Title 38, U.S.C. to clarify the eligibility for monthly
    stipends paid under the Post-9/11 Educational Assistance Program for
    certain members of the reserve components of the Armed Forces. VES
    supports Section 8.
        S. 798 Yellow Ribbon Improvement Act of 2017 (Senators Cassidy,
    Brown, Tillis). S. 798 would correct an inequity that denies Survivors
    entitled to the Fry Scholarship the opportunity to participate in the
    Yellow Ribbon matching program. Under the Yellow Ribbon participating
    colleges and universities may match up to half any remaining cost after
    GI Bill benefits are paid. The VA matches the difference. VES strongly
    supports S. 798.
        S. 844 GI Bill Fairness Act of 2017 (Senators Wyden, Boozman).
    S. 844 would authorize Guard and Reserve members receiving medical care
    or treatment on active duty to earn GI Bill entitlement during that
    period of service. Under current law, reservists who are wounded, ill
    or injured in the line-of-duty and eligible to earn GI Bill benefits
    are transferred to ``medical hold'' status resulting in the loss of
    that service for the purpose of GI Bill entitlement. By contrast active
    duty servicemembers continue to earn GI Bill benefits during a medical
    hold period of service. VES strongly supports S. 844.
        S. 882. Purple Heart GI Bill Act (Senators Rounds, Boozman). S. 882
    would grant full Post-9/11 GI Bill benefits to all Post-9/11 Purple
    Heart recipients.
        Currently, only veterans who either serve at least 36 months on
    active duty or are medically retired receive Post-9/11 GI Bill benefits
    at the 100 percent rate. Those who were not medically retired and serve
    less than 36 months receive only a portion of those benefits on a
    prorated basis. Unfortunately, this leaves out many Purple Heart
    recipients, particularly from the Reserve Component, who were wounded
    on Post-9/11 battlefields, but were activated for less than three years
    in total. VES strongly supports S. 882.
        S. 1192, Veterans TEST Accessibility Act of 2017 (Senator Rounds,
    Hirono). S. 1192 would change the rate for reimbursing the cost of
    licensure and certification tests under the GI Bill to a pro-rated
    amount based on the actual cost of the fee charged for the test. VES
    supports S. 1192.
        S. 1277. Veterans Employment TEC Act of 2017 (Senator Boozman,
    Heller). S. 1277 would require the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to
    conduct a pilot program under which eligible veterans could enroll in
    high technology programs of education. (The pilot authority would not
    amend GI Bill statutes nor affect GI Bill benefits for veterans).
        VES will not oppose S. 1277 provided the following concerns are
    addressed:

              First, we urge the Committee to add language to ensure that a
            legitimate, high quality boot camp receives the VA contract.
            Currently, the only requirement is that the boot camp has been
            in existence for two years, but many low-quality rip-offs have
            existed for two years. There is no mention of outcomes, price,
            scale, or population served in the definition of qualified
            providers. We recommend the provision require VA to survey
            America's best high tech companies and select a boot camp from
            one of the top five ranked by high tech companies.
              Second, the provision includes no cap on tuition. Some
            proprietary boot camps charge outrageous tuition for a very
            short number of weeks. The tuition should be capped, such as by
            limiting the VA reimbursement to no more than 10% higher than
            the average nonprofit boot camp tuition price for the same time
            period. Another method would be to limit the boot camp tuition
            coverage to no more than a weekly prorated share of the annual
            GI Bill.
              Third, we urge the Committee to consult executives from the
            top tech companies in Silicon Valley. Executives tell us many
            coding boot camps are a rip off, and that the public excitement
            about such boot camps may be misplaced.
              Fourth, there is real concern that giving Federal funding to
            boot camps, some of which are owned by proprietary colleges,
            will lead to the next big scandal. Significant quality
            assurance measures are needed to prevent that. At a minimum,
            the Committee could require that coding boot camp programs meet
            the current Education Department requirements for short-term
            programs--70% completion and 70% job placement rates. Coding
            boot camps are not currently eligible for Education Department
            funding because they are not accredited and are too short to
            qualify for Pell Grants. Reports show the same problems with
            boot camp job placement rate claims that occurred among bad
            actors in the proprietary college industry, so much so that the
            private lenders that lend to students in these program just
            announced a more vigorous job placement rate definition and
            verification system for the coding camps.
              Finally, the provision includes some clear loopholes,
            including failing to define the type, quality, or duration of
            ``employment'' and ``meaningful employment.''
                       gi bill discussion draft bag17503

    SECTION 2. CONSOLIDATION OF CERTAIN ELIGIBILITY TIERS UNDER POST-9/11
                        EDUCATIONAL ASSISTANCE PROGRAM OF THE DEPARTMENT OF
                        VETERANS AFFAIRS.

        This provision would raise the percentage of Post-9/11 GI Bill
    entitlement for the lowest two tiers for National Guard and Reserve
    servicemembers with qualifying active duty service. Tier 1--an
    aggregate of 90 days active duty--would increase from 40% to 50% GI
    Bill entitlement. Tier 2--aggregates of more than 180 days, but less
    than 360 days--would increase from 50% to 60% entitlement.
        Below is a recent VA report summarizing new GI Bill entitlement by
    tiers:

                              Number of Veterans, Servicemembers, and Dependents Using Pthe Post-9/11 Benefit by Eligibility Level
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                            Eligibility level                             40%       50%       60%        70%       80%       90%        100%        Total
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Number of Users..................................................   17,209    65,530    109,788    63,396    68,504    71,527    1,090,195    1,486,149

    Percent of total.................................................     1.2%      4.4%       7.4%      4.3%      4.6%      4.8%        73.4%         100%
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Source: VA (August 1, 2009 through Sept. 30, 2015).

        The data indicate that over time Tier 1 and Tier 2 participants
    appear to migrate to higher levels of entitlement due to additional
    qualifying active duty service. In other words, over a 6 year period
    from the start of the new GI Bill only 1.2% of all users were in Tier
    1. The 100% entitlement top tier no doubt includes a substantial number
    of National Guard and Reserve members who have served multiple
    qualifying tours of active duty. Unofficially, more than one million
    Guard and Reserve members have been called up since Sept. 11, 2001 and
    over 300,000 have had multiple activations.
        VES recognizes and greatly appreciates the service and sacrifice of
    our Nation's Guard and Reserve warriors. VES is supportive of Section 2
    of the Draft Bill but we wonder whether there is a demonstrated need to
    increase the first two tiers of eligibility at this time.
        We believe strongly that the first order of business must be to
    resolve the inequity of denied entitlement for service under certain
    activation orders such as 12304b, 10 U.S.C. discussed above.

    SECTION 3. ADDITIONAL POST-9/11 EDUCATIONAL ASSISTANCE FOR CERTAIN
                        INDIVIDUALS PURSUING PROGRAMS OF EDUCATION IN
                        SCIENCE, TECHNOLOGY, ENGINEERING, MATH, OR HEALTH
                        CARE.

        This provision would authorize an additional lump sum payment under
    the P911 GI Bill for veterans who pursue degrees in science,
    technology, engineering, math or health care.
        VES appreciates the intent of this provision. It would further the
    career goals of certain veterans who pursue STEM degrees and
    potentially benefit the economy over time. These are certainly laudable
    goals.
        We must caution, however, that the provision would overturn a
    fundamental principle of all GI Bill programs extending back more than
    70 years, namely, that all veterans are entitled to the same basic
    benefits under the GI Bill for the same service rendered to the Nation.
        With those benefits, veterans are free to pursue any course of
    study or training approved for the GI Bill that meets their personal
    and career needs. No veteran should get additional basic benefits on
    the basis of their field of study or training.
        Section 3 would establish a policy that would alter this
    longstanding principle of benefit equity. In effect, it would say that
    some fields of study are inherently more valuable, thereby relegating
    non-STEM pursuit to a lesser level of importance to the Nation. A
    second order consequence of the provision is that lawmakers may be
    tempted in the future to lower (or raise) entitlement to the GI Bill
    based on the attributed worth of a program of study. What happens, for
    example, if STEM degrees fall out of favor or are not seen as important
    to the economy as business degrees, for example?
        Similarly, we would encourage you to consider the unintended,
    second order consequence of this provision in incentivizing some STEM
    programs to change their tuition and/or number of credits needed, in
    order to charge more to take advantage of this provision.
        Finally, we would ask if the Committee has thoroughly consulted
    experts to determine if this provision is needed. We would note that
    the Nation's finest STEM programs such as at the Massachusetts
    Institute of Technology and Carnegie Mellon, do not require additional
    time to graduate, raising the question of the necessity of this
    provision.
        There is a current mechanism for the proposed objective--additional
    entitlement--at least in part. Veterans with eligibility for multiple
    GI Bill programs may use up to 48 months of benefits. For example,
    Montgomery GI Bill (Chap. 30, 38 U.S.C.) participants can use up to 12
    months of entitlement and make an irrevocable election for the P911 GI
    Bill benefit and have 36 months of remaining entitlement for a total of
    48 months of benefits.
        For these reasons, VES is unable to support Section 3.

    SECTION 4. INCREASE IN AMOUNTS OF EDUCATIONAL ASSISTANCE PAYABLE UNDER
                        SURVIVORS' AND DEPENDENTS' EDUCATIONAL ASSISTANCE
                        PROGRAM

        This provision would restore the education and buying power of
    Survivors and Dependents Educational Assistance (DEA) benefits under
    Chap. 35, 38 U.S.C..
        When Congress enacted the P911 GI Bill in 2008, it also increased
    by 20% MGIB benefits. Unfortunately, Survivors and their dependents
    were left behind. Over time, the value of their benefits has fallen
    further behind since the annual COLA adjustments, if any, are applied
    to a smaller base amount.
        Congress needs to do more to help Survivors prepare for their
    futures by restoring the value of their benefits earned by their
    spouses who made the ultimate sacrifice. VES strongly supports Section
    4.

    SECTION 5. AUTHORIZATION FOR USE OF POST-9/11 EDUCATIONAL ASSISTANCE TO
                        PURSUE INDEPENDENT STUDY PROGRAMS AT CERTAIN
                        EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS THAT ARE NOT INSTITUTIONS
                        OF HIGHER LEARNING.

        VES shares the views of the National Association of State Approving
    Agencies on this provision. Adequate controls should be put in place to
    limit the potential for abuse by ``non-accredited'' independent study
    programs. VES is very concerned that some veterans may be duped into
    so-called Independent Study programs that don't lead to a license,
    certification or other meaningful credential needed to pursue a career
    in a chosen field of study. State Approving Agencies and/or the
    Departments of Veterans Affairs, Education and Labor must be given
    authority to oversee programs envisioned under Section 5.

    SECTION 6. CALCULATION OF MONTHLY HOUSING STIPEND UNDER POST-9/11
                        EDUCATIONAL ASSISTANCE PROGRAM BASED ON LOCATION OF
                        CAMPUS WHERE CLASSES ARE ATTENDED.

        The provision would change the method for determining the housing
    stipend for veterans to the location of the facility where the veteran
    is enrolled.
        VES is supportive of the provision, provided the VA assesses the
    impact of the proposal on veterans. The sponsor of the House version of
    the bill, Rep. Paul Cook, wrote to the VA earlier this year requesting
    data on the how his bill would affect the housing stipend calculation
    system-wide. It's our understanding the VA has not yet responded to the
    request. We believe the housing stipend data will be helpful in
    determining whether to proceed with some version of this provision. The
    VA must assure Congress that any second or third order impact on
    veterans is fair and balanced.

    SECTION 8. AUTHORIZATION OF TRANSFER OF ENTITLEMENT TO POST-9/11
                        EDUCATIONAL ASSISTANCE BY DEPENDENTS WHO RECEIVE
                        TRANSFERS FROM INDIVIDUALS WHO SUBSEQUENTLY DIE.

        VES supports Section 8.

    SECTION 9. DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS PROVISION OF ON-CAMPUS
                        EDUCATIONAL AND VOCATIONAL COUNSELING FOR VETERANS.

        VES notes the existence of the VetSuccess on Campus (VSOC) program
    at 94 campuses across the country according to the VA website. VES is
    supportive of Section 9 and recommends Congress and the VA assure
    coordination and/or integration of the new authority with VetSuccess on
    Campus.

    SECTION 10. RESTORATION OF ENTITLEMENT TO POST-9/11 EDUCATIONAL
                        ASSISTANCE AND OTHER RELIEF FOR VETERANS AFFECTED
                        BY SCHOOL CLOSURE.

        Thousands of student veterans who were enrolled in ITT and
    Corinthian colleges, now closed, have lost vital GI Bill benefits
    through no fault of their own.
        VES has been in contact with nearly 1,000 of these veterans and is
    advising them on actions they may be able to take regarding their
    benefits.
        Veterans regularly describe to VES various false statements that
    their school made in order to persuade them to enroll. For example,
    many veterans describe how their school inflated its job placement
    rates or the efforts it puts into finding students jobs. Many also
    report that their school misled them about the accreditation status of
    its programs or whether its credits transfer to other schools. Many
    veterans describe how their school promised them that the GI Bill would
    cover their entire education, only to be told later that they would
    need to take out loans in order to complete their education. Some even
    describe learning that officials at their school falsified Federal aid
    applications by forging their names on loan applications.
        One veteran told us that his school said it had a 93% job placement
    rating, and promised that he would have access to a nationwide network
    of employers. That veteran told us, ``It wasn't until near the end of
    my schooling that I began to realize that a lot of the training I was
    getting was outdated, in some instances by a few years, and that I had
    a long way to go until I was up to par with the industry standards. I
    also found out that . . .  my program had a success rate of only 38%. I
    have student loans that I am going to be paying off for years and
    really I have nothing to show for it.''
        Another veteran, Travis, attended ITT Tech. Travis asks, ``Why was
    I getting outdated material? Why were instructors not even competent in
    what they teach? How could I know more about the subject than my own
    instructor? This was MADNESS!'' He goes on, ``What more can we do about
    this because at the end of the day the veterans are the ones taking the
    biggest hit! Lost GI Bill that we can't recoup, lost time away from
    family and friends and nothing to show for it! What about my time going
    to this school, sleepless nights studying for exams and finals, driving
    to school, driving home from school? As Veterans, the Education system
    has to do more for us! They should give us our time back toward our GI
    Bill that was used. Maybe in the future they will look more into these
    schools so this type of thing never happens again!''
        Those veterans are just a few examples of thousands who served
    their country, chose to use the educational benefits they earned in the
    military in order to transition into civilian life, yet later
    discovered that their school defrauded them, provided a subpar
    education, and in some cases could not even keep its doors open. Along
    with wasting their GI Bill benefits, many of these veterans are now
    saddled with overwhelming student loan debt. As Travis told us, ``It's
    affecting me as well as other veterans. Sometimes just dwelling on it
    brings me to tears because, in reality, at the end of the day, you
    honestly feel like a failure. You try so hard to get your education in
    order and then this happens.''
        Section 10 would restore up to four weeks GI Bill entitlement and a
    housing stipend under specific criteria in cases where a school closed
    permanently and the veteran did not receive credit or lost training
    time toward a program of study. The effective date would be the
    beginning of fiscal year 2015.
        VES supports Section 10. VES recommends the Committee provide a
    more generous reinstatement of benefits than four weeks of GI Bill,
    such as by providing the entire GI Bill reinstated as in the House bill
    by Congressman Messer. Additionally, we recommend the Committee amend
    the provision to include student veterans who were defrauded by the
    now-closed Corinthian Colleges.

    SECTION 11. TREATMENT, FOR PURPOSES OF EDUCATIONAL ASSISTANCE
                        ADMINISTERED BY THE SECRETARY OF VETERANS AFFAIRS,
                        OF EDUCATIONAL COURSES THAT BEGIN SEVEN OR FEWER
                        DAYS BEFORE OR AFTER THE FIRST DAY OF AN ACADEMIC
                        TERM.

        VES supports Section 11.

    SECTIONS 12-15.

        VES supports.

    SECTION 16. TRAINING FOR SCHOOL CERTIFYING OFFICIALS AS CONDITION OF
                        APPROVAL OF COURSES FOR VETERANS EDUCATIONAL
                        ASSISTANCE.

        This provision has the potential for reducing errors in calculating
    benefit entitlement and overpayments under the GI Bill programs for
    veterans by requiring school certifying officials to be trained by the
    VA as a condition for the school to be approved for such benefits. VES
    supports Section 16.

    SECTION 17. MODIFICATIONS RELATING TO REIMBURSEMENT OF EXPENSES OF
                        STATE APPROVING AGENCIES FOR MATTERS RELATING TO
                        ADMINISTRATION OF VETERANS EDUCATIONAL ASSISTANCE.

        This provision would increase funding for the State Approving
    Agencies (SAAs). SAAs are essential to the management and integrity of
    GI Bill programs, which is in our veterans' best interest. Funding for
    the SAAs has been flat-lined for over 10 years except for modest
    increases under annual COLAs. The provision would raise annual funding
    by discretionary appropriation of $3 million per year. VES supports
    Section 17.

    SECTION 18. MODIFICATION OF CALCULATION OF AMOUNT OF EDUCATIONAL
                        ASSISTANCE FOR INDIVIDUALS PARTIALLY ELIGIBLE FOR
                        POST-9/11 EDUCATIONAL ASSISTANCE.

        This provision would change the method of calculating GI Bill
    benefits for veterans who have less than a 100% entitlement.
        The following example illustrates the inequity. A veteran has 50%
    eligibility for the P911 GI Bill. She can receive 50% of the net
    tuition and fee costs paid, up to a maximum of half the private school
    cap.
        The annual tuition and fee charges for this veteran are $20,000,
    which is less than the annual cap if it's a private school.
        The veteran applies for grants and scholarships from outside
    sources, the school, and from their employer. The veteran receives
    $10,000 in tuition scholarships for the school year.
        When certifying the veteran's enrollment to VA, the school reports
    net tuition and fee charges of $10,000 (actual charges minus
    scholarships). VA pays 50% of the reported charges, or $5,000.
         The veteran now has to come up with another $5,000 to pay the
    balance. But if any of those additional funds are tuition scholarships
    or employer assistance, it will further reduce the calculated net
    tuition and fees and further reduce the amount the VA pays.
        Section 18 would make the inclusion of any scholarship, or other
    Federal, State, institutional, or employer-based aid or assistance
    (other than loans and any funds provided under section 401(b) of the
    Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1070a(b))) that is provided
    directly to the institution and specifically designated for the sole
    purpose of defraying tuition and fees, no longer applicable to the net
    tuition and fee calculation for those with less than 100% eligibility.
        VES supports Section 18.

        Veterans Education Success appreciates the opportunity to express
    our views before the Committee. We thank the Members for their enduring
    interest in and support of our Nation's veterans, survivors and their
    family members.
                                     ______

       Prepared Statement of Kristofer Goldsmith, Assistant Director for
           Policy and Government Affairs, Vietnam Veterans of America

    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                                    ______

                                                             Attachment
       Memorandum from Veterans Legal Services Clinic, Yale Law School,
    presented by Erin Baldwin, Corey Meyer, and Rachel Tuchman, Law Student
                                    Interns

    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]