    [House Hearing, 118 Congress]
    [From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

                                                                  [H.A.S.C. No. 118-21]

                                     HEARING

                                       ON

                       NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT

                              FOR FISCAL YEAR 2024

                                      AND

                  OVERSIGHT OF PREVIOUSLY AUTHORIZED PROGRAMS

                                   BEFORE THE

                          COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES

                            HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                        ONE HUNDRED EIGHTEENTH CONGRESS

                                 FIRST SESSION
                                   __________

                   SUBCOMMITTEE ON MILITARY PERSONNEL HEARING

                                       ON

            MILITARY DEPARTMENT PERSONNEL CHIEFS: PERSONNEL POSTURE
                                   __________

                                  HEARING HELD
                                 MARCH 29, 2023

                      [GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                                   __________

                        U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE

    53-741                     WASHINGTON : 2024

                       SUBCOMMITTEE ON MILITARY PERSONNEL

                          JIM BANKS, Indiana, Chairman

    ELISE M. STEFANIK, New York          ANDY KIM, New Jersey
    MATT GAETZ, Florida                  CHRISSY HOULAHAN, Pennsylvania
    JACK BERGMAN, Michigan               VERONICA ESCOBAR, Texas
    MICHAEL WALTZ, Florida               MARILYN STRICKLAND, Washington
    BRAD FINSTAD, Minnesota              JILL N. TOKUDA, Hawaii
    JAMES C. MOYLAN, Guam                DONALD G. DAVIS, North Carolina
    MARK ALFORD, Missouri                TERRI A. SEWELL, Alabama
    CORY MILLS, Florida                  STEVEN HORSFORD, Nevada

                   Dave Giachetti, Professional Staff Member
                     Ilka Regino, Professional Staff Member
                      Alexandria Evers, Research Assistant

                                C O N T E N T S

                                  ----------
                                                                       Page

                  STATEMENTS PRESENTED BY MEMBERS OF CONGRESS

    Banks, Hon. Jim, a Representative from Indiana, Chairman,
      Subcommittee on Military Personnel.............................     1
    Kim, Hon. Andy, a Representative from New Jersey, Ranking Member,
      Subcommittee on Military Personnel.............................     3

                                   WITNESSES

    Cheeseman, VADM Richard J., Jr., USN, Chief of Naval Personnel,
      and Deputy Chief of Naval Operations for Personnel, Manpower,
      and Training (N1), U.S. Navy...................................     6
    Glynn, LtGen James F., USMC, Deputy Commandant for Manpower and
      Reserve Affairs, U.S. Marine Corps.............................     8
    Kelley, Katharine, Deputy Chief of Space Operations for Human
      Capital, U.S. Space Force......................................     9
    Miller, Lt Gen Caroline M., USAF, Deputy Chief of Staff for
      Manpower, Personnel, and Services, Headquarters U.S. Air Force.     7
    Stitt, LTG Douglas F., USA, Deputy Chief of Staff, G1, U.S. Army.     5

                                    APPENDIX

    Prepared Statements:

        Banks, Hon. Jim..............................................    31
        Cheeseman, VADM Richard J., Jr...............................    50
        Glynn, LtGen James F.........................................    76
        Kelley, Katharine............................................    94
        Kim, Hon. Andy...............................................    34
        Miller, Lt Gen Caroline M....................................    58
        Stitt, LTG Douglas F.........................................    36

    Documents Submitted for the Record:

        Department of Defense Announces Recruiting and Retention
          Numbers for Fiscal Year 2022 thru March 2022...............   107
        Exhibit A, Navy Personnel Form...............................   108

    Witness Responses to Questions Asked During the Hearing:

        Mr. Mills....................................................   111

    Questions Submitted by Members Post Hearing:

        Mr. Davis....................................................   117
        Mr. Gaetz....................................................   116
        Mr. Kim......................................................   115
        Mr. Mills....................................................   118

            MILITARY DEPARTMENT PERSONNEL CHIEFS: PERSONNEL POSTURE

                                  ----------

                      House of Representatives,
                           Committee on Armed Services,
                            Subcommittee on Military Personnel,
                             Washington, DC, Wednesday, March 29, 2023.
        The subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 3:01 p.m., in
    room 2212, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Jim Banks
    (chairman of the subcommittee) presiding.

      OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. JIM BANKS, A REPRESENTATIVE FROM
         INDIANA, CHAIRMAN, SUBCOMMITTEE ON MILITARY PERSONNEL

        Mr. Banks. The subcommittee will come to order. I ask
    unanimous consent that the Chair be authorized to declare a
    recess at any time. Without objection, so ordered.
        I want to welcome everyone to this hearing of the Military
    Personnel Subcommittee. And I want to start by saying that it
    has been some time, if I have it correctly it's been since
    2019, that we have had the service personnel chiefs come in
    front of the Military Personnel Subcommittee.
        A lot has changed in that time. We now have a Space Force.
    The end of operations in Afghanistan. A Russian war in Ukraine
    on the eastern flank of NATO [North Atlantic Treaty
    Organization]. And the ever-increasing threat of the PRC
    [People's Republic of China] military in the South China Sea
    and in other locations throughout the world.
        These changes are what makes this hearing so important.
    Today's hearing is focused on the personnel policymakers who
    are charged with developing the policies, guidance, and
    programs that affect the strategic objectives for accessions,
    recruiting, assignments, benefits, career development, and so
    much more.
        That is to say that you are largely responsible for
    developing tools that shape the total force in each of your
    services. This is no small task.
        We are here to hear from you, your perspective, on the
    effectiveness and consequences of all of these policies,
    especially considering the current difficulties that we face in
    retaining talent and the challenges that we are encountering
    across the recruiting enterprise. And those are just two areas.
        We have heard from a number of senior DOD [Department of
    Defense] officials touting the 2023 marks--that 2023 marks the
    50th anniversary of the All-Volunteer Force. This is indeed a
    tremendous achievement that speaks to the American spirit of
    patriotism that embodies many young people that are willing to
    put service in front of self.
        Quite the difference when we consider the sometimes forced
    conscription militaries of our adversaries like China and
    Russia. These societies oftentimes give no credence to the
    desires of their young adults. But this is to be expected from
    states that espouse despotism, not democracy.
        Which makes what we are going to discuss today here so much
    more important. I, for instance, had a choice when I raised my
    hand and volunteered for service to this great Nation,
    something that I would do again over and over again. Because it
    was this opportunity to serve in our military that helped shape
    who I am today.
        That is why I can say the viability of our All-Volunteer
    Force is at stake. I have said before at this subcommittee that
    there appears to be an erosion of trust between our service
    members and its senior leaders.
        That is why these personnel issues and these policies that
    you control could not be more important. We owe it to our
    service members and their families to get it right.
        I want to thank our witnesses for being with us today and
    for their service to this Nation. I also want to thank all of
    our service members, Active Duty, reservist, and Guard members
    who are serving this Nation around the world as we speak.
        You and your families are really the subject of this
    hearing as the policies and regulations controlled by these
    senior officers profoundly affect your lives and the very
    decision to stay in service or to leave.
        In our hearing on the 9th of March, we heard from the
    senior enlisted leaders that all things are not well. That the
    services have a trust issue. And some of our service members
    are not properly taken care of. This is our, and your,
    responsibility to--and our primary responsibility.
        As I said then, the All-Volunteer Force has placed a
    covenant of trust in our military leaders. You are those
    leaders entrusted with this obligation, this sacred
    responsibility, to develop policy and recommend legislation
    that maintains the force and takes care of people, their
    careers and their families, their very livelihood.
        Secretary Austin just released a memo strengthening our
    support to service members and their families. I am heartened
    that many of these issues long advocated for by this
    subcommittee and some legislated by this Congress are finally
    being implemented. But is it enough?
        I would say no, it is not. And the service recruiting
    metrics over the last several years bear this out. Almost all
    of you are likely to miss your recruiting goals again this
    year, the Army alone by more than 15,000 just last year.
        You have reduced your end-strength requests below the 2023
    authorized numbers. So you must ask yourselves why? And I ask,
    what are you doing about it?
        What are you doing to ensure that you have the required end
    strength to fulfill this mission, the mission requirements
    around the world? Let alone issues like service members' food
    insecurity, identified by you to affect 25 percent of the
    force. That is unacceptable, so what are you doing about it?
        So today we want to focus on what concrete actions are you
    taking to address all the problems that you face, whether it's
    recruiting, pay and benefits, food security, retaining talent,
    family issues, or the elimination of unnecessary bureaucracy.
        And we don't want more of the same. Clearly that is not
    working. What are you doing differently?
        In my view, the personnel system writ large, the totality
    of statute, regulation, culture, and tradition currently in
    place that determines how uniform service members and civilians
    alike are recruited, trained, and retained, promoted, assigned,
    and compensated, is out of date and needs to be reformed.
    Reformed to be more agile, flexible, and adaptive.
        The key challenges to consider include policy bars to
    accessions like medical and physical standards. Compensation of
    personnel: What do they--what do they value, money,
    assignments, family care, for example. And talent and career
    management policy: What are the barriers? Assignments,
    promotions, service culture.
        What are you doing to attract the next soldier, Marine,
    sailor, airman, or Guardian that will be entrusted with
    defending our freedom?
        That is a lot. But all of that is a contract of trust that
    is critical to recruiting, retention, and people's belief in
    service. It is critical to the implementation of the National
    Defense Strategy and the defense of this Nation.
        What I'd like to understand today is what have the services
    done to effect change to live up to this responsibility. What I
    know is there can be no doubt the lifeblood of the military is
    our great men and women that choose to serve, whether they be
    from Indiana like me, New Jersey like our ranking member, or
    any of the other States in this Nation.
        We have an opportunity to serve our service members, and we
    must get it right.
        So I want to welcome our witnesses: Lieutenant General
    Stitt, Vice Admiral Cheeseman, Lieutenant General Miller,
    Lieutenant General Glynn, and Katharine Kelley. But before we
    hear from our witnesses, let me offer Ranking Member Kim an
    opportunity to make any opening remarks as well.
        [The prepared statement of Mr. Banks can be found in the
    Appendix on page 31.]

     STATEMENT OF HON. ANDY KIM, A REPRESENTATIVE FROM NEW JERSEY,
           RANKING MEMBER, SUBCOMMITTEE ON MILITARY PERSONNEL

        Mr. Kim. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you, everybody, for
    participating.
        A few weeks ago, as you heard, we heard testimony from your
    services' senior enlisted leaders. They shared with us their
    concerns about recruiting and retaining the force. They also
    provided us with a snapshot of quality-of-life issues impacting
    military families.
        Today I look forward to learning how your services'
    personnel policies support our military's greatest asset, which
    is our people. Without soldiers, sailors, Marine, airmen, and
    Guardians, we couldn't man military weapon systems, deliver
    humanitarian assistance, or effectively respond to aggression
    throughout the world.
        I read your testimonies, and there is no doubt you are all
    concerned about our youth decreasing propensity to serve, their
    missing connections to the value of military service, and
    meeting your end-strength goals.
        I share these concerns and would add that while--why I
    support taking steps, whatever necessary, to widen the pool of
    applicants we can draw from for our All-Volunteer Force. It's
    also very clear that you are each exploring new ways to attract
    talent for your specific service and mission needs without
    impacting the quality of individuals we bring into the force.
        I'm encouraged by how you are employing innovative tools to
    increase the impact and effectiveness of your recruiters'
    force, who often serve as the first-line ambassadors in schools
    and communities across the country.
        I know we recruit the service member, but we retain their
    family. It's important not to lose sight of the importance
    quality of life has in reaching end-strength goals. I often
    hear from many service members in my district at Joint Base
    McGuire-Dix-Lakehurst how they struggle to get access to
    medical care and child support they need.
        And additionally, I think this is something my colleagues
    on the other side of the aisle can agree to, we need to address
    the lack of accessible mental healthcare across the force. This
    lack of care is impacting our ability to retain service members
    who have--we have a vested interest in helping return to full
    duty. We need to work together to solve this problem.
        From my time in national security, I remember that to take
    a comprehensive look at a problem, in this case recruiting and
    retention, we need a diverse experience and opinions. We may
    need to take a hard look beyond the Department at how we can
    best encourage the next generation to serve.
        As I've said before, we ask a lot of our service members.
    We ask them to risk their lives to protect our country. So we
    need to make sure they know that we have their backs and that
    we are supporting them however they need.
        Mr. Chairman, thank you for having this hearing today so we
    can discuss the importance of personnel policies on the lives
    of service members. Thank you to the witnesses again for being
    here, and I yield back the balance of my time.
        [The prepared statement of Mr. Kim can be found in the
    Appendix on page 34.]
        Mr. Banks. I thank the ranking member. I ask unanimous
    consent to allow members not on the subcommittee to participate
    in today's hearing and be allowed to ask questions after the
    subcommittee have--subcommittee members have all been
    recognized.
        And each witness will have the opportunity to present his
    or her testimony. And each member will have an opportunity to
    question the witnesses for 5 minutes.
        We respectfully ask the witnesses to summarize their
    testimony in 3 minutes or less. We have your written testimony.
    We appreciate it, we've studied it. Your written comments and
    statements were made part of the hearing record.
        With that, Lieutenant General Stitt, you may make your
    opening statement.

    STATEMENT OF LTG DOUGLAS F. STITT, USA, DEPUTY CHIEF OF STAFF,
                             G1, U.S. ARMY

        General Stitt. Good afternoon, Chairman Banks, Ranking
    Member Kim, distinguished members of this committee. Thank you
    for the opportunity to appear before you on behalf of the men
    and women of your United States Army.
        The Army's number one priority is our people: our soldiers,
    our Army civilians, families, and veterans, our soldiers for
    life. Nothing is more important for our combat readiness.
        In the Army, a pacing item is a critical--mission-critical
    piece of equipment. Our people are our pacing items, and we
    must meet our pacing challenges by taking care of our most
    important resource, our people.
        We are working tirelessly across this Nation in the most
    challenging recruiting landscape in a generation to fill our
    ranks with qualified people that want to be all they can be as
    a part of our Army team.
        There is no one-size-fits-all to the current challenge. We
    are committed to tackling these challenges head-on by
    recruiting a force that looks like the Nation it serves.
        We are laser-focused on innovative efforts such as the
    ``Future Soldier Prep Course,'' which helps potential recruits
    become soldiers. This initiative, and others, are designed to
    increase the accession of qualified candidates under three
    principles.
        We will not sacrifice quality for quantity, we will not
    lower our standards, we will invest in America's youth so that
    those who want to serve can meet our standards.
        Last year the Army achieved 104 percent of our retention
    mission in our Active Component, and we are on track to do so
    again this year. This demonstrates the value that our soldiers
    and their families see in service to our Nation.
        Personnel readiness relies on an installation and
    environment that allows our soldiers and families to thrive.
    High-quality housing and barracks are key to ensuring overall
    health and wellness, contributing to the readiness, and
    critical for retaining Army soldiers and their families.
        The Army program approximately $1.6 billion from fiscal
    years 2024 to fiscal year 2028 to improve the government-owned
    Army family housing inventory. Additionally, we have invested
    an average of $1 billion per year in barracks for construction,
    restoration, and modernization across all three Army
    components.
        We are using a very selective process to create and sustain
    command climates at scale across our Army, which now and over
    time permeate down to our lethal and ready squads, crews, and
    teams. Resiliency programs and initiatives aimed at harmful
    behaviors are critical to help us combat sexual harassment and
    assault and factors that contribute to death by suicide.
        Putting our people first as an Army priority and a
    philosophy continues to drive everything we do and contributes
    to our quality of life and our combat readiness.
        Chairman Banks, Ranking Member Kim, distinguished members
    of this committee, I thank you for your generous and unwavering
    support to your Army, its soldiers, civilians, and their
    families. I look forward to your questions. Thank you.
        [The prepared statement of General Stitt can be found in
    the Appendix on page 36.]
        Mr. Banks. Thank you. Vice Admiral Cheeseman.

      STATEMENT OF VADM RICHARD J. CHEESEMAN, JR., USN, CHIEF OF
       NAVAL PERSONNEL, AND DEPUTY CHIEF OF NAVAL OPERATIONS FOR
           PERSONNEL, MANPOWER, AND TRAINING (N1), U.S. NAVY

        Admiral Cheeseman. Chairman Banks, Ranking Member Kim, and
    distinguished subcommittee members, thank you for the
    opportunity to appear before you today.
        As the Chief of Naval Personnel, it is my distinct
    privilege to represent the sailors of the United States Navy,
    who stand the watch 24 hours a day, 7 days a week in every
    corner of the globe, above, on, and below the surface of the
    seas, preserving the American way of life and freedom around
    the world.
        This year's budget focused holistically on taking care of
    our people, where our sailors work and live, how they are
    compensated, and how we support them and their families. We
    must ensure that sailors and their families are afforded a
    quality of life and service on par with their responsibilities.
        They must be fairly compensated through pay increases,
    targeted bonuses, and appropriate allowances. In addition, the
    budget prioritizes several initiatives that allows our Navy to
    maintain a culture to fight and win, including tools and
    education for our leadership specifically to address mental
    health, suicide, and sexual assault prevention and response.
        We released our ``Mental Health Playbook'' last month,
    which supports command leaders in minimizing mental health
    issues. But when they do occur, to empower them with the
    resources to connect sailors with the appropriate mental
    healthcare at the right level at the right time.
        With proper use, the Playbook enables everyone in a command
    to share an understanding of how to conduct mental health
    preventive maintenance.
        Continued commitment to invest in our sailors is necessary
    to sustain the fleet and is largely the reason why we have been
    able to maintain such a high retention rate. I appreciate your
    strong support here in Congress on compensation to include
    vital special pays and bonuses, which are needed to target
    specific skills and technology changes to the landscape of war.
        We have also leveraged several other monetary and non-
    monetary incentives, to include extended high year tenure
    opportunities and billet-based advancement. As we navigate this
    area of strategic competition, we must continue to attract,
    influence, recruit, cultivate, and train talent from every
    corner of the country and every walk of life.
        And we recognize there's significant competition for that
    talent. As a result, we have thoughtfully and creatively
    implemented several targeted policy changes within our current
    authorities to widen our available pool of potential recruits.
        As I have traveled around the country to visit and hear
    from our sailors, one thing is clear. They embody an American
    spirit that no adversary can define. I remain inspired each and
    every day by these men and women who exceed every expectation,
    and it is my singular honor to serve each of them.
        We train every sailor that enters our ranks to be a
    warfighter, yet more importantly, we make better Americans to
    be leaders for our country, both in uniform and when they
    return to civilian life. We owe it to them, the most junior
    sailors in the waterfront today and the youngest future sailors
    of tomorrow, to continue to build the best Navy we can.
        You and every American can be proud of your sailors and
    their families. I appreciate your continued support and
    partnership, and I look forward to your questions.
        [The prepared statement of Admiral Cheeseman can be found
    in the Appendix on page 50.]
        Mr. Banks. Thank you. Lieutenant General Miller.

     STATEMENT OF LT GEN CAROLINE M. MILLER, USAF, DEPUTY CHIEF OF
    STAFF FOR MANPOWER, PERSONNEL, AND SERVICES, HEADQUARTERS U.S.
                               AIR FORCE

        General Miller. Good afternoon. Chairman Banks, Ranking
    Member Kim, and distinguished members of the subcommittee, I am
    honored to have the opportunity to appear before you with my
    fellow service personnel colleagues.
        Today, for the first time in recent history, the United
    States is facing two peer competitors, China and Russia. To
    prevail against these sophisticated adversaries, we must
    develop a networked team of airmen with unique expertise to
    develop game-changing solutions. Only in this way can we
    increase our competitive advantage.
        We are currently working two lines of effort to prepare for
    the high-end fight. First, we are refining future competencies
    and skills required for 2030 and beyond. This effort includes
    targeted focus on digital and multi-capable airmen, which will
    enable our forces to adapt to an evolving and uncertain future.
        Second, we are modernizing our talent management process
    and systems. A multiyear effort is underway to completely
    transform our talent management architecture by replacing 111
    outdated legacy IT [information technology] systems with 6
    agile platforms. This will enable unprecedented access to
    talent management data and allow us to make real-time, risk-
    informed force management decisions.
        As we move forward, we must enhance targeting the
    functional skill sets and leadership attributes of the airmen
    we want to retain. Our most recent data indicate our Active
    Duty population retention trends are healthy. Over the last 5
    years, we've held steady at approximately 90 percent.
        That said, we do have critical skill sets on our retention
    watch list: cyber; special warfare; intelligence, surveillance,
    and reconnaissance; nuclear; maintenance; and many rated career
    fields.
        However, while our retention rate indicates a strong force,
    our recruiting efforts are falling short. We are not on track
    to meet our recruiting targets for 2023. Despite this, we
    remain resolute in strengthening our recruiting efforts.
        We know that family support is key to successful recruiting
    and retention. The Air Force is committed to alleviating the
    unique challenges associated with military service experienced
    by spouses and family members. One of the most impactful
    challenges, economic insecurity, poses major readiness and
    retention risks to our force.
        I would just like to say thank you for your support in the
    fiscal year 2023 NDAA [National Defense Authorization Act] to
    increase basic pay and allowances for housing and
    [subsistence].
        Available, affordable, and quality childcare programs for
    families and spouse employment are also key to recruiting and
    mission readiness. We must continue to focus on ensuring our
    airmen and their families have a safe place to work and live,
    an environment in which all airmen are treated with dignity and
    respect and able to reach their full potential.
        These play a critical role in retention, a critical role in
    warfighting mission readiness, and a critical role to deter our
    peer competitors, China and Russia. Ready and resilient airmen
    and families are our competitive advantage, and the Air Force
    is committed to taking care of them.
        Thank you for the continued advocacy for your airmen, both
    military and civilian, and the families who support them. I
    look forward to your questions.
        [The prepared statement of General Miller can be found in
    the Appendix on page 58.]
        Mr. Banks. Thank you. Lieutenant General Glynn.

    STATEMENT OF LTGEN JAMES F. GLYNN, USMC, DEPUTY COMMANDANT FOR
            MANPOWER AND RESERVE AFFAIRS, U.S. MARINE CORPS

        General Glynn. Chair Banks, Ranking Member Kim, and
    distinguished members of the subcommittee, it's my privilege to
    appear before you today alongside my colleagues from the other
    services to provide an overview of your Marine Corps personnel.
        I've submitted a written statement to the subcommittee and
    intend to keep these opening remarks brief, as you highlighted.
        Your Marine Corps is strong. In the midst of Force Design
    2030, we met our recruiting and retention missions last year
    and are working hard toward that end this year as well.
    Recruiting, however, remains historically challenging, perhaps
    more so than last year, because our delayed entry pool was
    leveraged in the past year and is subsequently lower than we
    have habitually maintained it.
        As we continue to recruit and retain Marines, one thing
    will never change: We remain an able expeditionary force at the
    ready, committed to our standards that ensure we're prepared to
    fight and win in every clime and place.
        In this 50-year--50th year of the All-Volunteer Force, we
    are reminded that we have an all-recruited force and are
    mindful of the strategic advantage it provides: talent,
    capability, and warfighting excellence.
        To continue its success, we need to do three things. One,
    engage in a persistent national dialog on service that
    highlights the positive benefits of military service. Two,
    modernize recruiting to optimize advertising in much the same
    way the commercial sector has. And third, improve access to
    young Americans, particularly in high schools, as personal
    engagement is foundational to our recruiting efforts and its
    success.
        I'm pleased to report that Marine Corps retention efforts
    are modernizing to match the energy and enthusiasm of the
    force. This year, we have retained Marines at a historic pace,
    both in number and quality. It shows that once one becomes a
    Marine, they want to remain a Marine.
        And that says a lot about our ethos, being part of a team,
    accomplishing the mission, and taking care of one another
    remain sacred qualities to which Marines both in uniform now
    and the past hold tight.
        To further improve recruiting and retention, we have
    decisively stepped out on what we call a talent management
    design that continues to expand and gain momentum. Talent
    Management 2030 is foundational to Force Design 2030 and the
    future success of our Corps, and it leverages many of the
    authorities that Congress and this subcommittee has granted us
    in recent years, for which we remain grateful.
        It will help better maximize the number of fully trained,
    qualified, experienced, and deployed Marines in our operational
    forces. The overarching goal of talent management is to
    increase Marine Corps warfighting capability and sustain our
    ability, and frankly our responsibility, to be the Nation's
    premier expeditionary force in readiness, your ``fight
    tonight'' force.
        A pillar of warfighting readiness is built on trust, and
    that trust is maintained with a Marine support structure at
    home and in their communities. To that end, we recognize and
    promote all the ways Marine and Family Programs support the
    force and allow them to keep a focus on the mission.
        Holistic performance, including spiritual, mental, social,
    and physical fitness, are critical for Marines and their loved
    ones and are a major line of effort for successfully achieving
    our talent management goals.
        Family readiness, quite simply, is readiness. It's my honor
    to represent your Marine Corps today, and I look forward to
    your questions. Semper Fidelis.
        [The prepared statement of General Glynn can be found in
    the Appendix on page 76.]
        Mr. Banks. Thank you. Ms. Kelley.

    STATEMENT OF KATHARINE KELLEY, DEPUTY CHIEF OF SPACE OPERATIONS
                  FOR HUMAN CAPITAL, U.S. SPACE FORCE

        Ms. Kelley. Thank you. Chairman Banks, Ranking Member Kim,
    distinguished members of this subcommittee, thank you for your
    leadership and the support you have provided to our Guardians
    and their families.
        I just recently transferred from the Army. I'm delighted to
    be here representing with my colleagues here today. I am a
    service IST [interservice transfer] transfer as a civilian, a
    former officer, and a spouse of a veteran. Thank you for your
    time.
        Your Guardians, both military and civilian, are preserving
    U.S. freedom of action in increasingly contested space domains.
    Developing this force is a national imperative.
        We are comprised of a powerful mix of talent from all
    branches of the service, as well as young, innovative, bright
    minds from across the Nation. This is our most important
    operational advantage.
        We are committed to taking care of our people and
    positively shaping their professional and their family
    experience. We will continue to work with this committee and
    with our Air Force partners on tough issues such as pay and
    compensation, quality of life, childcare, and family services.
        The Space Force is proposing a new approach to military
    personnel management, with flexible force design options. At a
    time when national propensity to serve is declining, winning
    the war for talent is the greatest strategic advantage.
        The proposal eliminates the complexities of traditional and
    regular reserve constructs and provides a continuum of service
    aimed at retaining critical skill sets and offering a new way
    to employ talent through service-managed part-time
    opportunities, which today are not available in the Space
    Force.
        This new model would facilitate a different conversation
    with prospective candidates. We believe it will better position
    the Space Force in the most competitive labor market we've seen
    in years.
        We understand that new statutory authorities are necessary
    and we look forward to continued conversations. The Space Force
    is actively incorporating education, training, and
    individualized development, including access to schools and
    investment in brand awareness.
        Beginning this year, we will partner with a private
    institution for senior-level education, culminating in a
    master's in public policy. This new approach is a collaboration
    between civilian academia and professional military education.
        We are also leveraging innovative ways to increase holistic
    health and fitness of the force, including mental health. We
    are studying the most appropriate ways, include long-term
    fitness standards with an eye towards departing from single
    episodic testing to interactive fitness.
        Space is no longer a benign domain. I am proud of the more
    than 13,000 military and civilian Guardians who have joined so
    far. Together we are building a force unilaterally focused on
    the mission of securing and defending America's interests in
    space.
        We thank you for your continued support, and I look forward
    to your questions.
        [The prepared statement of Ms. Kelley can be found in the
    Appendix on page 94.]
        Mr. Banks. Thank you to each of you. I'll yield myself 5
    minutes to begin questions.
        And with that, I'll start with you, Lieutenant General
    Stitt. What has been the practical effect of recruiting
    shortfalls?
        General Stitt. Chairman Banks, where we see the practical
    impact of recruiting shortfalls is primarily within our skill
    level 1 inventory across the force. So it's those junior
    enlisted soldiers that we did not recruit, that that's where we
    see the holes in ranks.
        Mr. Banks. How has that changed the Army?
        General Stitt. Chairman Banks, we have not changed. We
    believe that we are ready and capable to fight tonight.
        Mr. Banks. So even though we're way short of our
    recruitment goals, it's not--you're saying it's not changing
    the strength of the Army.
        General Stitt. Chairman Banks, yes, our overall end
    strength has decreased because we did not recruit and bring in
    the skill level 1 soldiers, those junior enlisted personnel
    last year.
        Mr. Banks. Let me ask this: Would you say that the
    difficulty in recruitment has driven your reductions in the
    end-strength requests for the fiscal year 2024, or is it
    because of the reduced mission requirements in the Army?
        General Stitt. Chairman Banks, I would ask that I take that
    question for the record, please.
        [The information referred to was not available at the time
    of printing.]
        Mr. Banks. Okay, fair enough. What's your outlook for
    recruitment moving forward? I mean, frankly, how are you going
    to fix it? How are we going to meet our recruitment goals when
    we've continued to fail at it?
        General Stitt. Chairman Banks, we're taking, as I indicated
    in my opening statement, a robust approach looking at opening
    our pool to get after as wide an applicant population as
    possible, utilizing, for instance, the ``Future Soldier Prep
    Course,'' where we can bring in applicants who do not meet the
    current academic or physical fitness requirements. And on a
    conditional basis, we train them up down at Fort Jackson,
    holistically.
        And we've also expanded this program now at Fort Benning.
    We're seeing about a 97 percent success rate to--and that is
    one of our big bolsters to recruiting that we initiated at the
    end of last year, and we're seeing significant improvement this
    year.
        Mr. Banks. So you're admitting that we're weakening
    standards to make up for recruitment shortfalls.
        General Stitt. Chairman Banks, we are not lowering
    standards. As indicated, we are not sacrificing quality for
    quantity. These are applicants who are otherwise qualified for
    entry into the service, and we are just burnishing their skill
    sets prior to sending them on into Basic Combat Training.
        Mr. Banks. All right, my next question is for all of you:
    How are we fixing the food insecurity issue in the military
    that I addressed in my opening statement?
        I'll start with you, General Stitt.
        General Stitt. Chairman Banks, we are looking and working
    with the Department of Defense through the Quadrennial Review
    of Military Compensation.
        But at the grass-roots level, we continue to train and
    inform soldiers and family members, utilizing resources through
    family programs to educate them and train them on this is what
    you can do when you are promoted, when you add a family member,
    so that we are developing financial readiness and resiliency
    across the force.
        Mr. Banks. Admiral Cheeseman, what's the Navy doing to fix
    the food insecurity issue?
        Admiral Cheeseman. Sir, thanks for the question. Very
    similar response. I note from that survey that you discussed
    earlier where about 25 percent of service members indicate some
    level of food insecurity. About 85 percent of service members
    also indicate they feel like they're fairly compensated.
        So you know, definitely endorse the quadrennial review of
    military commission, but from a grass-roots level, as my
    colleague mentioned, we are working very hard to, you know,
    help our sailors make good financial decisions.
        We start training on financial security in boot camp. We've
    provided programs at the Fleet and Family Support Centers at
    all waterfront levels and each individual unit has a financial
    specialist that can help sailors with questions of these sorts,
    sir.
        Mr. Banks. General Miller.
        General Miller. Yes, Chairman Banks, thank you. Similar to
    my colleagues, we're doing very similar things. But I will tell
    you that one of the things that we focus, in addition to the
    training at multiple levels, starting from basic military
    training, is connectedness.
        We are making sure that our command teams understand and
    our--and know their airmen. That way they can tell what is
    going on not only in their professional life, but what is going
    on in their personal life.
        And so if they find that they are having some challenges in
    food security or, you know, other areas, they can immediately
    make sure that they reach out to the appropriate resources to
    help those airmen.
        Mr. Banks. And quickly, General Glynn.
        General Glynn. Yeah, to not be repetitive I would just
    highlight that any question about insecurity in any area,
    whether it is housing or food, is indicative of the very small
    margin that we see in pay scales right now. And hence the
    reference to Quadrennial Review of Military Compensation.
        I would only offer in addition that what are we doing in
    addition is highlighting to folks the advantage they get by
    where they shop. In this case the commissary. The Department
    has made concerted efforts to ensure commissary prices on
    staples are more than competitive in ensuring that folks take
    advantage of those.
        Mr. Banks. Very good. Ms. Kelley.
        Ms. Kelley. Yes, Chairman. I agree with all my colleagues.
    I would also just add in the Space Force there is an education
    component and a team component to make sure that we're aware of
    our needs from the Guardians. And we place a special emphasis
    on making sure that we are aware if there are those issues.
        Mr. Banks. Thank you. I yield to Ranking Member Kim.
        Mr. Kim. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you all again for
    taking the time to come on out here.
        I wanted to talk to you about something that is--that we've
    been talking a lot about on the Hill since it came out last
    month. The Suicide Prevention and Response Independent Review
    Committee released about 125, over 125 different
    recommendations to reduce the rate of military suicides.
        There was one particular mention there in terms of an idea
    there that was--included creating a task force to modernize and
    reform the military promotion system to better reward and
    select the right people for the right positions at the right
    time.
        I wanted to just get your thoughts on that. Because we have
    been kind of talking through that on our end, and wanted to
    just see, you know, each of you if you could respond to that.
    So if you don't mind, maybe we will start over with Army.
        General Stitt. Ranking Member Kim, the Army is
    participating in the IRC [Independent Review Committee]
    committee. And regarding in terms of promotions, one of the
    things that we have done is we have utilized from the 2019 NDAA
    putting some of those authorities into place, such as brevet
    promotion to reward and augment critical skills and shortage
    capabilities that we have that are already in place across the
    service.
        We are also utilizing the merit-based promotion system that
    also came out in the 2019 NDAA, and we look forward to
    participating in future and ongoing efforts to look at our
    promotion system.
        Mr. Kim. Vice Admiral.
        Admiral Cheeseman. Thank you for the question, sir. Very
    similar answer. Bottom line in the Navy, for any promotion
    board is about the best and fully qualified for that sailor or
    that officer. And we enjoy maintaining that standard.
        To that end, we do enjoy the authorities, as my colleague
    mentioned, from the fiscal year 2019 NDAA, and we are using
    each one of those appropriately. But I look forward to working
    with my colleagues here on the panel and my OSD [Office of the
    Secretary of Defense] partners on getting out the
    recommendations from that report, sir.
        Mr. Kim. Okay, thank you. Lieutenant General.
        General Miller. Yes, thank you for the question. I won't
    repeat what they are saying, we are doing much the same thing.
    But we are also, we are ready to support the Department of
    Defense and where they go with the SPRIRC [Suicide Prevention
    and Response Independent Review Committee] release report.
        Additionally, we are--we have some initiatives that are
    going on with the DAF [Department of the Air Force] for the
    suicide prevention, to include a go-slow campaign, which is
    basically putting time and space in between behavior. And so we
    have got a big initiative on gun locks and safe storage
    material.
        And additionally, we have launched recently a comprehensive
    lethal means safety plan in 2022.
        Mr. Kim. Okay, thank you. Lieutenant General.
        General Glynn. Ranking Member Kim, thanks for the question.
    There are many similarities, so I think I will highlight one.
        I am happy to report inside that Talent Management 2030
    that I described, we have already undertaken an aggressive look
    at our enlisted retention and promotion approach, specifically
    leveraging one of the authorities that you have provided
    previously, which is merit reorder.
        We have applied that across several officer ranks to see
    its effect, and this year have a pilot going on the enlisted
    side as well to address what we hear from Marines, at least,
    is, How do I know that my performance is recognized? How is
    that reflected in the pace and rate at which I am promoted? And
    that is what specifically it is intended to address.
        Mr. Kim. Thank you. Ms. Kelley, you have anything to add
    here?
        Ms. Kelley. I do, thank you, Ranking Member Kim. I would
    offer in the Space Force one of the things we are thinking
    about with respect to promotion and to the specific ask from
    the committee for innovative ideas.
        We are looking at all the jobs that we have in the Space
    Force. There is a little bit of an advantage to our small size
    that we can do this. And we are looking through a lens of
    competencies that are necessary for the type of work that we
    have in the Space Force.
        A highly technical, predominantly STEM [science,
    technology, engineering, and mathematics]-focused environment,
    but aligning the competencies and then communicating them to
    Guardians so that they understand what it is going to take for
    them to be promoted is one of the goals of our competency work,
    sir.
        Mr. Kim. Some of other ideas and recommendations that came
    out, several of them focused on length of assignments, greater
    flexibility in the career trajectory, more predictability in
    unit training.
        I guess I just wanted to ask more broadly, is that
    something that stands out to you as something that we need to
    be moving towards, not just for the prevention of suicide, but
    just more broadly as employers here? Is there anyone that
    wanted to jump on that? Vice Admiral.
        Admiral Cheeseman. Yes, sir. Thanks for that question, it
    is a very important discussion to have. We find that as we are
    modernizing our enlisted talent management strategy, we have
    something called ``Detailing Marketplace Assignment Policy.''
        And that is where we provide a number of monetary and non-
    monetary incentives to get--to, you know, incentivize sailors
    to stay on sea duty. And to your point, it is not just about
    money, it could be about, you know, geographic stability. It
    could be about assignment choice.
        So more today than ever before, a young enlisted sailor has
    a say in what they are doing for their career, and we're having
    positive effects from that, sir.
        Mr. Kim. Thank you. I am out of time, but I will follow up
    with the rest of you, I would love to continue that
    conversation.
        Mr. Banks. I yield 5 minutes to General Bergman.
        Mr. Bergman. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you all for
    being here, and thanks for all you do every day.
        Nineteen ninety-eight. The Wall Street Journal did a little
    survey on values. And the point is they just recently redid
    that. And I don't know if you've seen it, but the number one
    now in increase for young people is the desire for money,
    desire for money, be rich, okay.
        What's been displaced? And here is the point from the
    article. Patriotism listed as a value has basically gone from
    70 percent to 38 percent. I am not going to deal with the
    others, but patriotism.
        Ms. Kelley, you mentioned, you used the word propensity to
    serve. And according to my favorite app, that would be the
    Webster Dictionary, propensity, an often intense natural
    inclination. And when we think about recruiting young men and
    women into the military, there is a certain intensity that
    draws people into the military.
        So having said that, and I would just appreciate a simple
    yes-or-no answer from all of you, I don't need elaboration on
    the following question. The subject is GENESIS.
        Do you believe that the new MHS [Military Health System]
    GENESIS system is having a positive, negative, or neutral
    impact on your all's ability to recruit?
        General.
        General Stitt. Positive, sir.
        Admiral Cheeseman. Sir, I second that, positive from here.
        General Miller. Positive.
        General Glynn. Sir, I would say neutral, too soon to tell.
        Ms. Kelley. I agree with neutral. I think it can get to
    positive, but I think it just needs to work out some of the
    kinks.
        Mr. Bergman. Yeah, what I have heard from the recruiters is
    that it's encumbered them with timelines, delay in decision
    making and all this kind of stuff that may not add to the value
    proposition for that young person. Or maybe not so young, but
    the bottom line is that person who would show a propensity.
        They feel they are getting messed, you know, delayed with,
    screwed around with, whatever you want to call it. That we
    can't--we, the United States military, the Department of
    Defense, can't make a decision ``yes or no.''
        On March the 9th, your senior enlisted leaders from each of
    the services sat before this committee for this same topic. And
    I asked those leaders two questions. And for the record--I
    asked them to take it for the record, but I am still awaiting
    the answers for the record, so I'll ask them to you all.
        Number one, are the recruiters, are your recruiters getting
    access to the schools? Are the school influencers, the boards
    of education, the teachers, the counselors, the coaches, the
    principals, welcoming recruiters into the schools?
        And if you know the answer, I would love to hear it. If you
    would like to take it for the record, I would like to know that
    too. But when you do take one for the record, we do need an
    answer, okay?
        Anybody want to make a comment on that before I go on to
    the next one?
        General Miller. Yes, sir, I will comment on that. I think
    that it depends. I think there are some schools that are very
    welcoming. I have worked with superintendents when I personally
    was the 502nd Air Base Wing at Joint Base San Antonio, and I
    worked with superintendents across San Antonio. And they were
    very welcoming, they wanted people in there.
        But I also think that there are communities in which are
    not exposed to the military, and so they are a little more
    hesitant because they don't know what our mission is.
        And so we have got to make sure that we open our gates, we
    have people out there to explain what the military is, and
    we've got to change the national narrative on what the positive
    things about serving in the military.
        Mr. Bergman. So having said that, in your opinion, and I
    would like an answer from all of you on this, what DOD policies
    are currently inhibiting your ability to lead in your
    departments?
        And are there policies countering positive efforts that you
    are expected to comply with? In other words, what are the extra
    rocks in your pack that are making it tough for you to meet
    mission? Anybody want to offer in, from a policy standpoint?
        General Glynn. Congressman, I don't have a single one, but
    the point is taken that much has been added. And so when you--
    --
        Mr. Bergman. Much, meaning rocks to your pack?
        General Glynn. Over time.
        Mr. Bergman. Okay.
        General Glynn. With very few removed.
        Mr. Bergman. Well, then let's do this, and I know my time
    is up, let's talk about I'm always, and I know I speak for I
    think for all of us here, I don't care what side of the aisle
    you are on, we are not interested in adding rocks to your pack
    that don't add value to what you are trying to achieve.
        And looking forward to our next conversation with that. Mr.
    Chairman, I yield back.
        Mr. Banks. Thank you. Representative Escobar.
        Ms. Escobar. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, thank you, Mr.
    Ranking Member. And thanks to our panelists for your time with
    us here this afternoon. But especially for your service to our
    country.
        Wanted to share a couple of observations with you, and not
    necessarily for your response or your comment, I have other
    questions. But just a couple of interesting things I'd like to
    share.
        First, as I have gone on a number of CODELs [congressional
    delegations] over the last 12 months to different countries,
    allies, mostly in Europe, and when I have had the opportunity
    to speak to their military leaders, I have asked about how
    their recruitment is going. And not consistently but I would
    say invariably most of our friends and allies are struggling
    with the same challenge.
        So this is not a uniquely American challenge, the challenge
    with recruitment. So you are all nodding, so it sounds, it
    looks like you all are familiar with the fact that this is--we
    are not alone in facing this challenge, our country is not
    alone.
        The second thing I would like to put on your radar, I get
    to meet with incredible young people who apply to our service
    academies. And I frequently ask them about recruitment as well.
    Not to a person, but I have conversations with many of them.
        Almost to a person, they have told me that they believe
    recruitment needs to start far earlier. And that many of their
    peers and friends who are very--who become very interested as
    they learn of the service academies and begin thinking about
    their own future feel like they learn about it too late.
        So just wanted to share those two items with you.
        But I represent El Paso, Texas, home to Fort Bliss, which
    has--is the largest joint mobilization force generation
    installation in the Army. And we get--we have a lot of military
    families, a lot of veterans. I am very proud of that, we are a
    very proud military community.
        And so quality-of-life issues for our personnel, especially
    because so many of our personnel make contact with Fort Bliss,
    those are a priority for me and my team and my office.
        Lieutenant General Stitt, as the Army struggles with
    recruitment and retention efforts, we need to acknowledge the
    dire need for quality-of-life infrastructure. Reporting
    yesterday indicated that the Army alone found over 2,000
    facilities across the service with mold problems, which is
    obviously unacceptable.
        The problem at hand is not merely a matter of simple
    upkeep, it is housing service members in buildings that are
    long past their service life. In your testimony, you stated
    that improving barracks and housing for our soldiers and
    families is a top priority for all Army senior leaders.
        I know the fiscal year 2024 budget request identified
    barracks across a few installations as quality-of-life
    projects, but the Army has a long way to go to include CDCs
    [child development centers] and other housing.
        Can you please speak to your efforts to convey these
    infrastructure needs to your installation management
    counterparts thus far? And how can Congress be a partner in
    addressing this problem?
        General Stitt. Representative Escobar, thank you for the
    question. And the Army remains committed to providing safe
    housing, barracks, infrastructure, and other facilities for our
    soldiers, families, and civilians.
        A critical aspect of this commitment is ensuring that all
    facilities are inspected and brought into standards. So to go
    back to the survey that was brought out, this was done with
    experts from industry partners and healthcare professionals to
    assist in our efforts to train and certify these inspectors and
    remediation teams across the Army.
        And we are also empowering leaders at the lowest level to
    highlight these concerns that they see so that they can take
    immediate action, such as what was done at Fort Bragg, North
    Carolina, when mold was discovered and soldiers were displaced.
        And we are also with our contracted housing providers,
    holding them accountable when we see issues arise.
        Ms. Escobar. Thank you so much. I'm just about out of time,
    so I'll have to follow up with my question about service
    members' spouses. But you know, in my community as well, we
    hear a lot from the spouses who are struggling to find
    employment and would love to explore that with all of you as
    well at a later date.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
        Mr. Banks. Thank you. Five minutes to Representative Gaetz.
        Mr. Gaetz. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I am going to begin by
    seeking unanimous consent to enter into the record a press
    release from last year from the Department of Defense entitled
    ``Department of Defense Announces Recruiting and Retention
    Numbers for Fiscal Year 2022 through March of 2022.''
        And it reads, ``Overall, it is clear the broader recruiting
    market continues to deteriorate and recruiting shortfalls can
    no longer be solely attributed to COVID-19 [coronavirus disease
    2019].''
        [The information referred to can be found in the Appendix
    on page 107.]
        Mr. Banks. Without objection.
        Mr. Gaetz. So we just heard from Secretary Austin moments
    ago that COVID was the driving headwind, that was the--headwind
    was the term he used, in these recruiting challenges that
    trouble us all. But the Department is saying that it is not
    COVID.
        So I guess I am just trying to figure out what do you guys
    think is the driving factor of the recruiting collapse that we
    are currently overseeing? Any of you who are particularly
    interested.
        General Stitt. Representative Gaetz, that is a great
    question. And what we seeing is that it is not just one factor.
    It is a variety of factors when we look at obesity, physical
    fitness, misconduct, behavioral health challenges, knowledge
    gap.
        What we saw from our data was that individuals that we
    surveyed identified that they would be potentially putting
    their life on hold if they served. So not attributable to one
    single factor, but a multitude.
        Mr. Gaetz. I agree with that. We have got a younger
    generation that is too dumb, fat, slow, addicted, and on video
    games to be eligible to serve in the military.
        And it is really troubling to hear that the response is to
    thin the soup rather than to do what we can earlier on maybe
    through our education system or nutrition programs, whole of
    government to try to get a greater share of our folks capable.
        Does anyone here attribute any of the recruiting challenges
    we face to the new DEI [diversity, equity, and inclusion] push?
    Any of you? Raise your hand if you do. None of you.
        Well, I would suggest that that is misguided. I have heard
    directly from people that this embrace of DEI and ``White
    fragility'' and ``White rage'' harms our recruiting effort in
    the area of the country where we do our best recruiting, in the
    American South.
        I have additional questions for you, General Miller. How
    many Republicans running for Congress had their personnel
    records unlawfully compromised by the United States Air Force?
        General Miller. Thank you for that question. So we did have
    a PII [personal identifiable information] breach. Eleven
    individuals overall, their data was released----
        Mr. Gaetz. You say--when I hear breach, what I hear is that
    like someone hacked or broke in or got the information. You
    gave this information.
        General Miller. Yes, we did, no the Air Force----
        Mr. Gaetz. Right, it wasn't a breach, it was a illegal
    release.
        General Miller. It was a, yes, it was.
        Mr. Gaetz. Right.
        General Miller. We take full responsibility for that.
        Mr. Gaetz. How many?
        General Miller. Eleven.
        Mr. Gaetz. Eleven.
        General Miller. Yes.
        Mr. Gaetz. And all Republicans, right?
        General Miller. I don't know the answer to that. I know
    some of them were, but I think----
        Mr. Gaetz. But if I represent to you that it is all or
    almost all Republicans----
        General Miller. Almost all Republicans, that is correct,
    yes.
        Mr. Gaetz. And this information was given to the Due
    Diligence entity, right?
        General Miller. There was--there were--there was an entity,
    yes.
        Mr. Gaetz. Yeah, and it is an opposition research entity
    that gets hundreds of thousands of dollars from the Democratic
    Congressional Campaign Committee and the Democratic Senatorial
    Campaign apparatus, right?
        General Miller. I don't know that much about Due Diligence,
    but there is--I know that we released the information
    inappropriately.
        Mr. Gaetz. Why did you do that?
        General Miller. It was a, you know, it was an error. We did
    an investigation as soon as we found out. We notified all of
    the members in which their data was released. We have put in
    place multiple layers of checks and balances. We did a
    retraining.
        Mr. Gaetz. Who has been fired for doing this?
        General Miller. We have taken the appropriate action.
        Mr. Gaetz. Okay, who has been fired?
        General Miller. We have taken the appropriate action.
        Mr. Gaetz. It is a fascinating answer, just not to my
    question. Who has been fired?
        General Miller. I can't answer that.
        Mr. Gaetz. Has a single person been fired?
        General Miller. I do not know the answer to that.
        Mr. Gaetz. Shouldn't you, though? I mean, here we are
    having recruiting challenges. You guys are releasing personnel
    information of predominantly Republicans to a Democrat
    opposition research firm.
        You run personnel for the United States Air Force, and you
    can't tell me whether anyone has been fired for this
    unauthorized release?
        General Miller. Congressman, I can tell you that we have
    taken the appropriate action based on the----
        Mr. Gaetz. But you deem it appropriate, but what if we
    don't? Because we have civilian control of the military, and we
    may have to change our laws to hold people accountable. And
    pardon me for not trusting your vague reference to the layers
    that you have put on.
        But Mr. Chairman, I request that this committee get
    specific answers for what the accountability regime was for
    this unlawful action by the United States Air Force, and that
    we not take as an article of faith the representation that they
    think they have taken the appropriate action.
        They have taken the illegal, inappropriate action to
    compromise these records, and I think we should hold them
    accountable for it.
        Mr. Banks. On that note, General Miller, for the record,
    can you submit to the committee what those appropriate actions
    were?
        General Miller. Yes, we certainly may.
        [The information referred to was not available at the time
    of printing.]
        Mr. Banks. Okay, I yield 5 minutes to Representative
    Houlahan.
        Ms. Houlahan. Thank you very much for your testimony today.
    I am going to try an experiment that I haven't tried before
    with my 5 minutes.
        I served in the military, my father and grandfather served
    more than 20 and 30 years, respectively, in the military. My
    brother did. My cousins do currently.
        And I am interested in two questions. One is, assuming that
    we have a qualified individual who has the--has the propensity
    to be able to serve, let's make that first assumption, I am
    going to give you a list of reasons, and I would like you to
    write these lists down. And I alphabetized them, so they are
    not in any value-based order.
        Please write down, childcare. Please write down, don't feel
    welcome or I don't see myself. Please write down, I'm afraid
    for my health or my life. Please write down, housing. Please
    write down, another job is more attractive. Please write down,
    pay is not competitive. And finally, please write down, spouse
    or partner.
        So to review again, we have childcare, don't feel welcome
    or don't see myself, I am worried about my health or life,
    housing, other jobs more attractive, pay not competitive, and
    spouse or partner.
        So with these seven, again, alphabetically listed, I am
    actually interested, assuming a qualified and willing
    participant, somebody who has the propensity to serve, my two
    questions are, one, why I didn't join the military.
        Could you please take a couple of minutes, 15 seconds or
    so, to pick your top four reasons why I didn't join the
    military.
        And when you look up, I will assume that you guys have got
    your four. I might have been a teacher once.
        The next question is why I didn't stay in the military.
    Again, your top four.
        Now I only have 2\1/2\ minutes left, and so quickly I would
    like you to go through your top four why I didn't join and then
    we will go through again your top four why I didn't stay.
        So General Stitt, first you, why I didn't join.
        General Stitt. Representative Houlahan, great question, and
    thank you for your service and for your family's legacy of
    service.
        What we are seeing is primarily three reasons why
    individuals do not join.
        Ms. Houlahan. Okay, could you list them, please.
        General Stitt. There's a knowledge gap, a trust gap, and an
    identity. So from----
        Ms. Houlahan. From the list that I gave you, what are the
    three reasons then?
        General Stitt. The three reasons, we would see that the
    putting their individual's life on hold. So I think that----
        Ms. Houlahan. Okay, life or health, okay. Number two?
        General Stitt. Don't see themselves.
        Ms. Houlahan. Don't see themselves, okay.
        General Stitt. And then concern for their safety.
        Ms. Houlahan. That's life, okay. And the third?
        General Stitt. And then where we see our--the spouse,
    partner.
        Ms. Houlahan. Okay, thank you. Vice Admiral Cheeseman,
    please. And unfortunately, we are going to run out of time for
    this, so I am going to ask you to submit your answers for the
    record on this.
        The Vice Admiral, please.
        Admiral Cheeseman. Congresswoman, thanks for the question.
    Similar to my colleague, everything we see in the Navy is about
    feeling like you have to put your life on hold.
        So specifically, spouse, opportunity, pay and compensation,
    something else may be more attractive because of that, and they
    just don't see themselves in the Navy because there's other
    opportunity.
        Ms. Houlahan. General Miller, please.
        General Miller. Yes, ma'am. I said spouse and partner, they
    don't want to, you know, move with the--with their spouse. I
    also said there's other jobs available. And then my third one
    was that they would--that they are not comfortable or they
    don't know enough about the military, so perhaps would not feel
    welcome.
        Ms. Houlahan. General Glynn, please.
        General Glynn. Congresswoman, thank you. Very, very
    similar. I think to your time available, the one difference in
    joining and staying, childcare.
        Ms. Houlahan. Okay, thank you, that is helpful. And
    General--and Ms. Kelley, please.
        Ms. Kelley. Thank you. I would only offer that I think the
    issue of coming in really rests on the lack of knowledge on
    what the service really is.
        Ms. Houlahan. Yeah, and that is why I think so many of us
    have served in families that serve.
        Ms. Kelley. Yes, ma'am.
        Ms. Houlahan. I know I have run out of time, but I guess my
    point is I have sat through this hearing and I have also sat
    the through other hearing with the military folks who are the
    most senior-ranking enlisted people. When we asked the most
    senior-ranking enlisted people if DEI was a positive thing,
    they all said ``yes.''
        When we asked you if it was a factor at all, you all said
    ``no.'' And so I am frustrated because there are so many
    complex reasons why a person joins or doesn't stay. And I just
    really want us to qualify and quantify that, rather than
    politicize these issues.
        Thank you, I yield back.
        Mr. Banks. Representative Mills.
        Mr. Mills. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I ask unanimous consent
    to enter into record the NAVPERS [Navy Personnel], which I will
    be referring to as Annex A.
        [The information referred to can be found in the Appendix
    on page 108.]
        Mr. Banks. Without objection.
        Mr. Mills. Behind me, as you can see, is Exhibit, what I
    consider as Exhibit A. It is a page 13 service record book
    entry that currently being given to Navy reservists asking them
    to acknowledge that they will not get points for the time they
    were dropped, discharged, or otherwise prohibited from
    participating because of being unvaccinated.
        But it is also threatening that if they don't come back,
    they can have adverse administrative actions taken against
    them.
        This question is to you, Vice Admiral. By what authority is
    the Navy threatening adverse actions against the people it
    forced out in order to force them to come back in?
        [The information referred to can be found in the Appendix
    on page 111.]
        Admiral Cheeseman. Congressman, thanks for that question. I
    am not familiar with that specific page 13, but I will talk to
    you in general. There is no authority for adverse actions right
    now because of the vaccine mandate and the recission of that
    said vaccine mandate.
        In fact, we have taken the painstaking effort to go through
    our sailors' records to make sure that we have removed negative
    connotations from their records. And as a measure going
    forward, for selection boards and promotion boards, we have
    guidance there that no negative indication because of COVID
    should be considered, sir.
        Mr. Mills. And this is for everyone. We know how
    important--and I am prior military as well, have spent time
    with the United States Army, was a proud combat veteran out of
    the 82nd, and I thank you all for your service and your time
    today.
        We know how important our reentry codes are when it comes
    to our DD-214. And many of our service members who in my
    opinion were unconstitutionally purged out of our military up
    to the 8,400 personnel were receiving things like Code 3s and
    Code 4s.
        And we know the difficulty, and in some cases the absolute
    refusal to allow them to enter back into service. What are
    doing to correct and change that?
        I'll start with you, Lieutenant General Douglas.
        General Stitt. Representative Mills, thank you for the
    question, thank you for your service.
        If there is an individual who was separated under the
    auspice of COVID-19, that individual is allowed to pursue
    reentry by contacting their local recruiter or pursuing reentry
    through the Army Board of Correction of Military Records.
        Admiral Cheeseman. Congressman, similar question for the
    Navy. Any prior service sailor can petition to have their
    record changed through the BCNR [Board for Correction of Navy
    Records] process. And once complete, they can, you know,
    attempt to reenter into the service by contacting their local
    recruiter, sir.
        General Miller. Yes, sir, it is very similar for the Air
    Force. We've identified all the individuals that were separated
    with--for COVID and for the vaccine, and we've reached out to
    them so that they can come back through the BCMR process as
    well.
        General Glynn. Congressman, same process. I would just
    highlight for the Marine Corps, we were very intentional about
    the assignment of that RE [reenlistment] code so that it
    highlighted, you know, what it was for and gives very clear--
    gives clarity to the process of what has to be changed.
        Ms. Kelley. Sir, I would tell you the Space Force did not
    separate any Guardians solely for COVID vaccination. However,
    we would follow the same process that the Air Force does.
        Mr. Mills. Go Guardians. All right, moving on. So did the
    DOD or your individual service perform any studies or analysis
    of the number of service members who had refused to take the
    mRNA [messenger ribonucleic acid] product based on religious or
    medical objections? Is there any study conducted as a result of
    that?
        Because, and here is the reason I ask this question. The
    DOD Inspector General said that on average, the time taken to
    determine whether or not a person qualified for a medical or a
    religious exemption was 12 minutes.
        And in my opinion, do you feel that you could determine a
    person's religious or medical exemption within 12 minutes? We
    will start with you, Lieutenant General Stitt.
        General Stitt. Representative Mills, I am unaware of the
    DOD survey that you are referencing. I know that within the
    Army, we handled and looked at each individual exemption case,
    medical or religious, on a case-by-case individual-by-
    individual basis.
        Mr. Mills. Well, I can tell you right now, having worked
    for the government, we don't do anything in 12 minutes. So
    that's probably one of the rapidest time.
        And I would advise you all to please look at this DOD
    Inspector General writeup that's very clearly stating that
    these were decisions made within 12 minutes. And I don't
    consider that to be a subsequent amount of time to vet a
    person's religious or medical reasoning for exemptions.
        I want to say for the record as well, how many of you would
    support, and I do this quick in the 10 seconds, reentry back
    into the military for those unconstitutionally purged out with
    back pay, full benefits, and their ability to finally serve
    their United States military as opposed to any political
    agenda?
        I'll start with you, Lieutenant General Glynn.
        General Glynn. Sir, in terms of reentry, we addressed that
    part of the back pay would be a decision not made by a service.
        Mr. Mills. But is it something that you would support for
    those who want to continue their service and that was
    unconstitutionally purged?
        General Glynn. I support them coming back in.
        Mr. Mills. Lieutenant General Miller.
        General Miller. I support them coming back in through the
    process.
        Mr. Mills. Vice Admiral.
        Admiral Cheeseman. Congressman, same thing. I support the
    BCNR process and their ability to come back in, should it be
    adjudicated as such.
        Mr. Mills. And Lieutenant General.
        General Stitt. I support it through the BCMR process.
        Mr. Mills. Well, I hope you guys do, and I look forward to
    try and help work with my colleagues and with our chairman to
    get legislation in place that will actually allow that to
    happen so people can finally come back and serve our military,
    hopefully filling the ranks of the 25,000-plus recruitment
    shortage that we have today that in my opinion is partially due
    to the morale drop and the DEI that has been implemented, as
    opposed to increase lethality.
        Mr. Mills. With that I yield back.
        Mr. Banks. The gentleman's time is expired. Mr. Moylan.
        Mr. Moylan. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        You know, earlier today, I was--I had the opportunity to
    ask Secretary Austin a question regarding the recent reduction
    of COLA [cost-of-living adjustment] for service members on
    Guam, when he testified before the full committee.
        However, I would also like to pose that--pose it to you
    folks as well here today. So given that there's a COLA
    reduction as a result of Department policy, what can be done to
    increase the cost-of-living allowance for service members on
    Guam who live at the latter end of the supply chains in the
    service and serve in one of the most unique parts of the United
    States?
        So basically that's my question, all right. I suppose you
    all want to ensure that the COLA is there for our troops, the
    most forward-deployed. But now we have a situation where
    they're going to lose that COLA. So how good is that for us,
    for the members to ensure the quality of life is there, right?
        So I'm just posing that to you folks, as well as what I did
    to the Secretary, Secretary Austin earlier today. Whoever would
    like to answer, please.
        General Stitt. Representative Moylan, thank you for the
    question.
        We would participate with the Department of Defense
    Quadrennial Review of Military Compensation to look at cost-of-
    living allowances, basic allowance for housing, basic allowance
    for subsistence, the entirety of pay and benefits so that we
    can collect the information and review that--and ensure that
    our service members and their families are adequately
    compensated for their service and their sacrifice.
        And if there are any decrements to COLA, we would request
    from the Department of Defense that the services receive
    notification so that we can work with respective chains of
    command to inform our soldiers and families and support them if
    they require assistance.
        Admiral Cheeseman. Congressman, thank you for that
    question. Very similar answer. I think we need to work with our
    OSD partners to, you know, on possible ways to modernize how we
    determine COLA.
        But more specifically to what my colleague said here, we
    need to have an active campaign with our service members so
    they understand the purpose of COLA. And then when there are
    changes, specifically reductions, we give them enough of a
    heads-up so they can plan for it appropriately in their budget,
    sir.
        General Miller. I would just add one thing to my colleague,
    thank you for the question. I would like to see compensation
    for service members structured so that they don't have to get
    any other additional service. It should be able to--they should
    be able to live on the compensation in which we provide.
        General Glynn. Like Lieutenant General Miller, I think,
    sir, that your question gets to the point of if service members
    are so sensitive to a move in COLA up or down, then it's
    indicative of the combined effect of many economic factors.
        We hear about it when changes in housing. I'm sure you've
    heard about BAH [basic allowance for housing]. We hear it about
    changes in the price of gas, food, any number of items. I think
    it speaks to the margin and how narrow the margin has become,
    particularly for our junior enlisted folks, when it comes to
    being able to afford and absorb some of the fluctuations.
        Ms. Kelley. Representative, thank you for the question. The
    only other thing I would add is the agility for the Department
    to react to market conditions. And we are talking about
    financial market conditions that move quickly, and we have got
    to be rapid in how we adjust.
        Mr. Moylan. I appreciate all your responses. And one answer
    that the Secretary Austin did give us was it is not a matter of
    law. It is Department of Defense.
        So I think this is really important for us right now in the
    Indo-Pacific to ensure that we just can't cut off that COLA or
    reduce it like what has happened. So we are expecting an answer
    by the end of--by the end of next month, according to Secretary
    Austin.
        And with your understanding, with your troops, and I am
    doing this to support. Especially we got a Marine Corps base,
    right, coming onto Guam, which we already rededicated that
    flag. Four thousand Marines coming on over for Okinawa. And
    that flag is going to be there to stay, General, so.
        We want to make it the best way possible for the morale and
    the welfare of our troops to ensure their families are taken
    care of while they defend our United States and our District of
    Guam.
        So I thank you for that, and I appreciate your continued
    support to ensure that our troops are well taken care of,
    especially with the COLA. So thank you very much.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I relinquish my time. Thank you,
    sir.
        Mr. Banks. Thank you. And I want to thank all of our
    witnesses again for their service and for providing testimony
    this afternoon.
        I would close by requesting that you take the issues that
    we have identified and discussed here today back to your
    service chiefs and let them know that we will be looking for
    the concrete actions they intend to take to mitigate the
    problems that we have identified at this hearing and how they
    intend to fix them.
        With that, there being no further business, the
    subcommittee stands adjourned.
        [Whereupon, at 4:11 p.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.]

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

                                A P P E N D I X

                                 March 29, 2023

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

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

                  PREPARED STATEMENTS SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD

                                 March 29, 2023

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

    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

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

                       DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD

                                 March 29, 2023

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

    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

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

                  WITNESS RESPONSES TO QUESTIONS ASKED DURING

                                  THE HEARING

                                 March 29, 2023

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

                  RESPONSE TO QUESTION SUBMITTED BY MR. MILLS

        Admiral Cheeseman. Congressman, thanks, thanks for that question. I
    am not familiar with that specific Page 13. I'll talk to you in
    general. In response to Congressional direction in the FY-23 NDAA to
    rescind the COVID-19 vaccine mandate, and in accordance with
    implementing guidance from the Secretary of Defense and Secretary of
    the Navy, the Navy issued Fleet-wide guidance in NAVADMIN 065/23 ending
    the requirement to be vaccinated against COVID-19. As directed, the
    Navy centrally reviewed the records of all currently-serving Navy
    Service Members who requested religious accommodation from COVID-19
    vaccination to identify and remove adverse information related to
    vaccine refusal. Therefore, there is no authority for adverse actions
    right now, because of the vaccine mandate and the rescission of that
    said vaccine mandate. In fact, we've taken painstaking efforts to go
    through the records of these Sailors and make sure that we've removed
    negative connotations from their records and as a measure going
    forward, for selection boards and promotion boards, we have guidance
    here that no negative indication because of COVID should be considered.
    Other current and former Navy service Members may petition the Board
    for Corrections of Naval Records regarding COVID-19 vaccination related
    matters.   [See page 21.]

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

                  QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY MEMBERS POST HEARING

                                 March 29, 2023

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

                         QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY MR. KIM

        Mr. Kim. Recruiting challenges are not unique to the military, and
    we continue to see a labor shortage across the nation. In areas like
    cyber, we are likely competing for the same talent within the
    Department of Defense and the private sector. Have the services
    partnered with industry leaders on best practices to recruit personnel?
        General Stitt. While no official partnerships exist, attracting
    qualified talent and remaining competitive in the labor market is
    essential to our Army's future success. The Army recognizes that we
    must find ways to differentiate military service to compete and expand
    our ranks, and to achieve this objective, the Army is looking into a
    number of programs and initiatives designed to attract talent that
    align with our civilian counterparts. These initiatives include
    modernizing Recruiting Command's mission to ensure our recruiting force
    remains flexible and agile in the face of a challenging environment and
    even offering non-monetary incentives such as station of choice for
    recruits. The Army has met with corporations like Wal-Mart to discuss
    recruiting and talent management.
        Mr. Kim. Recruiting challenges are not unique to the military, and
    we continue to see a labor shortage across the nation. In areas like
    cyber, we are likely competing for the same talent within the
    Department of Defense and the private sector. Have the services
    partnered with industry leaders on best practices to recruit personnel?
        Admiral Cheeseman. Yes, the Navy utilizes industry partners and
    best practices to assist in the business of recruiting and uses the
    services of a full-service marketing and advertising (M&A) agency,
    Valentine, McCormick, Ligibel, Young, and Rubicam (VMLY&R), to provide
    M&A expertise. VMLY&R is an industry leading marketing firm behind
    award-winning campaigns for blue-chip companies such as Coca-Cola,
    Colgate-Palmolive, Dell, Ford, etc. With this M&A contractor, the Navy
    gains media purchasing power of their media buyer, Group M, a top-five
    global media network, responsible for one in every three ads purchased
    worldwide.
        Additionally, the Navy utilizes the research and insights of major
    data platforms, such as Google, Snapchat, and Reddit, to implement
    innovative campaigns geared towards our target demographic.
    Additionally, the Navy provides industry-leading tools and recruiting
    platforms, such as LinkedIn, Handshake, and others to provide
    recruiters with tools to search for applicants with specific skills/
    education, as required by some of the more technical ratings available
    in the Navy.
        Mr. Kim. Recruiting challenges are not unique to the military, and
    we continue to see a labor shortage across the nation. In areas like
    cyber, we are likely competing for the same talent within the
    Department of Defense and the private sector. Have the services
    partnered with industry leaders on best practices to recruit personnel?
        General Miller. While not specifically in conjunction with
    industry, the Department has multiple initiatives underway to attract
    and retain cyber talent. Ongoing initiatives including establishing a
    ``Stripes for Cyber Certifications'' that will provide entry rank
    incentives to cyber qualified recruits. Cyber recruits with current
    industry certifications will be compensated with rank advancement upon
    entry. Additionally, the Air Force is leveraging special authorities to
    reach and recruit expertise in the civilian sector, implementing the
    Cyber Direct Commissioning Program and Constructive Service Credit
    (CSC). The program awards individuals with cyber industry experience
    (amongst other criteria) with rank and commensurate pay, up to the
    grade of Colonel. The Air Force is looking to leverage the 2023 NDAA to
    offer Cyber Assignment Incentive Pay (CAIP) of up to $1,500 per month
    to attract and retain skilled and certified cyber professionals.
    Finally, the Air Force is testing a Technical Track for cyber officers
    as an alternative to the standard career field force development models
    with the intent to maximize return on investment for high-demand, low-
    density Cyber Mission Force Airmen.
        Mr. Kim. Recruiting challenges are not unique to the military, and
    we continue to see a labor shortage across the nation. In areas like
    cyber, we are likely competing for the same talent within the
    Department of Defense and the private sector. Have the services
    partnered with industry leaders on best practices to recruit personnel?
        General Glynn. The Marine Corps acknowledges the significant
    headwinds the Services and private sector are facing in recruiting
    talented individuals. Residuals from COVID, generational and labor
    market challenges, historic lows in qualification rates, propensity,
    and a fragmented advertising environment have made it increasingly
    difficult to rebuild recruiting momentum. As society continues to form
    the post-pandemic normal, Marine Corps Recruiting Command has a renewed
    focus on systematic, relevant, dynamic, and anticipatory training. We
    have contracts with industry leaders to develop performance-based,
    criterion-referenced instruction for recruiters and recruiter managers
    and have invested in advertising research and development to keep pace
    with competitors in the market.
        Mr. Kim. Recruiting challenges are not unique to the military, and
    we continue to see a labor shortage across the nation. In areas like
    cyber, we are likely competing for the same talent within the
    Department of Defense and the private sector. Have the services
    partnered with industry leaders on best practices to recruit personnel?
        Ms. Kelley. The competitive market for STEM talent the Space Force
    requires creates a significant challenge to recruit across the
    Department. While the Space Force has been successful to date with
    meeting recruiting goals, we know the recruiting landscape is dynamic--
    there is a high demand for talent who possess the unique and essential
    skills the Space Force needs. Thus, we remain mindful it is likely we
    will experience recruiting challenges in the future, and we must
    outcompete the civilian market for talent by demonstrating how
    attractive careers as a Guardian are for all people. Accordingly, we
    are investing in a robust Space Force brand awareness campaign designed
    to reach the American public, raise awareness of the Space Force, and
    expand the pool of high-quality applicants. Space Force recruitment
    initiatives are focused on expanding the pool of potential STEM
    applicants through several outreach initiatives and programs such as
    the University Partnership Program, STEM to Space, and Guardian
    Enhanced Active Recruiting or ``G.E.A.R'' outreach programs. We've also
    established the Grow with Google program--a career certificate program
    available to military spouses and non-degree individuals who have
    previously faced barriers to higher paying tech positions. The
    professional certificates are offered in in-demand fields of Data
    Analytics, Information Technology Support, Project Management, Digital
    Marketing & e-Commerce, and User Experience (UX) design. Furthermore,
    we have completely revamped the spaceforce.com public outreach website,
    offering visitors an enhanced, interactive insight into our roles,
    missions, and functions.
                                     ______

                        QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY MR. GAETZ
        Mr. Gaetz. General Miller, what corrective steps has the Air Force
    taken to hold the person(s) accountable for the unlawful release of GOP
    members service records to a leftist political strategy group?
        Has anyone been fired, if not why?
        What specific processes have been put in place by the Air Force to
    prevent this unlawful release of document from happening again?
        Documents related to the question:
        1) A third former House GOP candidate alerted to unapproved
    military records request--POLITICO
        2) f (10901408) (politico.com)
        3) Air Force IDs 2 new GOP candidates whose military records were
    improperly released--POLITICO
        4) GOP lawmakers seek investigation of `unauthorized' disclosure of
    their Air Force records--POLITICO
        5) https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/the-nsas-
    top-talent-is-leaving-because-of-low-pay-and-battered-morale/2018/01/
    02/ff19f0c6-ec04-11e7-9f92-
    10a2203f6c8d_story.html?utm_term=.66951f36b998
        6) 6--Press Release March 2022 FY22.pdf (defense.gov)
        7) Politicization contributing to Americans' low trust in the
    military (militarytimes.com)
        General Miller. The DAF is taking this matter seriously. Our
    personnel, including our veterans, expect their records to be
    safeguarded and the DAF must uphold this responsibility. The Air Force
    Personnel Center (AFPC) command-directed investigation and internal
    audit identified eight individuals employed by the DAF who were
    involved in the improper records release. The command-directed
    investigation found no evidence of intentional misconduct by any DAF
    employee. Five individuals have received a written Letter of
    Counseling. One separated from active duty before the release was
    discovered. Administrative action is still pending for two individuals
    who voluntarily transitioned to a different section.
        Measures have been implemented to prevent this from happening
    again, to include: 1) second-level review on all third-party requests
    received by the Air Force Personnel Center (AFPC) are elevated to the
    Chief of Operation Support & Records Management Divisions; 2) conduct
    of a thorough legal sufficiency reviews by the AFPC Legal Office for
    all non-governmental third-party requests before records are released;
    3) Remedial awareness and specialized training to all staff members
    involved in the release process; 4) Monthly audits to ensure no records
    were improperly released. Furthermore, a personnel action was initiated
    to hire a second quality control official to ensure records are
    properly redacted before release. At the direction of DepSecDef, all
    MilDeps are currently working with Assistant to the Secretary of
    Defense for Privacy, Civil Liberties, and Transparency to provide a
    Personnel Records Protection Assessment. The DAF will assess the
    strength of processes and procedures to prevent future unauthorized
    disclosures of personnel records, and identify any additional
    enhancements needed.
                                     ______

                        QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY MR. DAVIS
        Mr. Davis. There are 8 times more veterans per capita in my
    district than nationwide. Active-duty military personnel are also
    overrepresented in eastern North Carolina. At the same time, college-
    level education is comparatively low.
        Given that military careers remain a vital path for youth in
    eastern North Carolina, have you and your team considering a recruiting
    strategy that relies on the high rates of retention to persuade
    candidates that personnel tend to stay put once they commit?
        General Stitt. The Army does continue to retain its Soldiers at a
    very high rate. After decades of higher operational tempo, the Army
    recognizes that stabilizing Soldiers longer at home station helps to
    stabilize our Army Families which improves Soldier morale, retention,
    and overall force readiness. As a goal, the Army strives to ensure
    first-term Soldiers serve at their first duty station for the bulk of
    their first enlistment term and we work to make life more predictable
    for Soldiers. Staying at the first duty station longer helps to
    stabilize families and encourage spouse employment. We will continue to
    communicate to potential recruits the quality of life a future Soldier
    can expect, including highlighting the many Soldiers that choose to
    remain in the Army. This goes a long way in influencing a candidate's
    decision to serve.
        Mr. Davis. Lieutenant General Miller: In your written testimony,
    you referenced the Air Force's Total Force marketing improvements and
    the ROTC ``You Can Fly'' campaign. Specifically, you highlighted
    underrepresented female, Hispanic, Asian/Pacific Islander, and American
    Indian/Native Alaskan populations as target groups for these
    initiatives. One group you left off is the cohort of prospective ROTC
    cadets at HBCUs. As I raised in last week's hearing with Assistant
    Secretary Wagner, there is only ONE Air Force ROTC program at an HBCU
    deemed viable in the entire country out of 15 active programs and 174
    ROTC programs total nationwide.
        How can the Air Force truly attract the best candidates, including
    at Elizabeth City State University in my district, which is trying to
    activate a program of its own, if ROTCs at these institutions, which
    have received overwhelming bipartisan support I might add, are not
    included as a primary area of focus for recruiting?
        General Miller. The AFROTC You Can Fly (AYCF) program was created
    in 2019 to help increase diversity among rated forces through early
    exposure, education, and flight experience, in accordance with the Air
    Force diversity definition outlined in Air Force Instruction (AFI) 36-
    7001, Diversity and Inclusion. The AYCF Execution Plan specifically
    outlines the program's two-fold intent: (1) Create a robust and
    innovative Rated Officer applicant pool with diverse backgrounds that
    can solve tomorrow's global challenges by providing combat air
    lethality with agility and resolve, and (2) Increase awareness of rated
    careers with a compelling outreach designed to inform, influence, and
    inspire AFROTC cadets from underrepresented communities.
        AYCF is a national-level ground and flight training program
    executed at FAA approved Fixed Base Operators (FBOs) across the nation
    and participation is encouraged across all AFROTC cadet cohorts
    attending any of our 145 host or 1,000 cross-town universities,
    including cadets at AFROTC HBCU detachments and crosstown universities.
    AYCF opportunities are awarded proportionally to AFROTC regions and
    detachments based on enrolled cadet populations and detachment
    commanders are empowered to nominate all cadets who meet program
    eligibility criteria (e.g., US citizenship, flight physical) and
    selected flight school requirements.
        The Air Force offers commissioning opportunities to cadets via 145
    host detachments and 1044 crosstown school partnership agreements.
    Among these, 7 host detachments are at HBCU colleges/universities and
    48 crosstown partnerships are with HBCU colleges/universities.
    Detachment non-viability does not impede cadets from participating in
    AFROTC program activities or opportunities.
        While AF line officer recruiting falls primarily under the purview
    of the Air Force Recruiting Service, each AFROTC detachment's cadre
    consists of an additional duty recruiting officer who conducts
    recruiting activities on campus and in the local area, with the
    participation of cadets from the detachment's cadet corps and in
    concert with other local AF Total Force recruiting agencies/entities.
        Mr. Davis. Lieutenant General Miller: I want to bring you your
    attention some of the challenges faced by personnel at Seymour Johnson
    Air Force Base, which is a major economic driver in eastern North
    Carolina. Specifically, I am concerned about the current state of the
    Child Development Center, which is in disrepair. Military families are
    forced to use off-base facilities because of limited space and
    deteriorating electrical systems on-site.
        Can you give me a sense as to why the Seymour Johnson Child
    Development Center is not on the current unfunded priorities list? How
    can we ensure that personnel living off-base with their families have
    the same access to childcare as those who live on-base?
        General Miller. The conditions of Child Developments Centers remain
    a top priority for the DAF to ensure our Airmen and Guardians have the
    support they require. While our CDCs overall are in adequate condition,
    we are planning a focused FSRM investment across the DAF of $42M for
    CDCs in FY24.
        Specific to your concerns at Seymour Johnson AFB, the installation
    recently completed a local repair project to improve the electrical
    systems. There is also a Facility Sustainment Repair and Modernization
    project in progress to repair other immediate concerns. Additionally,
    there are plans to build a new CDC and that will accommodate increased
    capacity. It is currently in design and will be considered for future
    budget requests.
        On-base child care is available to both on base and off-base
    residents. Additionally, Military Child Care in Your Neighborhood
    (MCCYN) supports military families not living near an installation or
    unable to access military childcare programs through fee assistance for
    community-based childcare. Currently there are 12 children enrolled in
    MCCYN approved civilian childcare programs near Seymour Johnson AFB.
    MCCYN-Plus is a Department of the Defense initiative to increase
    childcare options for military parents by expanding eligibility for
    providers to participate in military fee assistance programs. MCCYN-
    PLUS launched in North Carolina in March 2023.
                                     ______

                        QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY MR. MILLS
        Mr. Mills. For each branch, what was the total amount of lost or
    withheld pay and benefits for service members on active duty, in the
    National Guard or in the Reserves for non-compliance with the COVID-19
    mandate?
        General Stitt. For the Active Component, total cost of backpay and
    recouped bonuses, through September 2023, for the 1,903 Soldiers
    separated for COVID-19 vaccine refusal is estimated to be $184M.
        For the Army National Guard, approximately 187,339 Unit Training
    Assemblies (UTAs) were not conducted as a result of the 10,469 Soldiers
    who were reported as refusing the COVID-19 vaccination at any point
    between 1 July 22 and 9 January 23. This represents singular
    occurrences in which these Service Members were not entitled to pay
    and/or points in a duty status under Title 32 U.S.C. Estimated cost per
    Unit Training Assembly (UTA) for each Soldier is $176--this equates to
    $32.97M total for the 187,339 UTAs missed during the specified period.
        For the Army Reserves, the estimate for total cost of withheld pay
    for service members in the Reserves to be approximately $9.1M. 1,962
    USAR Soldiers received a code ``Z'' for no pay/no points for the
    period. The Multiple Unit Training Assembly (MUTA) is the unit of
    measure for pay and there are 4 MUTAs for a drill weekend. The average
    cost of a MUTA in the USAR is $193 for each Soldier
        Mr. Mills. Secretary Austin's second Covid-19 Memorandum (dated
    Nov. 30, 2021) cut Federal funding for the National Guard for anyone
    who was unvaccinated. After that memorandum, how many people were lost
    from the Guard or Reserve in and following December 2021 as a result of
    this memorandum?
        General Stitt. The ``No Pay/No Points'' policy became effective in
    the Reserve Components on 1 July 22 and rescinded on 9 January 23. The
    Secretary of the Army did not direct separation actions for the RC,
    therefore, the Army Reserve and the Army National Guard did not have
    any Servicemembers involuntarily separated as a result of the mandate.
        Mr. Mills. Have all of those who had a RE-3, RE-4 re-enlistment
    code or anything less than an Honorable discharge corrected? If not,
    why not?
        General Stitt. To-date, there have not been any changes to
    servicemember records related to discharges for the COVID-19 mandate.
    The Army Review Boards Agency has received 96 applications requesting
    discharge related corrections from Soldiers who were separated as a
    result of prior COVID policies. Processing will proceed upon a final
    determination of further COVID-related policies.
        Any Soldier who has been separated from service within the last 15
    years, except for those separated by general court-martial, may request
    a correction of their DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge
    from Active Duty) Character of Service or Reentry Code entries by
    application to the Army Discharge Review Board. If additional
    corrections are requested, the Soldier may apply to the Army Board for
    Correction of Military Records.
        Mr. Mills. Did your service attempt to quantify the costs of the
    mandate (e.g., lost, discharged, or non-deployable service members) and
    compare it to the expected benefits from the mandate? If so, what were
    the results? If not, why not?
        General Stitt. We are not aware of any attempt to quantify the cost
    of the mandate and compare to expected benefits. There was no
    requirement from the Department of Defense to undergo any such study.
        Mr. Mills. Were any such studies or analyses performed on the
    policy of systematically denying religious accommodation requests, and
    in particular, whether such a policy would be perceived as hostility
    towards religion and what effect such perceived hostility to religion
    would have on the moral and readiness of those remaining in service
    and/or on recruiting new service members? If so, what were the results?
    If not, why not?
        General Stitt. There was no requirement from the Department of
    Defense to undergo any such studies. The Army did not systematically
    deny religious accommodation requests. The Army recognizes the
    fundamental right of Soldiers to observe the tenets of their religion
    or to observe no religion at all, as provided in federal law as well as
    the Department of Defense (DOD) and Army policy. Every COVID-19 vaccine
    exemption request was reviewed in a detailed and deliberate manner. The
    process included interviews with the Soldier's chaplain,
    recommendations from the chain of command, as well as a public health
    and a legal review. Exemption approval considered the Soldier's
    specific religious beliefs, chaplain and chain of command
    recommendations, the working environment of the individual Soldier and
    the public health risk. Soldiers were also afforded the opportunity to
    appeal any exemption denials to the Army Assistant Secretary for
    Manpower and Reserve Affairs.
        Mr. Mills. For each service, can you provide the demographic data
    (to include, at a minimum, race, sex, and religion) for active-duty
    service members who were discharged and for National Guard and Reserve
    service members who suffered the aforementioned adverse actions, as
    well as a comparison with the total number of service members in these
    demographic groups (i.e. in order to identify any disproportionate or
    disparate impacts from the mandate)?
        General Stitt. Soldiers separated due to COVID-19 refusal were more
    likely to be White, male, and/or Christian when compared to the Active
    Component as a whole. The below spreadsheet has the breakdown for
    gender, Race/Ethnicity, and Religion, as requested.
        Active Component:

    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        [Table continues on next page.]

    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        The Secretary of the Army did not direct separation actions for
    the RC, therefore, the Army Reserve and the Army National Guard did not
    have any Servicemembers involuntarily separated as a result of the
    mandate.
        Mr. Mills. For each branch, how many members of the National Guard
    or Reserves were:
          transferred/dropped to the Inactive Ready Reserve (IRR)
    or some other inactive status;
          placed in a ``No Points, No Pay'' status;
          had active-duty orders (including professional schools)
    curtailed, cancelled, or cut short; and/or
          were prohibited from attending drills over the COVID-19
    mandate?
        General Stitt.
        Army National Guard:
          Transferred/dropped to the Inactive Ready Reserve (IRR)
    or some other inactive status: The Army did not reach the
    implementation phase of transferring to IRR for refusal of the COVID-19
    Mandate; therefore there were none in this category associated with
    vaccine refusal.
          Placed in a ``No Points, No Pay'' status: 10,469 total
    ARNG Service Members experienced ``No Pay/No Points'' at any point
    during this period.
          Had active-duty orders (including professional schools)
    curtailed, cancelled, or cut short; and/or were prohibited from
    attending drills over the COVID-19 mandate: 46 personnel during this
    period were within the Training Pipeline when they separated. No
    further data is available regarding rescission of Active-Duty orders.
    10,469 Soldiers were prohibited from attending drills as a result of
    refusing the Covid-19 vaccination mandate in accordance with SecDef
    guidance.
        Army Reserves:
          Transferred/dropped to the Inactive Ready Reserve (IRR)
    or some other inactive status: The Army did not reach the
    implementation phase of transferring to IRR for refusal of the COVID-19
    Mandate; therefore there were no Soldiers in this category associated
    with vaccine refusal.
          Placed in a ``No Points, No Pay'' status: 1,962 total
    USAR Soldiers experienced ``No Pay/No Points'' at any point during this
    period.
          Had active-duty orders (including professional schools)
    curtailed, cancelled, or cut short; and/or were prohibited from
    attending drills over the COVID-19 mandate: 1,962 USAR Soldiers were
    prohibited from attending drills for the period of the vaccine mandate.
    There is no evidence to conclude that any Soldier had their
    professional school curtailed or cancelled due to the mandate.
        Mr. Mills. Do you have any estimates as to how much it will cost to
    train new recruits to replace those positions lost due to the DOD's
    enforcement of the COVID-19 vaccine mandate?
        General Stitt. The training cost to replace those Soldiers lost due
    to the DOD's enforcement of the COVID-19 vaccine mandate is
    approximately $145M ($89K per Soldier). These costs include those from
    USAREC, USMEPCOM, and TRADOC. That said, the Army is accepting
    applications from those that left the Army due only to the vaccine
    mandate. Over 80% of those that left would require no training and
    therefore no additional cost reducing the estimate.
        Mr. Mills. The service is the custodian of the service members'
    military records, so why are service members being directed to apply to
    the BCMR/BCNR process to have their records corrected?
        That process takes years. The Board only makes recommendations that
    are ultimately controlled by the Secretaries of the service concerned.
    Why don't the Secretaries just order the appropriate correction for the
    affected personnel?
        General Stitt. The Army issued the lawful order to its Soldiers to
    become fully vaccinated against COVID-19, in compliance with the DOD
    vaccination requirement, while it was in effect. Soldiers who refused
    the lawful order were subject to adverse personnel actions including
    involuntary separation. If a Soldier or former Soldier believes there
    were mitigating circumstances that should be considered as it relates
    to their misconduct, it is their individual responsibility to initiate
    the review request. Both the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) and/or
    the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) will consider
    each case on its own merits, the recent changes in law and policy, the
    applicable OSD policy for clemency and the respective Board standards:
    propriety and equity.
        Mr. Mills. For each branch, what was the total amount of lost or
    withheld pay and benefits for service members on active duty, in the
    National Guard or in the Reserves for non-compliance with the COVID-19
    mandate?
        Admiral Cheeseman. The Navy recouped $2.35M in unearned bonus
    money. In addition, Sailors separated would have earned a total of
    $75.35M in total basic pay (not including special pay or allowances),
    if they remained in the Navy until September 9, 2023.
        Mr. Mills. Secretary Austin's second Covid-19 Memorandum (dated
    Nov. 30, 2021) cut Federal funding for the National Guard for anyone
    who was unvaccinated. After that memorandum, how many people were lost
    from the Guard or Reserve in and following December 2021 as a result of
    this memorandum?
        Admiral Cheeseman. The Navy does not have a National Guard
    component. The Secretary of Defense's memorandum of November 30, 2021
    does not apply to the Navy Reserve. Therefore, we assess that no Navy
    Reserve Sailors were lost as a result of this memorandum.
        Mr. Mills. Have all of those who had a RE-3, RE-4 re-enlistment
    code or anything less than an Honorable discharge corrected? If not,
    why not?
        Admiral Cheeseman. No.
        Of the 1,878 Sailors separated by the Navy, 1,856 received
    honorable characterizations. Twenty-two received no characterization.
    These twenty-two were entry level separations who exited the service
    prior to the signing of the 2022 National Defense Authorization Act
    (NDAA-22) which required all service members solely separated for
    COVID-19 vaccine refusal to receive a minimum of a general discharge
    (under honorable conditions).
        Any of the 1,878 Sailors separated solely on the basis of COVID-19
    vaccine refusal can petition to Board for Correction of Naval Records
    (BCNR) to review their records and adjust their re-entry code and/or
    characterization of service. In accordance with 10 USC 1552, the
    service's method to amend a DD-214 is to petition the Board of
    Correction for Naval Records (BCNR).
        Mr. Mills. Did your service attempt to quantify the costs of the
    mandate (e.g., lost, discharged, or non-deployable service members) and
    compare it to the expected benefits from the mandate? If so, what were
    the results? If not, why not?
        Admiral Cheeseman. No. On August 24, 2021, the Secretary of Defense
    directed all Services to immediately begin full vaccination of all
    members of the Armed Forces, and the Navy moved quickly to implement
    the Secretary's orders, as directed.
        Mr. Mills. Were any such studies or analyses performed on the
    policy of systematically denying religious accommodation requests, and
    in particular, whether such a policy would be perceived as hostility
    towards religion and what effect such perceived hostility to religion
    would have on the moral and readiness of those remaining in service
    and/or on recruiting new service members? If so, what were the results?
    If not, why not?
        Admiral Cheeseman. The Navy did not systematically deny religious
    accommodation requests.
        All Sailors who requested accommodation received a thorough,
    individualized review of their case, to include consideration of the
    Navy's compelling government interest in a medically and operationally
    ready force, as well as other, less restrictive means to meet the
    government's interest.
        In general, the Navy accepted Sailors' asserted religious beliefs
    as sincere. However, in most cases, less restrictive means were deemed
    insufficient to achieve the Navy's compelling government interest in
    protecting and maintaining an operationally ready force.
        Religious liberty is a foundational principle of enduring
    importance in America, enshrined in our Constitution and other sources
    of Federal law. Service members have the right to observe the tenets of
    their religion or to observe no religion at all, as provided in Federal
    law and Departmental policy. Like all Services, the Navy continues to
    apply the uniform standards set forth in DOD guidance regarding
    religious liberty in the military Services.
        Mr. Mills. For each service, can you provide the demographic data
    (to include, at a minimum, race, sex, and religion) for active-duty
    service members who were discharged and for National Guard and Reserve
    service members who suffered the aforementioned adverse actions, as
    well as a comparison with the total number of service members in these
    demographic groups (i.e. in order to identify any disproportionate or
    disparate impacts from the mandate)?
        Admiral Cheeseman. ``Total Force'' demographics represent the U.S.
    Navy Force as of December 2022. ``All Separated Sailors'' demographics
    represents 1,878 total Sailors separated due to COVID vaccine refusal.

    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        Note: The Navy tracks 179 religious categories to capture the
    religious diversity of the Total Force. Several categories were
    consolidated for this response.
        *Distributes ``unknown'' (24.9%) category proportionally across all
    asserted religions.

        Mr. Mills. For each branch, how many members of the National Guard
    or Reserves were:
          transferred/dropped to the Inactive Ready Reserve (IRR)
    or some other inactive status;
          placed in a ``No Points, No Pay'' status;
          had active-duty orders (including professional schools)
    curtailed, cancelled, or cut short; and/or
          were prohibited from attending drills over the COVID-19
    mandate?
        Admiral Cheeseman. The Navy Reserve had 5,262 unvaccinated Sailors
    and no Sailors were put in an IRR status or a ``No Points, No Pay''
    status. All Selected Reservists experienced some level of impact having
    their active-duty orders (including professional schools) curtailed,
    cancelled, or cut short due to limitations on travel, destination
    protocols, transitions to virtual when possible, and stipulations on
    unvaccinated Sailors. For example, for an extended period of time,
    mission critical official travel required approval from the Under
    Secretary of the Navy via the Assistant Secretary of the Navy Manpower
    and Reserve Affairs (ASN M&RA). The Navy Reserve enterprise submitted
    zero (0) requests for mission critical travel and did not prohibit
    Sailors from attending drills during the COVID-19 mandate.
        Mr. Mills. Do you have any estimates as to how much it will cost to
    train new recruits to replace those positions lost due to the DOD's
    enforcement of the COVID-19 vaccine mandate?
        Admiral Cheeseman. The Navy separated 1,878 Sailors due to
    enforcement of the DOD's COVID-19 vaccine mandate.
        The Navy estimates the cost required to train replacements for
    1,878 Sailors as the amount of pay and entitlements allotted to those
    new recruits during the time they are in training.
        Recruits spend an average of 285 days in training at Recruit
    Training Command and in initial training prior to reporting to their
    first operational assignment. Estimating the average pay and benefits
    of a junior Sailor at $62,435/year, the estimated cost of training
    replacements for the 1,878 Sailors that separated is $91M.
        Mr. Mills. The service is the custodian of the service members'
    military records, so why are service members being directed to apply to
    the BCMR/BCNR process to have their records corrected?
        That process takes years. The Board only makes recommendations that
    are ultimately controlled by the Secretaries of the service concerned.
    Why don't the Secretaries just order the appropriate correction for the
    affected personnel?
        Admiral Cheeseman. I cannot speak for the Secretary of the Navy. To
    provide some context, some Sailors separated for vaccine refusal also
    committed other collateral misconduct warranting an RE-4. Altering
    their RE-4 without deliberate adjudication would potentially allow
    Sailors who separated for other infractions to return.
        The Navy audited the records of all currently-serving Sailors who
    requested Religious Accommodation from the COVID-19 vaccine mandate and
    removed any COVID-related adverse information present.
        The Board of Correction for Naval Records (BCNR) is the Department
    of the Navy's authority to adjudicate corrections to individual records
    for discharged Sailors. BCNR typically takes roughly three months to
    adjudicate a request.
        Mr. Mills. For each branch, what was the total amount of lost or
    withheld pay and benefits for service members on active duty, in the
    National Guard or in the Reserves for non-compliance with the COVID-19
    mandate?
        General Miller. Active-Duty Air Force: No Airmen/Guardians
    experienced withheld or lost pay for the amount of service completed
    before separation, due to non-compliance with the COVID-19 mandate. We
    estimate a basic cost of $803M ($559M for voluntary separations, $244M
    for involuntary separations), or approximately $80M/month, to pay 1,399
    separated Active-Duty Airmen and Guardians for the time between
    separation and return (anticipate 30 Sep 2024). This amount does not
    include Basic Allowance for Subsistence, Basic Allowance for Housing or
    special and incentive pays service members may receive.
        The Air Force Reserve (AFR) estimates that members who refused the
    COVID-19 vaccination and were placed in a no pay/no points status, as
    well as those that were subsequently involuntarily reassigned to the
    Individual Ready Reserve (IRR), did not earn $4.8M in pay and benefits.
        Mr. Mills. Secretary Austin's second Covid-19 Memorandum (dated
    Nov. 30, 2021) cut Federal funding for the National Guard for anyone
    who was unvaccinated. After that memorandum, how many people were lost
    from the Guard or Reserve in and following December 2021 as a result of
    this memorandum?
        General Miller. The AFR did not separate members who refused the
    COVID-19 vaccination; instead, 547 members were placed in a no pay/no
    points status and were involuntarily reassigned the IRR, a non-
    participating status of the Reserve. As such, these members could
    return to a participating status, if they came into compliance with
    medical standards. 60 Service members were involuntarily separated from
    the Air National Guard, while another 616 Service members voluntarily
    separated.
        Mr. Mills. Have all of those who had a RE-3, RE-4 re-enlistment
    code or anything less than an Honorable discharge corrected? If not,
    why not?
        General Miller. Former servicemembers who were separated
    (discharged or separated in lieu of receiving the COVID-19
    vaccination), may use the existing Discharge Review Board (DRB) process
    to petition for an upgrade to their discharge characterization. Each
    record must be individually assessed. Barring aggravating factors, such
    as misconduct or other unfavorable information, applicants who have
    appealed to the DRB have had their discharges upgraded to an Honorable
    discharge. No member received a 4-series RE code upon discharge.
        Mr. Mills. Did your service attempt to quantify the costs of the
    mandate (e.g., lost, discharged, or non-deployable service members) and
    compare it to the expected benefits from the mandate? If so, what were
    the results? If not, why not?
        General Miller. No. The Secretary of Defense mandated immunization
    for Service members on August 24, 2021, to ensure the protection of and
    military readiness of the force. Of the over 500,000 total force Airmen
    and Guardians, approximately 98% (RegAF and Space Force 99%; Guard
    94.3%; Reserve 95.9%) complied with the Secretary of Defense order
    which enabled the continued combat readiness of the force, as well as
    providing life-saving support to the American people and surge support
    to local healthcare systems and agencies at all levels of the
    government.
        Mr. Mills. Were any such studies or analyses performed on the
    policy of systematically denying religious accommodation requests, and
    in particular, whether such a policy would be perceived as hostility
    towards religion and what effect such perceived hostility to religion
    would have on the moral and readiness of those remaining in service
    and/or on recruiting new service members? If so, what were the results?
    If not, why not?
        General Miller. Religious liberty is foundational to our Nation and
    Service members have the right to observe their religion or no religion
    at all, in line with the Religious Freedom Restoration Act. All
    requests for religious accommodation, be it from the COVID-19
    vaccination or for any other reason, are handled within Departmental
    standards, to include DAFI 52-201, Religious Freedom in the Department
    of the Air Force, 48-110, Immunizations and Chemoprophylaxis for the
    Prevention of Infectious Diseases.
        The requirement to vaccinate to ensure medical preparedness and
    military readiness is not a new requirement for the military or our
    members. The Department must weigh an individual's right to follow
    their belief and our ability to accommodate that belief against the
    impact to the mission to ensure we are prepared to support and defend
    that very same right for the American people as a whole.
        Mr. Mills. For each service, can you provide the demographic data
    (to include, at a minimum, race, sex, and religion) for active-duty
    service members who were discharged and for National Guard and Reserve
    service members who suffered the aforementioned adverse actions, as
    well as a comparison with the total number of service members in these
    demographic groups (i.e. in order to identify any disproportionate or
    disparate impacts from the mandate)?
        General Miller. (Reserve Response): see attached demographic
    spreadsheet (Tab 1).

    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        (Guard Response): The Air National Guard involuntary separated
    60 Service members. We require additional time to work with Air Reserve
    Personnel Center to acquire the requested demographics.
        Mr. Mills. For each branch, how many members of the National Guard
    or Reserves were:
          transferred/dropped to the Inactive Ready Reserve (IRR)
    or some other inactive status;
          placed in a ``No Points, No Pay'' status;
          had active-duty orders (including professional schools)
    curtailed, cancelled, or cut short; and/or
          were prohibited from attending drills over the COVID-19
    mandate?
        General Miller. The AFR involuntarily reassigned 547 members to the
    IRR. Because members can be put in no pay-no points status for a
    variety of reasons, we are unable to delineate which may have been
    placed in no pay-no points status strictly for COVID-19 vaccination
    refusal, as this was not tracked. While curtailed orders would have
    applied to Active Guard and Reserve (AGR) members, this number, if any,
    would have been small, however, these were not required to be tracked
    at the time.
        The ANG did not transfer its members to the Inactive Ready Reserve
    nor into any other inactive status.
        A.  Approximately 862 Airmen were officially prevented from
    drilling IAW the SecAF's December 7, 2021, memo, Supplemental
    Coronavirus Disease 2019 Vaccination Policy, Attachment 2, due to
    COVID-19 vaccination refusal, at least once during the January 1,
    2022--January 9, 2023, Air Force prohibition period, and placed in a no
    pay/no points status.
        B.  Four ANG members were returned home early (orders curtailed)
    from a formal school due to the members' refusal to receive the COVID-
    19 vaccination. The ANG needs additional time to review all AGR orders
    for this time period.
        Mr. Mills. Do you have any estimates as to how much it will cost to
    train new recruits to replace those positions lost due to the DOD's
    enforcement of the COVID-19 vaccine mandate?
        General Miller. Throughout the year, the DOD is engaged in training
    new recruits to meet the needs and requirements of the Services. Those
    Service members who chose not to follow the lawful order to be
    vaccinated against the COVID-19 virus were of varying ranks and time in
    service. Like all military separations, discharges, and retirements, of
    prior service members, there is no ability to replace them one-for-one,
    at their respective ranks and experience.
        However, for enlisted members, basic military training costs are
    $23,661 per student and the average technical training course costs
    $47,220. For officers, accession costs vary and depend on commissioning
    source (OTS, USAFA, and ROTC). OTS costs per student is $36,153.40.
    ROTC depends on individual's scholarship program. The costs for follow-
    on training also vary depending on career field, but the average cost
    is $68,500.
        Mr. Mills. The service is the custodian of the service members'
    military records, so why are service members being directed to apply to
    the BCMR/BCNR process to have their records corrected?
        That process takes years. The Board only makes recommendations that
    are ultimately controlled by the Secretaries of the service concerned.
    Why don't the Secretaries just order the appropriate correction for the
    affected personnel?
        General Miller. Former servicemembers may petition the Air Force
    Board for Correction of Military Records (AFBCMR) if they believe that
    there is an error or injustice in their situation. The Department has
    an established process to address these cases. On average, for
    currently serving Active Duty and Reserve forces, it takes
    approximately 90-days for these members to have their records corrected
    via the AFBCMR process, while for all others, (i.e., former Service
    members), the average time is 150-days.
        Mr. Mills. For each branch, what was the total amount of lost or
    withheld pay and benefits for service members on active duty, in the
    National Guard or in the Reserves for non-compliance with the COVID-19
    mandate?
        General Glynn. The Marine Corps did not withhold pay or benefits
    from Marines for non-compliance with the COVID-19 mandate.
        Mr. Mills. Secretary Austin's second Covid-19 Memorandum (dated
    Nov. 30, 2021) cut Federal funding for the National Guard for anyone
    who was unvaccinated. After that memorandum, how many people were lost
    from the Guard or Reserve in and following December 2021 as a result of
    this memorandum?
        General Glynn. The total number of Reserve Covid related discharges
    was 1,578.
        Mr. Mills. Have all of those who had a RE-3, RE-4 re-enlistment
    code or anything less than an Honorable discharge corrected? If not,
    why not?
        General Glynn. As with a range of issues, discharged personnel may
    petition the Board for Correction of Naval Records for issues regarding
    records to include requests to upgrade the characterization of their
    discharge. The Marine Corps has the authority to waive RE-3 and RE-4
    codes for personnel desiring to re-enter the Service if the
    disqualifying condition no longer applies; therefore, corrections would
    not be required.
        On 24 February 2023, the Secretary of the Navy directed the Marine
    Corps to review the records of currently serving Marines and remove all
    adverse information from their service record related to COVID-19
    vaccine mandate. In compliance with this directive, the Marine Corps
    established a cell responsible for reviewing and removing material
    solely related to COVID-19 vaccination refusal for Marines currently in
    the service.
        Mr. Mills. Did your service attempt to quantify the costs of the
    mandate (e.g., lost, discharged, or non-deployable service members) and
    compare it to the expected benefits from the mandate? If so, what were
    the results? If not, why not?
        General Glynn. The August 24, 2021, and November 30, 2021,
    memorandums requiring COVID-19 vaccination made it mandatory for all
    servicemembers until they were rescinded. As such, the Marine Corps did
    not study the costs of the mandate versus expected benefits.
        Mr. Mills. Were any such studies or analyses performed on the
    policy of systematically denying religious accommodation requests, and
    in particular, whether such a policy would be perceived as hostility
    towards religion and what effect such perceived hostility to religion
    would have on the moral and readiness of those remaining in service
    and/or on recruiting new service members? If so, what were the results?
    If not, why not?
        General Glynn.
        1. The Marine Corps did not systematically deny religious
    accommodation requests and considered each request on its own merits.
    Our religious exemption process is standard and deliberate, following
    US Statute and DOD policy.
        The Deputy Commandant, Manpower & Reserve Affairs is the Central
    Disposition Authority for the Commandant of the Marine Corps and the
    appellate is the Assistant Commandant of the Marine Corps.
        DC M&RA is assisted by a Chaplain; the Director, Health Services;
    and a Legal Advisor.
        DC M&RA reviews all material and carefully consider an individual's
    request on an individualized basis. We do not question the sincerity of
    any Marine's belief, and we do not send out form letters. Every
    Marine's exemption request is entitled to be considered in a consistent
    manner.
        2. The Marine Corps has not studied perceived hostility toward
    religion or any potential effects thereof.
        Mr. Mills. For each service, can you provide the demographic data
    (to include, at a minimum, race, sex, and religion) for active-duty
    service members who were discharged and for National Guard and Reserve
    service members who suffered the aforementioned adverse actions, as
    well as a comparison with the total number of service members in these
    demographic groups (i.e. in order to identify any disproportionate or
    disparate impacts from the mandate)?
        General Glynn. Please see attached documented response beginning on
    page 6 to page 9. [See tables that follow, beginning on next page.]

    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

    [Table continues on next page.]

    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        Mr. Mills. For each branch, how many members of the National
    Guard or Reserves were:
          transferred/dropped to the Inactive Ready Reserve (IRR)
    or some other inactive status;
          placed in a ``No Points, No Pay'' status;
          had active-duty orders (including professional schools)
    curtailed, cancelled, or cut short; and/or
          were prohibited from attending drills over the COVID-19
    mandate?
        General Glynn.
        1. The Marine Corps is unable to determine if Reserve Marines
    voluntarily dropped to the IRR for COVID-19 mandate related issues or
    for other personal reasons. Only formal administrative separation
    actions were recorded.
        2. Zero. The Marine Corps did not produce or publish a policy
    authorizing the placement of Marines into a ``No Points, No Pay''
    status for COVID-19 mandate related reasons.
        3. Eighty Reserve Marines were on active-duty orders before being
    discharged for COVID-19 mandate related reasons.
        4. No HQMC policy prohibited unvaccinated Marines from drilling.
    Marine Administrative Messages (MARADMIN) 264/20, 417/20, and 277/21
    authorized telecommuting for inactive duty training (tele-drill) and
    annual training (AT) to minimize COVID exposure of unvaccinated
    reservists while still allowing them to earn points and pay. Tele-drill
    authority was rescinded on 27 May 2022 with the issuance of MARADMIN
    275/22 which restricted official travel but not unofficial travel
    (drill) for unvaccinated personnel in accordance with SECNAV memorandum
    dated 29 April 2022. Telecommute authority for AT was rescinded 3 April
    2023.
        Mr. Mills. Do you have any estimates as to how much it will cost to
    train new recruits to replace those positions lost due to the DOD's
    enforcement of the COVID-19 vaccine mandate?
        General Glynn. The cost to train Marines differs by grade, time in
    service, military occupational specialty, and a host of other factors.
        Currently, the Marine Corps trains over 33,000 recruits (enlisted),
    more than 2,400 officer candidates, and 1,800 entry-level Marine
    officers annually with an Operations and Maintenance budget of $34M.
    This amount includes direct materials and overhead expenses including
    transportation, armory parts and targetry, Marine Corps Martial Arts
    Program gear, personal field gear (e.g., packs, web belts, canteens),
    athletic training equipment, religious service support, laundry
    contract services, fabric repair, printing and reproduction costs,
    uniform alterations, personal protective equipment, cleaning supplies,
    outdoor hygiene stations and appliance leases.
        Mr. Mills. The service is the custodian of the service members'
    military records, so why are service members being directed to apply to
    the BCMR/BCNR process to have their records corrected?
        That process takes years. The Board only makes recommendations that
    are ultimately controlled by the Secretaries of the service concerned.
    Why don't the Secretaries just order the appropriate correction for the
    affected personnel?
        General Glynn. On 24 February 2023, the Secretary of the Navy
    directed the Marine Corps to review the records of currently serving
    Marines and remove all adverse information from their service record
    related to COVID-19 vaccine mandate. In compliance with this directive,
    the Marine Corps established a cell responsible for reviewing and
    removing material solely related to COVID-19 vaccination refusal for
    Marines currently in the service. The BCNR remains the designated
    authority for all requests to modify/correct military records for
    discharged personnel.
        Mr. Mills. For each branch, what was the total amount of lost or
    withheld pay and benefits for service members on active duty, in the
    National Guard or in the Reserves for non-compliance with the COVID-19
    mandate?
        Ms. Kelley. The Space Force did not experience any loss of
    personnel due to non-compliance with the COVID-19 mandate. No Guardian
    experienced withheld pay or benefits.
        Mr. Mills. Did your service attempt to quantify the costs of the
    mandate (e.g., lost, discharged, or non-deployable service members) and
    compare it to the expected benefits from the mandate? If so, what were
    the results? If not, why not?
        Ms. Kelley. The Space Force did not experience any loss of
    personnel due to non-compliance with the COVID-19 mandate; however,
    Guardians who had not been vaccinated chose to leave the service
    through standard attrition mechanisms such as retirements, completion
    of initial service commitment, etc. These types of losses are expected
    and accounted for, therefore there were no direct cost factors due to
    the COVID-19 mandate.
        Mr. Mills. Were any such studies or analyses performed on the
    policy of systematically denying religious accommodation requests, and
    in particular, whether such a policy would be perceived as hostility
    towards religion and what effect such perceived hostility to religion
    would have on the moral and readiness of those remaining in service
    and/or on recruiting new service members? If so, what were the results?
    If not, why not?
        Ms. Kelley. No member of the Department of the Air Force was
    separated due to their religious beliefs. The DOD and the DAF respect
    and fully support the rights of our members to follow their conscience
    with respect to their exercise of religion but must balance that
    against the impact to mission and readiness.
        Vaccination in the military has been a long-standing requirement
    necessary for the protection and readiness of the force. The Department
    must weigh an individual's right to follow their belief and our ability
    to accommodate that against the impact to the mission to ensure we are
    prepared to support and defend that very same right for the American
    people as a whole. In his January 10, 2023 vaccine mandate rescission
    memo, the Secretary of Defense expressly stated that religious liberty
    is a foundational principle of enduring importance in America . . .
    that Service members have the right to observe the tenets of their
    religion or to observe no religion at all . . . and that Components
    shall continue to apply the uniform standards set forth in DOD
    Instruction 1300.17, ``Religious Liberty in the Military Services.''

                                      [all]