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


                                   
                         [H.A.S.C. No. 118-78]

                       MILITARY DEPARTMENT PERSONNEL 
                         CHIEFS: PERSONNEL POSTURE

                               __________

                                HEARING

                               BEFORE THE

                   SUBCOMMITTEE ON MILITARY PERSONNEL

                                 OF THE

                      COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES

                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                    ONE HUNDRED EIGHTEENTH CONGRESS

                             SECOND SESSION

                               __________

                              HEARING HELD

                             APRIL 17, 2024


                                     
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]


                                __________

                   U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE                    
56-396                      WASHINGTON : 2025                  
          
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------     

                   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

               Hannah Kaufman, 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.............................     2

                               WITNESSES

Cheeseman, VADM Rick, USN, Chief of Navy Personnel, U.S. Navy....     4
Glynn, LtGen James F., USMC, Deputy Commandant for Manpower and 
  Reserve Affairs, U.S. Marine Corps.............................     5
Kelley, Ms., Deputy Chief of Space Operations for Human Capital, 
  U.S. Space Force...............................................     7
Miller, Lt Gen Caroline M., USAF, Deputy Chief of Staff for 
  Manpower, Personnel and Services, U.S. Air Force...............     7
Stitt, LTG Douglas F., USA, Deputy Chief of Staff, U.S. Army.....     3

                                APPENDIX

Prepared Statements:

    Banks, Hon...................................................    33
    Cheeseman, VADM Rick.........................................    62
    Glynn, LtGen James F.........................................    69
    Kelley, Ms...................................................    83
    Kim, Hon.....................................................    44
    Miller, Lt Gen Caroline M....................................    91
    Stitt, LTG Douglas F.........................................    46

Documents Submitted for the Record:

    [There were no Documents submitted.]

Witness Responses to Questions Asked During the Hearing:

    Ms. Tokuda...................................................   107

Questions Submitted by Members Post Hearing:

    Mr. Finstad..................................................   116
    Mr. Waltz....................................................   115
        MILITARY DEPARTMENT PERSONNEL CHIEFS: PERSONNEL POSTURE

                              ----------                              

                  House of Representatives,
                       Committee on Armed Services,
                        Subcommittee on Military Personnel,
                         Washington, DC, Wednesday, April 17, 2024.
    The subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 3:28 p.m., in 
room 2118, 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. Today's hearing is focused on the 
personnel policymakers who are charged with developing the 
policies, guidance, and programs that affect recruiting, 
accessions, assignments, benefits, career progression, and so 
much more.
    And it is no small secret that policies, especially 
personnel policies, drive military culture. Strategic leaders 
in their efforts to form a shared belief system risk 
substituting continuous oversight with policy and guidance on 
how to think, feel, and behave. And some of the most culturally 
transformative guidance and policies in the military Services 
over the last decade have been in the personnel arena. Most 
notably, diversity, equity, and inclusion.
    For more than 10 years, former President Obama and 
President Biden have issued executive orders establishing a 
coordinated government-wide initiative to promote diversity and 
inclusion. Navigating these policies is no small task, 
especially considering the military personnel system that you 
are tasked with running is supposed to be based on merit not 
social engineering.
    I am concerned that policies you must implement not only 
contradict the military culture necessary to ensure an 
effective fighting force but that the culture upheaval this 
administration is pushing on the Department of Defense [DOD] 
and on the military Services may continue to lead to recruiting 
and retention problems.
    For example, Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion [DEI]. It is 
no secret that the backlash to DEI policies has been very 
strong. Last week Axios quoted Johnny Taylor, the president of 
Society for Human Resource Management, "The backlash to DEI is 
real, and I mean in ways that I have actually never seen it 
before." And yet even as Americans have pushed back, the 
Department of Defense continues to focus on DEI.
    This has an impact on recruiting and retention. This has an 
impact on potential servicemembers seeing their future success 
as dependent on their race or gender, not merit. We are going 
to end our recruiting crisis by chipping away at merit-based 
personnel actions with requirements and directives to take -- I 
am sorry. We are not going to end our recruiting crisis by 
chipping away at merit-based personnel actions with 
requirements and directives to take, for example, gender into 
consideration.
    As Lieutenant General Burt advocated for when addressing 
state Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, and Queer [LGBTQ] 
laws, "If the good match for a job does not feel safe being 
themselves and performing at their highest potential at a given 
location, or if their family could be denied critical health 
care due to the laws in that state, I am compelled to consider 
a different candidate and perhaps less qualified."
    The bottom line is that I am concerned. Especially that 
this administration and the military Services are dismissing 
the cultural changes that these personnel policies are forcing 
on the military without considering their effects on 
recruiting. It may just be a correlation that recruiting has 
struggled since the focus on DEI as a national security 
priority. But I am deeply skeptical of that. This needs to be 
investigated.
    But now I want to thank our witnesses for being here today. 
Lieutenant General Douglas Stitt of the U.S. Army, Vice Admiral 
Richard Cheeseman, Jr., Deputy Chief of Naval Operations for 
Personnel, Lieutenant General Caroline Miller, with the Air 
Force, Lieutenant General James Glynn with the U.S. Marine 
Corps, and Katharine Kelley, the Deputy Chief of Space 
Operations for Human Capital.
    Before hearing from our witnesses, let me offer Ranking 
Member Kim an opportunity to make any opening remarks.
    [The prepared statement of Mr. Banks can be found in the 
Appendix on page 33.]

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

    Mr. Kim. Thank you, Chairman. Thank you all for joining. 
Without Soldiers, Sailors, Marines, Airmen, and Guardians, we 
couldn't man military weapons systems, deliver humanitarian 
assistance or effectively respond to security challenges around 
the globe.
    I have read your testimonies. And there is no doubt you are 
all concerned about a number of issues, including young 
people's decreasing propensity to serve, their lack of 
connection to the value of military service and that affects, 
also, the changing recruitment landscape that is out there that 
the Chairman and I have been grappling with the rest of the 
members on this committee.
    I share these concerns and would add that this is why I 
support taking the steps necessary to widen the pool of 
applicants we can draw from for all our all-volunteer force. I 
am encouraged by the prep courses that the Army and Navy have 
established to help potential recruits overcome physical 
fitness barriers into service and meet or exceed service in 
Department of Defense physical requirements.
    I am encouraged by how the Services are employing 
innovative tools to increase the impact and effectiveness of 
the recruiter force from the Army's creation of a recruiter 
military career track to ensure that those who serve as first 
line ambassadors in schools and communities across the country 
are well-prepared, to the Navy's recruiting operation center, 
which now monitors recruiting efforts in real-time, and the Air 
Force's barriers to service review of internal policies, which 
resulted in an additional 6,800 people being eligible to serve 
as Airmen.
    These are just a few examples of how you are all trying to 
think out of the box to encourage military service among our 
youth.
    Another important factor is ensuring we have the force we 
need is to pay attention to the quality of life needs of 
servicemembers and their families. I am excited that myself and 
many others on this subcommittee have been a part of the 
Quality of Life Panel that released its report and 
recommendations last week.
    By focusing our efforts on solutions to address pay and 
compensation, we will make sure servicemembers and their 
families have enough money to put food on the table.
    I also often hear from many servicemembers in my district 
who are stationed at Joint Base McGuire-Dix-Lakehurst about how 
they struggle to get access to the medical and child care that 
they need.
    These are issues that I know my colleagues on the other 
side of the aisle can agree need to be addressed. As I have 
said before, we ask our servicemembers to be willing to make 
the ultimate sacrifice, which they voluntarily do day in and 
day out, which means that we owe it to them and their families 
to do everything we can to ensure that they have all that they 
need when they need it.
    Mr. Chairman, thank you for having this hearing today so we 
can discuss many of the important issues of personnel policies 
on the lives of our servicemembers. And 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 44.]
    Mr. Banks. Thank you, Ranking Member Kim. Each witness will 
have the opportunity to present his or her testimony and each 
member will have an opportunity to question the witnesses for 
five minutes.
    We respectfully ask the witnesses to summarize their 
testimony in three minutes or less. Your written comments and 
statements will be made part of the hearing record. With that, 
Lieutenant General Stitt, you may make your opening statement.

 STATEMENT OF LIEUTENANT GENERAL DOUGLAS F. STITT, USA, DEPUTY 
                   CHIEF OF STAFF, 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 
Soldiers and civilians of the United States Army.
    I submitted a statement for the record and want to 
highlight a few points from it now.
    The United States Army is amidst a fundamental 
transformation. We are adapting and changing capabilities, 
force structure, and our accessions enterprise. These 
collective efforts combine to enable ready combat formations 
while ensuring the care of our people and their quality of life 
is commensurate with their service.
    The Army senior leadership directed fundamental changes to 
improve the effectiveness of our accessions formations in the 
face of this challenging recruiting environment. These 
transformative efforts include enhancements of our recruiting 
workforce, engaging across the totality of the labor market, 
and a streamlined reporting structure. Compared to the same 
point last year, we are ahead in our accessions mission, and 
the Army is on pace to meet its fiscal year 2024 end strength 
of 445,000 in the active component.
    The Army remains a great place to serve, as demonstrated by 
our historically high retention rates. In fiscal year 2023, the 
Army achieved 102 percent of its retention mission. And we 
remain on glide path to exceed our retention mission in 2024.
    We remain focused on critical programs that get upstream 
and prevent harmful behaviors from entering our formations. Our 
civilian workforce is a readiness multiplier across the total 
Army. And our investments in their capabilities are crucial for 
meeting the needs of the Army of the future.
    All of these efforts contribute to Army readiness and are 
vital for retaining our Soldiers, civilians, and their 
families.
    For our Army families, we programmed $1.6 billion across 
fiscal years 2024 to 2028 to improve the Army family housing 
inventory. For unaccompanied Soldiers, we invested over $2.1 
billion annually in the construction, sustainment, restoration, 
and modernization across fiscal years 2025 to 2029 for our 
barracks.
    With congressional support, we will keep the Army on a 
sustainable strategic path as we transform for the future. We 
will deliver ready combat formations with advanced capabilities 
to defend our nation and its interest.
    We understand the critical importance of preserving the 
all-volunteer force. We will continue investments in the 
quality of life for our Soldiers, civilians, and their 
families. We will maintain and build cohesive teams and foster 
climates of trust grounded in our shared Army values.
    Chairman Banks, Ranking Member Kim, members of this 
committee, I thank you for your generous and unwavering support 
for our talented Soldiers, civilian professionals, 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 46.]
    Mr. Banks. Thank you.
    Vice Admiral Cheeseman.

 STATEMENT OF VICE ADMIRAL RICK CHEESEMAN, USN, CHIEF OF NAVAL 
                      PERSONNEL, U.S. NAVY

    Admiral Cheeseman. Good afternoon, Chairman Banks, Ranking 
Member Kim, and distinguished subcommittee members. Thank you 
for the opportunity to appear before you today.
    I am honored to be here to serve and represent the Sailors 
of our United States Navy, a high quality, motivated workforce 
comprised of the best America has to offer.
    The Navy budget request for fiscal year 2025 fund holistic 
efforts to support our warfighters and the foundation that 
supports them. It prioritizes our people with increases in 
military pay and basic allowances and additional funds for 
recruiting and retention bonuses.
    The budget also prioritizes several quality of life in 
service initiatives, including tools and education for our 
leadership specifically to address mental health, suicide and 
other harmful behaviors that build upon quality of service 
investments from the fiscal year 2024 appropriation.
    And while I am grateful for your continued support of our 
Sailors and their families, I must stress that our Navy remains 
most lethal and effective when we are able to execute under a 
full year budget.
    We remain in a very challenging recruiting environment. Our 
current projected miss is 6,700 against a 40,600 sailor 
mission, which is significantly better than what we anticipated 
at the beginning of the fiscal year. And I remain optimistic 
that investments in marketing and data analytics will show 
additional progress.
    As we position ourselves for success in the coming year, I 
look forward to sharing our continuous performance improvement.
    With recruiting challenges, there is a need for a greater 
retention. I appreciate your steadfast support in funding 
Sailor Special Incentive Pay and Bonuses, which are vital to 
targeting complex skill sets. These monetary incentives, 
coupled with several other initiatives, have helped us maintain 
our historically healthy retention levels.
    Last month, we rolled out Culture of Excellence 2.0, which 
focuses on building great people, great leaders, and great 
teams and prepares our warfighters to dominate in combat, 
innovate and solve hard problems, and prevent harmful 
behaviors.
    It simplifies, streamlines, and aligns several programs and 
concepts into an actionable approach for building great culture 
while providing tools for Commanders to better understand and 
act on the needs of their people.
    Our men and women of the United States Navy Active, 
Reserve, and civilian, along with their families, give our Navy 
the decisive edge. We must build strong warfighting teams, 
recruit, and retain talented people from all of America, 
provide them world class training and education and ensure they 
are prepared for when their Navy story ends, whether it be a 
single enlistment or a full career.
    You and every American can be proud of your Sailors and 
their families. I appreciate your continued support, and I look 
forward to your questions.
    [The prepared statement of Admiral Cheeseman can be found 
in the Appendix on page 62.]
    Mr. Banks. Thank you.
    Lieutenant General Glynn.

 STATEMENT OF LIEUTENANT GENERAL JAMES F. GLYNN, USMC, DEPUTY 
  COMMANDANT FOR MANPOWER & RESERVE AFFAIRS, U.S. MARINE CORPS

    General Glynn. Chairman Banks, Ranking Member Kim, and 
distinguished members of the subcommittee. It is my privilege 
to appear before you along with Sergeant Major Jake Rife to 
provide an overview of your Marine Corps through the lens of 
its personnel.
    Your Marine Corps and your Marines remain strong. Despite 
headwinds, we met the recruiting and retention missions for 
last year and expect to do so again this year. We have done so 
while maintaining top quality, something on which we will never 
compromise.
    Rest assured the caliber of our Marines directly 
contributes to the warfighting capability and readiness of the 
United States Marine Corps.
    Despite our successes, recruiting still presents 
challenges, including a shrinking pool of eligible youth who 
are increasingly unfamiliar with military service.
    To counter these trends, we are modernizing how we recruit 
and are working to increase access to schools. We ask for your 
continued support of these efforts and also to continue to 
resource our vital advertising efforts.
    In short, we must collectively ensure the health of our 
all-volunteer force and the strategic advantage it provides, 
talent, capability, and warfighting excellence.
    I am pleased to report that we continue to retain Marines 
at a historic pace, both in number and in quality. It 
reinforces that once an individual becomes a Marine, they 
desire to remain a Marine. And the desire for continued service 
speaks to our ethos.
    As we listen to Marines, they explain that being part of a 
team, accomplishing the mission, taking care of one another, 
and serving something bigger than themselves is what is 
motivating to continue in uniform. It also demonstrates that 
Marines believe in the leaders and processes that assign, 
promote, and award in a fair and transparent manner.
    Our talent management efforts to date remain foundational 
to force design and the future success of our Corps. They are 
helping us maximize the number of fully trained, qualified, 
experienced, and deployable Marines in the operational forces. 
And the overarching goal remains to increase Marine Corps 
warfighting capability and sustain our ability, really our 
responsibility, to be the nation's premier expeditionary force 
in readiness.
    And to that end, as we meet this afternoon, more than 
30,000 Marines are forward deployed or forward stationed with 
their families prepared to respond should that call come.
    Warfighting readiness is built on trust, including trust in 
the Marine Corps support of families. Family readiness for us 
is quite simply readiness. We are thankful for the attention 
you and the Quality of Life Panel have given to important 
policies and programs from child care, health care, housing, 
spouse employment or compensation. These are things that matter 
to Marines, to our families, and to me.
    We are leaning in with equal vigor in areas such as 
preventing destructive behaviors and increasing resilience 
through implementation of the Marine Corps Total Fitness 
Strategy. And I look forward to our dialogue on these topics as 
we continue to provide Marines with the highest quality of 
life.
    Again, it is my honor to represent the 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 69.]
    Mr. Banks. We understand that Lieutenant General Miller is 
not feeling well, and she has submitted her opening statement 
of the record. All members already have a copy of that. So we 
will move on to Ms. Kelley.
    [The prepared statement of General Miller can be found in 
the Appendix on page 91.]

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

    Ms. Kelley. Chairman Banks, Ranking Member Kim, 
distinguished members of the subcommittee, thank you for the 
opportunity to appear before you today representing the over 
14,000 uniformed and civilian Guardians of your Space Force.
    Our military and our nation's modern way of life depends on 
your Space Force successfully securing our national interests 
in, from, and to space.
    And while advanced technology is a vital component or our 
capabilities, our Guardians are the foundation of our ability 
to maintain freedom of action in space.
    Building and maintaining this foundation starts with 
winning the fight for talent in an era where opportunities to 
work in the growing space economy are expanding at an 
unprecedented pace. The Space Force must be seen as an employer 
of choice.
    We need to offer competitive pay and benefits compelling, 
career paths, and strong support for spouses and families. We 
must attract the talent we need through these mechanisms. And 
we must ensure our target recruitment population know about 
these initiatives through strong branding and talent 
acquisition efforts. But our work does not stop with attracting 
this talent. We must continue to focus on keeping the trained 
and experienced Guardians we have invested in and depend on.
    Thanks for your strong partnership, we continue to make 
progress serving as a pathfinder in modernizing the 
Department's approach to talent management, starting with 
enhanced space education.
    For example, we are establishing a refreshed Office of 
Training course, which will expose new Officers to the full 
spectrum of our space mission sets before they arrive at their 
first duty station.
    We have also partnered with some of our nation's top 
universities to provide new models of intermediate and advanced 
professional education for both uniformed and civilian 
Guardians.
    We are revamping our performance assessment and leadership 
selection process, drawing best practices from both inside and 
outside the Department to build high performing teams and 
effective leaders.
    Perhaps most importantly with your tremendous support, we 
are working to build a first of its kind flexible military 
service model as envisioned in the recently passed Space Force 
Personnel Management Act. This important legislation will 
enhance career flexibility while allowing us to retain 
invaluable technical talent that is so vital to the Space Force 
mission.
    We are doing all these things and much more not just to 
take care of Guardians and their families because it is the 
right thing to do, and it certainly is, but because taking care 
of Guardians is required to win.
    Warfighting success in space starts not with technology on 
orbit, but with the people who develop it, launch it, operate 
it, sustain, and exploit it in defense of our nation. Your 
support enables our Guardians to stand ready to face any 
challenge in the space domain.
    Thank you for the opportunity to be here today and to 
represent. And I look forward to your questions.
    [The prepared statement of Ms. Kelley can be found in the 
Appendix on page 83.]
    Mr. Banks. I want to thank all of our witnesses for your 
opening statements. I will begin with questions and yield 
myself five minutes.
    Last year, the White House objected to a provision that I 
introduced in the National Defense Authorization Act [NDAA] 
based on merit and requiring all the branches to maintain merit 
in accessions and promotions and require the military to base 
promotion decisions specifically on who is the best candidate 
for the job regardless of their race, inferring that somehow 
merit contradicted DOD's strategic advantage of drawing from a 
diverse group of people is what the administration responded 
when they opposed my amendment.
    My question for all of you is this. Do any of your 
personnel policies permit consideration of race or gender in 
promotion decisions? And we will start with Lieutenant General 
Stitt.
    General Stitt. Chairman Banks, we approach promotion and 
selection from merit looking at the whole of the candidate 
coming before any promotion or selection board. We do not set 
demographic quotas in our sessions, promotions, or selection.
    Mr. Banks. So you don't consideration of race or gender in 
promotion decisions?
    General Stitt. Our promotion and selection considerations 
are based upon the merit of the individual coming before that 
respective promotion or election board.
    Mr. Banks. Admiral Cheeseman?
    Admiral Cheeseman. Chairman Banks, thanks for the question. 
Race and gender are not part of the merit-based decision for 
promotion. It is about being best and most fully qualified.
    Mr. Banks. Lieutenant General Glynn?
    General Glynn. Likewise, Chairman Banks, best and fully 
qualified status.
    Mr. Banks. Lieutenant General Miller?
    General Miller. Same for the Air Force.
    Mr. Banks. And Ms. Kelley?
    Ms. Kelley. And the Space Force, sir.
    Mr. Banks. Do you think that considering merit alone in 
promotion decisions would harm the Department's lethality? We 
will begin with you, Lieutenant General Stitt.
    General Stitt. Chairman Banks, utilizing our merit-based 
promotion system, I believe we have the best land force in the 
world.
    Admiral Cheeseman. Sir, we are looking to keep every 
talented individual, and it is based on merit.
    General Glynn. Chairman, I opened with comments on 
warfighting readiness and lethality. That is our focus and that 
is what our system emphasizes.
    General Miller. It is the same in the Air Force. We need 
the best and the brightest based on merit.
    Ms. Kelley. Sir, it's the same for the Space Force, merit-
based to develop the best Guardians possible.
    Mr. Banks. Do you think that considering merit alone in 
promotion decisions would harm -- I am sorry. I just asked you 
that. Okay. My last question on that note, now that 
universities are prohibited from engaging in affirmative 
action, are Officers who joined your Services through Reserve 
Officers' Training Corps [ROTC] or Officers Candidate School 
[OCS] less qualified than those who came through ROTC and OCS 
before the affirmative action ban? Simply yes or no.
    General Stitt. We utilize a merit-based selection and 
assessment for applicants coming into both ROTC and the Officer 
Candidate School.Admiral Cheeseman. No, sir.
    General Glynn. I don't see how they are affected by it at 
this point.
    General Miller. No, sir.
    Ms. Kelley. Not for the Space Force.
    Mr. Banks. Okay. What policies have you implemented or 
changed to address overall what has been a very challenging 
recruiting year for each of your Services?
    General Stitt. Chairman Banks, the challenges that we face 
today didn't happen overnight. They won't be fixed overnight. 
But the United States Army Recruiting Command has aggressively 
transformed looking at considering the totality of the labor 
force, not just focusing on high school graduates. We have 
recently created a new Warrant Officer specialty of 420-T[AE1], 
which is a Warrant Officer who is focused on the technical and 
procedural aspects of our recruiting.
    We are creating a new military occupational specialty 
within our Enlisted Corps, Military Occupational Specialty 
[MOS]-420-T to serve as a professional recruiter. Recruiting 
command has adjusted their training and intake to better 
upskill and reskill our recruiting workforce to operate within 
this challenging recruiting environment.
    We are piloting and innovating at scale across our 
recruiting stations around the globe to look at those stations 
where we are seeing small gains. How could those small gains be 
brought forward into a brigade and potentially across the 
command? So a variety of efforts.
    Mr. Banks. I will come back to the rest later. I only have 
a few seconds left. And I want to ask the Vice Admiral a quick 
question.
    The Navy's Task Force 1 Report claims that diverse 
organizations perform better on the findings from a 2015 
McKinsey study. Do you recall that?
    Admiral Cheeseman. Yes, sir. I am aware of that study.
    Mr. Banks. Recently that study has been completely 
debunked. Many sources have debunked the study. Have you gone 
back to correct the findings of the McKinsey study and divert 
from relying on it to justify DEI in the United States Navy?
    Admiral Cheeseman. Sir, I am aware of the Econ Watch report 
that you are referring to. That is a recent report. The Navy is 
a learning organization. So we will certainly review that 
report and compare it to the McKinsey Report. It is important 
to note that in the Task Force One Navy Report, there was 
another reference from the National Academy of Sciences that 
talked about something very similar in a little bit different 
respect.
    But I think it is important to note overall as far as the 
Navy's program goes that it is not about diversity for 
diversity's sake. As we have just talked about, it is about a 
meritocracy. It is about the best and most fully qualified. And 
we have created a program where, you know, we want to make sure 
that all of our Sailors and all of our future Sailors 
understand that they can succeed in the Navy, and they have 
access to the same opportunity.
    Mr. Banks. Ranking Member Kim?
    Mr. Kim. Yes, thank you, Mr. Chair. While your service's 
needs are each different, recruiting challenges remain a top 
area of concern for all of you. I understand the department is 
piloting some changes on how to look at some medical conditions 
and whether they impact a person's ability to serve.
    When it comes to medical accession standards with regard to 
recruitment efforts, do you think that they should be 
modernized to consider advances in the management of chronic 
conditions that may not necessarily impact the ability to 
deploy? I just wanted to get your thoughts on that. Maybe we 
will start with you, Lieutenant General.
    General Stitt. Ranking Member Kim, we, the Army, 
participate along with the other Services and the DOD 
accessions military workgroup where we provide recommendations 
and review applicable Department of Defense instructions on 
medical accession standards.
    Admiral Cheeseman. Sir, thanks for that question. Certainly 
the Navy is all for any accession standards that -- you know, 
any review of an accession standard that, you know, allows us 
to bring somebody to boot camp, have them successfully complete 
that boot camp, and their first tour. So we are actively 
involved in those groups. We are looking to assess each 
standard, you know, case by case and look forward to continued 
development.
    Mr. Kim. Okay. Great.
    General Glynn. Congressman, I would affirm in a similar 
manner anything that in the modern era with what we know about 
medicine and how it -- what the long-term impacts on someone's 
ability to serve and deploy in the name of warfighting and 
readiness. If we can modify those standards and adapt them, and 
the Department looks at it regularly and we have the 
opportunity to submit those kinds of recommendations, we 
continue to support the modernization of it along with the 
systems that support them.
    Mr. Kim. Okay. Great. Lieutenant General Miller, Ms. 
Kelley, are you on a similar page like the others?
    General Miller. Yes, yes, Congressman, we are.Ms. Kelley. I 
am as well. The Space Force is uniquely positioned to test some 
of this as well based on a little bit of a different service 
model that we have so.
    Mr. Kim. That's interesting.
    Ms. Kelley. So we are certainly in support of the larger 
efforts as well.
    Mr. Kim. I appreciate your willingness to think through 
this and figure out, again, how we can just continue to adapt 
to this.
    Another aspect that has come out in conversations here with 
the subcommittee, when the Services Senior Enlisted leaders 
have publicly advocated for significant military pay raise, 
especially amongst Junior Enlisted servicemembers, I wanted to 
get your thoughts on this. Do you agree with that assessment? 
Are there other compensation policies that should be re-
examined? Maybe we'll start from right to left this time 
around.
    Ms. Kelley. Yes, thank you. The Space Force is certainly 
very much supportive of the look at what we can do for pay, 
especially for Junior Enlisted. We certainly are very 
appreciative of some of the feedback and the efforts that went 
into the quality of life report. And we are going to continue 
to partner with both Congress and inside the department to 
figure out where we go next.
    The piece that I think is also very important is that we 
are cognizant of and actively using the existing pay 
authorities that Congress has already given us. And I think 
from a Space Force perspective because of so many unique skill 
sets that we have, we are taking advantage of those today. And 
we look forward to the continued dialogue on where this goes, 
and we certainly want to be part of that conversation.
    Mr. Kim. All right. Thank you.
    General Miller. Yeah, I will agree with Ms. Kelley that, 
you know, looking at how to better make sure that our Airmen 
and their families are taken care of, we are 100 percent all 
in. The challenge that we have, of course, is the Military 
Personnel Appropriations [MILPERS approps]. And so, you know, 
it is tight right now. It is not going to get any better. So we 
are going to have to have the appropriations to go with that 
but fully support that.
    The only other potential concern we have is, you know, 
compression. If we are going to -- you know, how that is going 
to impact the higher ranks. So I think it is a whole looking at 
everything. But any pay and benefits that we can do to support 
our Airmen and their families, we are all in. Thank you.
    Mr. Kim. Message received back to us. I mean, we know we 
need to be part of this equation as well and, you know, wanted 
to get your thoughts on this.
    I just wanted to end with one last question particular to 
Vice Admiral Cheeseman. You mirrored your Future Sailor Program 
after the Army's. What do you think is the most important 
lesson learned since creating that program?
    Admiral Cheeseman. Yes, sir. Thanks for the question. For 
us, the physical side, we have seen a lot of benefits. We are a 
little bit behind on the academic side relative to where the 
Army is. They got a fresh start before we stood up.
    Where we are seeing benefit is when we have representation 
from the Navy in the classroom. Future Sailors want to learn 
from other Sailors. So it is not just about going out and 
getting contractors to maybe be your instructors versus being 
instructors. We see real benefit in using other Sailors, other 
people in the Navy that can talk to them not just about 
academic progress, but life in the Navy. We are seeing good 
benefits from that, sir.
    Mr. Kim. Okay, great. Thank you. Chairman, I yield back.
    Mr. Banks. Thank you. Representative Gaetz?
    Mr. Gaetz. Quality is down. Quantity is down. But there was 
a bright spot I noticed in recruiting. We had Academy Nights 
recently in my district. And a new question rose to the top 
that I hadn't really heard in a lot of previous years.
    So many students came to me and said Congressman, which of 
these academies should I go to if I want to be in the Space 
Force? And I think we have really ignited a sense of 
imagination and interest in the Space Force. How long until I 
am able to offer these students a great Space Academy to 
attend?
    Ms. Kelley. Congressman, thank you so much for that 
question. We are certainly seeing a lot of interest in our own 
data.
    We don't have a strategy right now that says stand up our 
own academy. We are leveraging the Air Force at the moment. But 
I really appreciate the comment about the interest that is out 
there. And I will take that back.
    Mr. Gaetz. Yeah, I think we should devise a plan to at 
least see what metrics or when that might be necessary and to 
plan for it. And what we have learned particularly about this 
generation is that there has got to be a real interest in that 
particular mission, that particular thing, not just the overall 
brand. And so that is why I think it would be helpful.
    I want to ask you some questions, General Glynn. What does 
it cost us to have a Marine Corps?
    General Glynn. You mean the overall --
    Mr. Gaetz. Yeah, just ballpark.
    General Glynn. Just over $50 billion a year.
    Mr. Gaetz. Right. And how much of that do you manage in 
your portfolio?
    General Glynn. It is just about -- I am trying to do math 
in my head here. When you divide it, it is about $4 or $5 
billion a year.
    Mr. Gaetz. Okay. And what if we doubled it, what you were -
- your portfolio? What if I gave you $2 for every dollar you 
get now. What would be like some stuff you could do?
    General Glynn. There is a host of --
    Mr. Gaetz. Exciting, isn't it?
    General Glynn. -- investments in the people that, yeah, I 
mean --
    Mr. Gaetz. Your probably weren't expecting that question 
from me.
    General Glynn. It is not an offer I get very frequently.
    Mr. Gaetz. Right. But what is interesting is it is like the 
offer we have made to Ukraine is actually more than the cost of 
the United States Marine Corps. In this supplemental that we 
are about to vote on, there is $61 billion for Ukraine, and it 
is about $50 billion to have a Marine Corps.
    So we could double our investment in the Marine Corps or we 
could vote for the supplemental. And I am just going through 
it. And there is stuff here that is really insulting.
    The $300 million for the anti-narcotics efforts in Ukraine. 
So we are about to proceed onto a bill that does nothing to 
protect Americans from the narcotics [narcos] in Mexico and the 
Northern Triangle and in this country. But we got $300 million 
to go fight the narcos in Ukraine. And it doesn't end there.
    Two hundred fifty million for the International Development 
Association. Now, I did not know what that was, but I knew it 
probably wasn't good. It turns out it is an arm of the World 
Bank. We are $34 trillion in debt. We are on a glide path to 
$50 trillion in debt, and we are borrowing money from China to 
give it to the World Bank.
    And then I looked at where this money got disbursed. And it 
is places like Niger. Niger where we have Air Force, and we 
have Army servicemembers who are not getting their medicine, 
who are not able to get their troop rotations, who are not able 
to get their mail because there are not diplomatic overflights 
allowed so that we can care for our own servicemembers.
    So in a bit, we will hear many of our colleagues stand up 
and talk about how important it is to stand with our allies. 
But not even all this money is going to our allies. So it is 
potentially being recycled through globalist money washing 
accounts to redistribute.
    And that is really what this is about. What this 
supplemental is about. It is about creating a massive wad of 
unaccountable American cash. And when we have had the officials 
who are the Inspectors General over this Ukraine sitting before 
us at those chairs, they cannot attest that the end use 
monitoring is done and that this equipment is not falling into 
the wrong hands.
    As a matter of fact, when we asked them those direct 
questions, they tell us, ``Oh, we have to talk to you about 
that in a classified setting'' not because the answers are 
particularly classified, but just because they are particularly 
embarrassing.
    So I am incredibly proud of what you are doing at the Space 
Force. I hope we are able to ignite more young people toward 
that interest. If I didn't say so before, the $50 billion we 
spent on the United States Marine Corps is a tremendous 
investment. I know that because we have got Marines who work in 
our office and who are about our district. And we are 
incredibly proud of them. I yield back.
    Mr. Banks. Ms. Escobar.
    Ms. Escobar. Back to the focus of our hearing. Good 
afternoon. Thank you all so much for being here. Thank you for 
your service to our country. I am excited to get to questions 
that I have about the topic at hand.
    Lieutenant General Stitt, I am deeply concerned about the 
Army's review and consideration of potential cuts to the 
Credentialing Assistance and the Tuition Assistance Program.
    Key education benefits like these programs are a core 
element of the incentives for military service, which are ever 
more important amidst a challenging recruitment and retention 
environment.
    Can you speak to the value of both the Credentialing 
Assistance and Tuition Assistance Programs? And while I know 
the Department of the Army has not yet issued decisions about 
any cuts to these programs, I really would like your input on 
how to reconcile any projected cuts in this recruiting and 
retention environment.
    General Stitt. Representative Escobar, these are, as you 
stated, highly successful programs, both the Tuition Assistance 
and the Credentialing Assistance. And they are important 
programs as we look at retaining and assessing individuals into 
our force. And that is why we need to make sure that we are 
ensuring the long-term sustainability of both of these great 
programs with left and right limits.
    Ms. Escobar. Agree. I would like to see a strategy for us, 
and Congress needs to focus on this, a strategy to ensure the 
longevity and investment in these programs. Thank you so much.
    General Glynn, I really enjoyed our conversation earlier. 
And I would really love for you to expand a little bit and 
share with my colleagues a little bit about the Marine Corps 
Total Fitness Program. It was to me a great example of thinking 
through some of the challenges that our Active Duty 
servicemembers are facing and ways to address them in a 
meaningful way. So, please.
    General Glynn. Thank you for the opportunity and for your 
enthusiasm about the topic. Marine Corps Total Fitness is the 
approach that we have adopted over the course of the last year 
to take a holistic view of the wellness of Marines and frankly 
their families. And so it is the intentional integration of 
four domains; mental, spiritual, social, and physical and 
ensuring that every offering that we have doesn't just go after 
one domain but offers all four so that folks are building a 
reservoir of wellness, and they are prepared for the challenges 
of life, in particular military life.
    Our early efforts so far are very promising. And they get 
directly at many of the destructive behaviors that we have 
discussed with this subcommittee in the past.
    Ms. Escobar. Thank you so much. I think that your approach 
mirrors some of what I have seen in some of the other Branches. 
But really I am looking forward to over the long term seeing 
what impact is and how helpful it is.
    I had the opportunity to serve on the Quality of Life Panel 
that some of my colleagues here on this dais also participated 
in. And we did some really work, work that I am excited about, 
hopefully getting out of the Congress to the President's desk 
and implementing.
    But even if we do all of those things, we still have to 
take care of the individual and the challenges that each 
individual and their families face.
    What I would like to hear from some of our other witnesses 
really is how each Branch -- we have got very -- actually, we 
will hear from Lieutenant General Stitt how the Army is 
handling this same issue. I wish we had time for everyone to 
respond. This is an important topic to me.
    General Stitt. We take a similar approach with holistic 
health and fitness and working on our prevention across the 
force, going anywhere from providing at the lowest level, 
linking Soldiers up and doing, you know, self-care wellness 
checks across the force.
    You know, at Fort Riley and in Alaska, they have mandated 
100-day wellness checks and not just with a provider, but with 
a military family life consultant. Educating and informing 
families on the resources that are available across our posts, 
camps, and stations to really just connect and ensure that our 
Soldiers understand that they have leaders in place that want 
to care for them.
    Ms. Escobar. Thank you. I am out of time. I appreciate all 
of you. I yield back.
    Mr. Banks. Representative Mills.
    Mr. Mills. Thank you so much, Mr. Chairman, and thank you 
all for being here today.
    I want to touch on a topic that I have mentioned in the 
past because it is really important for us with regards not 
just retention but ensuring that our priorities are set in the 
right way.
    As a military veteran myself, our priorities in the 
military when I was in the U.S. Army was increase lethality, 
readiness, and being properly equipped.
    I still to this day think that we should be focused on 
those three topics to ensure that we are ready for any of our 
adversarial nations regardless of the battlefield and 
regardless of the scenario.
    I want to give a special ``Oorah'' to our Marine General 
here. You guys have done an amazing job on your recruitment 
efforts to maintain not only retention but recruiting the best 
and brightest when it comes to the Marine Corps. So I want to 
thank you for that. And I hope that we can recruitment efforts 
up in the remaining Armed Service groups so that we can also 
meet those challenges and not reduce our standards as we have 
recently seen with the Navy where we are actually even waiving 
the ability for a diploma in the high school, I believe, is now 
the requirement.
    But as I talk about that, I want to get something that is 
really kind of near and dear. Does either of you across your 
Services know how many servicemembers were unconstitutionally 
pushed out of the military due to the forced Coronavirus 
[COVID] vaccine requirements? By all means, please jump right 
in.
    Ms. Kelley. For the Space Force, none.
    Admiral Cheeseman. Sir, I am concerned about the adjective 
you used with unconstitutionally so.
    Mr. Mills. It is my own opinion. But I will tell you, I 
will make it easy for your Vice Admiral. How many people were 
pushed out of the Navy due to the actual refusal of taking the 
COVID vaccination?
    Admiral Cheeseman. I believe we had 1,878 separations.
    Mr. Mills. Got you. That is challenging. Sir, General 
Stitt?
    General Stitt. The Representative knows I would like to 
take that question for the record. I don't know the exact 
number off the top of my head.
    Mr. Mills. Understood. Thank you, sir. General Glynn?
    General Glynn. Sir, we achieved a greater than 97 percent 
vaccination rate. During that period, we had about 3,700 that 
left the service.
    Mr. Mills. Now, would it shock any of you to know that 
those who had applied for religious or medical freedom 
exemptions that their entire documentation, granted, through 
the military process, through the federal government, through 
review of their actual submissions, that their requirements 
were actually being seen, adjudicated, and decisions made 
within less than five minutes of each application?
    General Miller. I would be surprised with that. That is not 
how the Air Force did it.
    Mr. Mills. The Department of Defense Inspector General 
reported on average it took less than five minutes to 
adjudicate processes, service-wide, for those who were seeking 
certain military medical or religious exemptions, which was 
shocking to me because I work in the federal government, so I 
know we are not that efficient.
    But my issue with this is that I don't think that permitted 
the necessary timeline when you think about what would actually 
have to be requested because they would have had to have gone 
to their priest to their -- whichever their religious, like, 
figure was that they were actually looking at as well as for 
maybe even in their own physician or other doctors that would 
have been able to verify these types of things.
    So I would ask that each of you look at the process or 
procedures that are being utilized to ensure that the necessary 
adjudication is actually being done for those who are actually 
seeking that.
    In looking at additional information, I would like to ask 
and determine, can any of you elaborate on why anyone removed 
from the military for refusing the untested vaccine would be 
given less than honorable discharge?
    Admiral Cheeseman. Sir, I can speak for the Navy. Nobody 
that left the Navy was given anything other than an honorable 
discharge.
    Mr. Mills. They weren't given the general or a Category 3 
[AE2]for their reenlistment?
    Admiral Cheeseman. The characterization was honorable. I 
will have to take the question for the record on the 
Reenlistment Code [RE code] and get back to you.
    Mr. Mills. Because a general is still different than an 
Honorable as we all know, especially when it comes to your 
Reenlistment Status, correct?
    Admiral Cheeseman. Yes, sir, it is. But everybody who left 
the United States Navy received an honorable discharge. I will 
have to verify the RE code just to be sure.
    General Miller. For those, though that we have -- so all of 
those that left from the Air Force, we have personally 
submitted a letter to them saying, you know, gave them the 
process to come back. And of all of the ones that have come 
back, we have boarded 98. Ninety-eight have been approved to 
come back, you know, with an honorable.
    Mr. Mills. General Stitt or General Glynn, would you guys 
like to reply to that at all or?
    General Glynn. A similar process as Representative Mills. 
We followed the DOD guidance and sent individual Soldiers a 
letter instructing them how to come back, utilizing their local 
recruiter in pursuing return via the Army Board of Correction 
for Military Review.
    Mr. Mills. Well, I thank you. My time has expired. But I 
will say that one of the things that I truly believe is that 
those who, in my vision and my view, was unconstitutionally 
prejudicial by our military for these vaccines should be 
reinstated, full back pay, full benefits, and be given the 
chance to serve the United States military and not the 
President's agenda or any other. And so, with that, I yield 
back, Mr. Chair.
    Mr. Banks. Ms. Tokuda.
    Ms. Tokuda. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Based on the last reports 
we have available, fiscal year 2022, there were 8,940 reports 
of sexual assault and a prevalence rate, which you know is the 
estimate, of how many sexual assaults occurred in the military 
was at 36,000.
    When we take a look at it by different service Branches, in 
2022 Air Force saw a 13 percent increase, Navy saw a 9 percent 
increase, Marine Corps 3.6, and Army, while a decrease of 9 
percent, had a prior year's total of a massive 26 percent rise 
in reported sexual assault.
    My question for you folks today is how does sexual assault 
in your Branches at these levels undermine our overall 
readiness and quite frankly impact our ability to recruit and 
retain servicemembers? Anyone can start.
    General Stitt. Representative Tokuda, good afternoon. We 
take sexual assault very seriously and started with the Office 
of the Special Trial Counsel now that we have implemented so 
that those sexual assault cases are now being prosecuted 
through that office and then leveraging through the Department 
of Defense the integrated prevention assistance groups where we 
are facilitating at individual posts, camps, and stations a 
Commander's ability to see themselves through greater data 
collection, integration with local law enforcement, Criminal 
Investigation Division [CID] on post because every post, camp, 
and station is different and some of the risk factors around 
post, camp, or station in one location are going to be 
different than another.
    So this Integrated Prevention Advisory Group [I-PAG] 
enables that Commander to get a better understanding of their 
environment. And then that respective Commander and the 
leadership there can flex those resources and programs to meet 
those challenges.
    Ms. Tokuda. I guess I would just like a simple answer for 
that and appreciate -- we will talk about the Special Trial 
Counsels [STCs] a little bit later on. But bottom line, do you 
think sexual assault in your branch impacts your ability to be 
ready and prepared to fight when we need to and does this 
impact recruitment and retention? It can be a simple yes or no 
answer.
    General Stitt. Representative Tokuda, any behavior that 
detracts from our ability to perform our warfighting mission 
infringes upon readiness.
    Ms. Tokuda. Thank you.
    Admiral Cheeseman. Ma'am, a similar answer for the Navy. 
Absolutely, sexual assault, any harmful behavior destroys unit 
cohesion and affects the mission. Yes, ma'am.General Glynn. I 
think we all agree that sexual assault is a crime that plagues, 
you know, many organizations, and it's an issue across the 
nation, not just for uniform Services but as it directly 
contributes to the readiness of a unit.
    General Miller. I would concur with that. Additionally in 
order to defend the Constitution, we have to have trust in one 
another. And if we can't trust the individuals that are in our 
formation, it absolutely impacts readiness.
    Ms. Kelley. Ma'am, I would concur with my colleagues.
    Ms. Tokuda. Thank you. And I agree what was just said, I 
believe, by Lieutenant General Glynn there that yes, sexual 
assault plagues many organizations. But at a prevalence rate 
this high for an institution that is entrusted with the 
safeguarding of our national security, these are absolutely 
unacceptable. These absolutely impact our readiness and quite 
frankly undermine every single effort you folks have put forth 
and talked about today to recruit and retain the very best to 
defend our country, to keep our families safe.
    I know I am running short on time, but I did, first of all, 
want to commend Secretary Austin and his leadership for 
prioritizing sexual assault prevention since we have seen sadly 
such drastic increases in numbers of assault and responding by 
establishing the Office of the Special Trial Counsels.
    Earlier today, I actually had a meeting with a number of 
survivors of sexual assault who experienced sexual assault 
during their time in uniform. And they talked to me about what 
it was like to live through that experience and quite frankly 
what it has been like after and what they would like to see 
done.
    So my question really, and you can provide more answers 
later, is about how you have been able to implement these 
special trial counsels and quite frankly build up a primary 
prevention and sexual response workforce as well that is 
critical as a secondary part to try to prevent these things 
from happening.
    But given that this was a landmark moment in history in 
terms of military justice systems, now that we are few months 
in, I believe you started at the beginning of this year in 
terms of these offices becoming fully functional, operational, 
I would like to get a sense of the early impacts.
    So going through the branches, perhaps you can submit this 
later since I am running out of time, what are some earlier 
takeaways about the Offices of the Special Trial Counsel that 
are important for this committee to know? What have been the 
challenges or successes? What kind of metrics and methods are 
you using to measure the success and impact of the Office of 
the Special Trial Counsel?
    And in terms of initial caseloads, do you have sufficient 
staffing in each of your Offices of Special Trial Counsel? And 
in particular, I would like to know how we are moving more of 
those restricted reports to unrestricted reports so people can 
get the help that they need.
    [The information referred to can be found in the Appendix 
on page 107.]
    Thank you. I am out of time. I yield back, Mr. Chair.
    Mr. Banks. General Bergman.
    Mr. Bergman. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I would like to begin 
with a historical bit of data on Marine Corps budgeting. In 
1972 when the fiscal year ended on June 30, we were both 
pleased to return money to the Department of Defense from our 
Marine Corps budget but at the same time fly unnecessary flight 
hours to burn gas so we could get our allotment. So there is a 
certain dichotomy there that doesn't quite fit.
    I appreciate that we hopefully continue to set a standard 
in warfighting. And I am referring to myself as a marine here. 
But I know that we all, all of you at the table, fight the war 
in a different uniform and a different mission but with the 
same passion for our national defense and our defense of 
freedoms.
    Lieutenant General Stitt, you testified that the Army 
developed two new military occupational specialties, 420-T 
talent acquisition technician, and 42-T, talent acquisition 
specialist. And I guess the 420-T is going to be a Warrant 
Officer, did I get that right?
    General Stitt. That is correct, Representative.
    Mr. Bergman. Will they have promotion opportunities all the 
way through Chief Warrant Officer 5 [CW05]?
    General Stitt. That is correct.
    Mr. Bergman. Okay. So as you develop this talent 
acquisition team, you know, you are going to do a rigorous 
selection and training process to recruit interested young 
Americans. These folks are going to be career recruiters?
    General Stitt. That is correct.
    Mr. Bergman. Okay. So how does the Army plan to incentivize 
these competitively selected and skilled talent acquisition 
technicians and talent acquisition specialists to stay in the 
Army past an initial enlistment?
    General Stitt. Right now, we are in the developmental 
stages for MOS 42-T and with the Enlisted MOS. Within the 
Warrant Officer's specialty, we are looking at continuity pay 
that already exists within the force for our Warrant Officers 
but also looking at potential non-monetary incentives such as 
stability at a location of choice. We are still looking at all 
our options, Representative.
    Mr. Bergman. What I would like to -- just take for the 
record, as you develop the long-term incentives, because when 
you think about it, it is one thing to recruit someone, whether 
it be Officer or Enlisted, to an initial contract, it is a 
whole different set of goals, if you will, when it comes to 
Firearms Technical Assistance Project [FTAP], Select Train 
Educate Promote [STEP] towards a, you know, 20 plus year 
career.
    So I would just like to see as the Army develops just your 
metrics to make sure your incentives work. Because we can put 
them out, but if we do not then check to see if they, you know, 
are still on target, if you will, then what good were they? 
Okay.
    Lieutenant General Glynn, you stated that the Marine Corps 
made its recruiting mission in fiscal year 2023 and is 
currently on track to meet it again this fiscal year. How has 
the structure and role of the MCRC, Marine Corps Recruiting 
Command, ensured the Marine Corps makes its recruiting mission?
    General Glynn. Congressman, thanks for that question and to 
your opening comment about the money and the budget, I mean, 
you are well aware we had the first clean audit in the history 
of any military service. So we are pretty proud of knowing 
where every dollar goes to.
    In the case of MCRC, Marine Corps Recruiting Command, it 
continues to be a very adaptive and dynamic organization 
constantly looking at where it is. Our commitment remains the 
same, to be in every ZIP Code, in every state, in every 
territory of the nation but ensuring that we are located where 
we need to be to ensure that we have the messaging, and we have 
the contact with young and men and women who might be inclined, 
but are uninformed, about the future military service and the 
future of service in a Marine Corps uniform.
    Mr. Bergman. Okay. I see I got 26 seconds left. What would 
you guess the percentage of your Marines, both Officer and 
Enlisted, who are really excited about going to be recruiters 
as opposed to staying in a deployable unit?
    General Glynn. I would say it is not the majority.
    Mr. Bergman. It is small. That is right. That is okay. You 
said -- that is okay. I don't want it to be a trick question 
here.
    General Glynn. Yes, sir.
    Mr. Bergman. We need to send the best to the recruiting 
field to recruit the best so we can train them to fight. And 
with that, Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
    Mr. Banks. Representative Horsford.
    Mr. Horsford. Thank you, Chairman Banks and Ranking Member 
Kim for the hearing. My district in Nevada covers almost 50,000 
square miles. It includes both one of the fastest growing 
housing markets in the country and in rural communities.
    It is also home to Nellis Air Force Base with more than 
11,000 military members that must compete for critical services 
in a rapidly growing district and at Creech Air Force base, 
also in my district, which has 3,500 servicemembers who lack 
access to critical services at their duty location and must 
travel 100 miles a day in order to access child care, military 
housing, and health care services.
    Access to safe, secure, and affordable housing is a concern 
of many of our constituents. As recruits consider military 
service, the availability and affordability of adequate housing 
is a concern.
    Nellis Air Force Base is among the installations with the 
highest levels of unmet housing need. This time last year, that 
unmet housing need meant that young Airmen were being released 
into off base community housing after 11 months. It concerns me 
that since then the issue has only worsened with Airmen now 
being released after only eight months.
    Lieutenant General Miller, I don't have to tell you that 
eight months is very short of the Air Force's requirement of 36 
months' time in service. So I will ask you the same question I 
asked Secretary Kendall and General Allvin earlier today, but I 
want to ask you, can you speak to the importance of ensuring 
adequate housing availability for both recruitment and 
retention of military members and what is currently being done 
to address the needs of our young unaccompanied Airmen at 
installations such as Nellis?
    General Miller. Yes, Congressman, thank you. And I will 
tell you that housing is absolutely a readiness issue. It is a 
quality of life that we have to make sure that we have safe and 
quality housing.
    So at Nellis in particular, we just did a $4.5 million dorm 
renovation. We also have two projects coming up for Military 
Construction [MILCON] that are in design to do that. We are 
partnering with the community to find additional housing.
    We know that Creech is a continual challenge because of the 
distance. And so we are looking at all sorts of opportunities 
to get child care out there, do bussing. So that is a big focus 
item for us.
    Mr. Horsford. Okay. Well, at the Nellis issue and those 
investments, I am proud to have worked with this committee to 
secure. The problem is that is to replace other housing that is 
coming off.
    General Miller. Yes, sir.
    Mr. Horsford. So it is not really in addition to, it is in 
place of. And so we really need a larger commitment to housing 
in these unmet areas if we are going to address the recruitment 
and retention area issue.
    On the Creech side of the equation, I look forward to 
partnering with you. I have identified a number of 
opportunities in partnership with the local YMCA and other 
child care providers in and near Creech Air Force Base.
    Let me turn to another issue around health care, which is 
also a critical piece of the support that we need to provide to 
military members throughout their careers.
    For members at Creech Air Force Base, many Airmen must 
travel to Nellis Air Force Base, as I said, to receive 
specialty health care resulting in months long wait times and 
increased cost. Additionally, the transition of the Services' 
health care to the Defense Health Agency [DHA] has resulted in 
many members having increased concerns with their access to 
medical care.
    So to the panel, can you speak to the impact that the 
changes to the military health care system are having on our 
ability to recruit and retain top talent?
    General Stitt. Representative Horsford, I think we are in a 
very competitive environment with a nationwide shortage of 
providers. So in conjunction with the Office of our Surgeon 
General and DHA, you know, we are taking on this challenge. It 
is very serious. And we acknowledge absolutely we need to take 
care of our Soldiers and families and continue to work forward 
on this.
    Admiral Cheeseman. Sir, I travel often in my role. And this 
is, you know, darn near the number one concern I hear from 
family members. So similar to our Army counterpart, our surgeon 
general works closely with DHA. As Secretary of the Navy 
[SECNAV] testified yesterday, we are willing to take risks in 
the short term with the operational medical forces as we cover 
down with DHA to make sure we are, you know, addressing these 
things appropriately. But, you know, underinvestment and under-
execution need to be addressed, and we look forward to moving 
out together with DHA.
    Mr. Horsford. I know we are out of time. I want to thank 
our witnesses for being here. These are critically important 
issues. Thank you for your service. And I look forward to 
having my office follow-up with you. With that, I yield back.
    Mr. Banks. Representative Finstad.
    Mr. Finstad. Thank you, Chairman Banks, and thank you to 
our witnesses for your service and for being here today.
    Personnel and recruiting are dynamic issues. Today's 
generation is not like the generation of World War II. This is 
okay. As a father of seven children under the age of 20, I get 
it. And it doesn't mean that there aren't future heroes and 
noble public servants in today's youth.
    Generations change, and as they will, we must change our 
recruiting methods to ensure that military service remains a 
tangible and viable option not solely an abstract one.
    So let me be clear. Our individual servicemembers are the 
most important collective part of the U.S. military. This 
importance begins with their recruitment and continues through 
their civic engagement as veterans.
    Before we consider all the fancy gadgets within 
modernization portfolios, we must consider the former, current, 
and future groups of servicemembers that will defend the 
American way of life. Military family health and wellness 
equals enhanced military readiness. And I look forward to 
supporting the quality of life focus in the fiscal year 2025 
NDAA.
    So let's talk recruitment for a little bit here. The Air 
Force has managed to improve their recruiting situation while 
the Army and Navy continue to struggle despite no lack of 
effort.
    The Marine Corps, to its credit, appears to consistently 
make its recruiting mission. So at the risk of a cage match 
fight breaking out between all of you, I want to learn from 
this. And I want us to be able to hear the secret sauce of 
success here.
    So, Lieutenant General Miller and Lieutenant General Glynn, 
what has the Air Force done to improve its recruiting success 
and what are the tenets of the Marine Corps' success in 
recruiting?
    General Miller. Yes, Congressman, thank you. We have looked 
internally, and we looked at barriers that we were putting on 
restraining ourselves from an adequate recruiting pool. So we 
looked at things such as our tattoo policy was incredibly 
stringent. And we hadn't needed to change up until this point. 
And so we looked into that and, you know, what was reasonable.
    Additionally, our body composition was higher than it -- I 
mean, it was relatively low. So we just increased that to make 
sure that we were still maintaining DOD standards. And we 
looked at driver's license. We had restricted many career 
fields from -- because they had to have a driver's license and 
so all of those internal barriers. Not lowering standards, we 
did not lower standards. But we just made those small policy 
changes, we were able to increase our pool of applicants.
    And additionally, you know, we had a campaign, you know, 
it's the -- last year, I think, you know, if you were going to 
go into the service, you weren't going to be paid enough. You 
were going to be sexually assaulted. All of these negative 
things. We needed to change that. Because if you look at our 
retention numbers, if you come into the service, our retention 
numbers are incredibly high.
    So we have been working on all facets of that, sir.
    General Glynn. Congressman, thanks for the opportunity to 
comment on it. I wouldn't say that there is one single item 
that is, you know, the special sauce as you alluded to. But I 
would say our commitment over years first and foremost has been 
in the quality of Marine that we put out there as a 
representative of our Corps and to ensure that that individual 
is representative to the part of the nation ZIP Code, as I 
alluded to earlier, that young men and women can possibly see 
themselves in becoming a United States Marine. That would be 
the first thing.
    The second thing is, our Commandants over the years, and I 
have been on recruiting several times, have been fully 
committed to ensuring that those that volunteer, go on 
recruiting duty, and succeed are recognized, rewarded, 
promoted, you know, whatever tangible and intangible ways that 
are required. So there are clear and compelling reasons to go 
and be a recruiter and do well as a recruiter.
    The last thing I would say is that through our recruiters, 
we try to listen to young folks like the seven young folks you 
alluded to. What appeals to them? And over and over again, it 
was in my opening statement, a desire to serve something bigger 
than themselves. And so we challenge them with the opportunity 
to earn the title Marine and go on and take that unique title 
to apply in unique areas of the world and unique circumstances 
and have the memories of a lifetime is why I continue to do it.
    Mr. Finstad. That is great. And I appreciate that. And I 
will just say again, as a father of seven, clarity of mission 
is always something that is very crucial to motivating at least 
my seven. When they can firmly believe in what I am putting in 
front of them, I get amazing results. And so I appreciate 
hearing that from you.
    Maybe just -- I guess my time is up here. But I would just 
say thank you again, and I look forward to working with each 
and every one of you, specifically around recruiting and 
quality of life issues as we move to the NDAA process. Thank 
you.
    Mr. Banks. Representative Alford.
    Mr. Alford. Thank you so much, Chair and Ranking Member 
Kim, and our witnesses today for being here. As a member with 
two premier defense installations in our district, Fort Leonard 
and Whiteman Air Force Base, I care deeply about the 
servicemembers' personnel issues. And that is why I am on the 
subcommittee.
    This Congress, I was honored to sit on the Quality of Life 
Panel and sign the recommendations designed to improve the 
standard of living for our servicemembers, all of which will be 
in the National Defense Authorization Act and will pass.
    I am very excited for these. I believe the recommendation 
for a 15 percent pay raise for Junior Enlisted will be a 
significant step in the right direction, especially for 
retention efforts. But there is much that we can do in Congress 
and the Department of Defense needs to do to address the 
challenges facing our fighting force today.
    In fiscal year 2023, the Department of Defense failed to 
meet its recruiting goal by 41,000 recruits. It is a huge 
shortfall. It includes industrial base procurement lethargy and 
backlogs as well as credibly deterring hostile competitors in 
multiple regions across the globe, all sorts of factors that we 
need to act upon.
    I kind of want to have a philosophical discussion. And I 
know we are probably not in the business of theorizing. But 
Lieutenant General Stitt, I know that only 9 percent of 
America's young people right now have any interest in joining 
the military. Some military families are actually discouraging 
their children and grandchildren from joining, which is a very 
sad thing. Why do you think that is, and what is the Army doing 
to try to change that?
    General Stitt. Representative Alford, I think what we are 
seeing this year to date is great progress within recruiting. 
And we remain cautiously optimistic today that we will achieve 
our fiscal year 2024 mission of 55,000 sessions into the active 
component and have 5,000 individuals contracted into our 
delayed entry program for next year.
    We have undertaken a significant overhaul of our recruiters 
and our recruiting workforce and our recruiting structure, 
looking at who we recruit, how we recruit, and with whom are we 
doing our recruiting? And when we talk about who we recruit, we 
look at the totality of the United States labor market. Let's 
move beyond just having a conversation with a potential 
applicant who is in high school but looking at the labor force 
right now where the students in high school about 80 percent 
are graduating from high school and going on to a college or 
university or a two-year school.
    So upscaling and rescaling our recruiting workforce to not 
only engage high schoolers but engage those who have complete -
- are attending college but may not complete. And then also 
engaging others that are in the workforce today but may be 
looking for other options. How we recruit, utilizing, and 
connecting with America today and where they live in the 
digital sphere, utilizing digital job boards; LinkedIn, Indeed, 
Glassdoor, and piloting and innovating across the nation, 
starting small, learning, collecting data and then moving on, 
taking those lessons learned.
    And then with whom we are recruiting, moving away from a 
borrowed military manpower situation where we are disrupting 
cohesion and readiness to identify a sergeant of infantry to go 
serve temporarily as a recruiter but creating a 
professionalized workforce across the nation that can start to 
thin the lines and send those other non-commissioned Officers 
back in to do the jobs across the force and enhance our 
readiness.
    Mr. Alford. Missions are becoming more technical. The 
skills needed are different than they were 20, 30 years ago. Do 
you see a time, Lieutenant General Stitt, where basic training 
as we know it is no longer needed for many of the people we are 
trying to get into the military, casting a wider net to be able 
to get some of these people in to do specific jobs, not firing, 
not fighting on the front lines necessarily, but to operate 
machinery and equipment that is more technical in nature?
    General Stitt. What we are seeing right now, Representative 
Alford, particularly within the Officer Corps is utilization of 
authorities from the 2019 NDAA for direct accession and into 
the service.
    We have brought in, off the top of my head, around 16 
individuals to serve in our branches as Cyber Officers. So we 
are utilizing the authorities to go out and continue to evolve 
and adapt our recruiting.
    Mr. Alford. Thank you. I am out of time. Thank you so much 
again for being here, and I yield back.
    Mr. Banks. Representative Waltz.
    Mr. Waltz. Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you all to our 
witnesses for your service. And we are in, as I think you have 
heard loud and clear from the committee today, and I know that 
all of your service secretaries and chiefs are focused on this, 
but we are in an absolute recruiting crisis.
    And what we have here, and I don't know if you can read it, 
but this was through the end of November. It is a quarter old. 
But basically the Services were making their numbers, not Army 
or Navy. I know that we have had some improvement, Army, in 
Quarter 2[Q2] or the first quarter of this calendar year.
    But I think it is important for everybody watching, 
listening to appreciate that even if you make those numbers, 
and that is an if still, we will see. We are not digging out of 
the hole, right? I mean, we have got now the smallest Army 
since World War II.
    And so the first question I would like you to talk about, 
what does it take not just to hit the numbers, but then how do 
we dig out of that trough that we found ourselves in in the 
last two years? And keep in mind, we are stating, Mr. Chairman, 
that this Congress prevented the expulsion of another 20,000 
after going down 45,000 for a vaccine that doesn't stop the 
spread, which made it in, I think, many people's view then a 
personal health decision. So thank God we didn't go that far. 
But talk to me about how we dig out of the hole.
    What do you need to exceed to get us out in let's say the 
next three years, 2027 being pretty important since Chairman Xi 
told his military to be ready to go by then? I think we need to 
be ready to go by then. How do we dig out of the hole?
    I will go to you, General Stitt. You have got the biggest 
one to dig out of.
    General Stitt. Representative Waltz, we didn't arrive at 
these recruiting challenges overnight. We are not going to dig 
ourselves out of the hole overnight. As I just stated, our 
transformation efforts across United States Army Recruiting 
Command [USAREC], our direct support of United States Army 
Recruiting Command efforts from the totality of the Army, 
Active Duty operational formations supporting recruiting 
efforts around the country. The returns that we are seeing from 
be all you can be --
    Mr. Waltz. A great ad during March Madness by the way. I 
think you have a lot more recruits that want to jump out of 
planes and kick in doors and do bad things to bad guys 
responding to that, I hope, than the previous ads we have had, 
which I still don't know why we had those. But anyway, nice 
correction.
    General Stitt. The Coach Krzyzewski ad is showing very 
favorable returns.
    Mr. Waltz. But talk to me, I mean, just in the time I have 
remaining, we have to dig out of the last couple of years not 
just break even. So let's talk about exceeding goals to make up 
for the hole that we are in. So in three years, you have to 
have, what, 10, 15,000 on top of your current goal? Is that 
roughly right?
    General Stitt. We would estimate that we would need 
somewhere -- you know, depending on where we finish in 2024, 
2025, we would like to get us back up to around 470,000 by the 
end of the program.
    Mr. Waltz. Navy, your Chief of Naval Operations [CNO] is, I 
think, being very candid, and I appreciate it, that you are 
what, 18,000 short he just said in terms of at sea needs and 
about 4,000 short here on shore. The Army is having great 
success with a prep course pre-basic training. Talk to me about 
what Navy is doing to emulate that. And I know that sounds like 
a Go Army, Beat Navy kind of question. It is not.
    Admiral Cheeseman. No.
    Mr. Waltz. But how can we emulate success.
    Admiral Cheeseman. You know, not too proud not to, you 
know, take lessons and learn them from my Army friends.
    Mr. Waltz. Right.
    Admiral Cheeseman. Sir, to your point about the numbers. 
CNO and I share your concerns, which is why you see our 
recruiting mission for this year as 40,600. We took what we 
missed last year and added it to what we need to do this year, 
partially, because we recognize it's not just about end 
strength. It is about work requirements in the fleet that we 
need to maintain so we can build out of that trough.
    So I think you can expect us to have similar missions in 
the years to come as we build up that work requirement and 
eventually, you know, outnumber just the end strength. And I am 
going through my Navy friends and hopefully this body asking 
for more end strength to come back because that is the glide 
slope that we are on.
    So your point about numbers, we are 2,500 recruits ahead of 
where were at this time last year.
    Mr. Waltz. Mm-hmm.
    Admiral Cheeseman. And in fiscal year 2023, while did miss 
mission, we were 6,000 recruits better than we were the year 
before. So we are trending in the right direction.
    Mr. Waltz. Mr. Chairman, if I could just ask one more. I 
think I am the end. General Miller, I asked this question of 
your secretary. You are the only service that requested with a 
budget request a decline in junior ROTC. I think we would all 
agree, and your Service chiefs have all agreed, not only do you 
get a recruit out of high school ROTC, you get a better 
citizen. And, oh, by the way, Senator Wicker and I worked to 
increase the authorization up to 4,000. So why the decline if 
we are in the midst of a recruiting crisis?
    General Miller. I don't know why the decline in the Junior 
ROTC. But I would say that as a citizens program, I think they 
are fantastic because they treat --
    Mr. Waltz. And we are also -- thank you. I appreciate that 
on the record. We are also working to decrease the minimum 
numbers.
    General Miller. That is right.
    Mr. Waltz. We have Junior ROTC departments in high schools, 
most of them in minority parts of the country, minority/
majority high schools with say 96, 97 cadets. But the 
requirement is 100.
    General Miller. Right.
    Mr. Waltz. So they are on a probation list. We are working 
to reduce that. Is there anyone that would oppose that? Okay. I 
will take that as a no.
    General Stitt. No, sir.
    General Miller. No, sir.
    Mr. Waltz. Okay. No, great.
    General Miller. Mm-hmm.
    Mr. Waltz. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for the 
indulgence.
    Mr. Banks. I want to thank all of our witnesses again for 
your service and for being here with us today to talk about 
these important issues.
    I hope that you will take back some of the issues that we 
discussed today to your Service Chiefs and discuss them, talk 
about concrete actions that we need to take to mitigate the 
problems that we face when it comes to recruitment and other 
issues.
    I appreciate all of you being here today. With no further 
business, the subcommittee stands adjourned.
    [Whereupon, at 4:49 p.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.]

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

                            A P P E N D I X

                             April 17, 2024

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


              PREPARED STATEMENTS SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD

                             April 17, 2024

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

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


              WITNESS RESPONSES TO QUESTIONS ASKED DURING

                              THE HEARING

                             April 17, 2024

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

      

              RESPONSE TO QUESTION SUBMITTED BY MS. TOKUDA

    General Stitt. The Army implemented the military justice reform 
requirements, including the Office of Special Trial Counsel (OSTC), 
through structural change focusing on independence, building expertise, 
and preserving the Army's commitment to good order and discipline. 
Through targeted personnel growth, the Army is increasing expertise in 
special victim litigation, holding offenders accountable, and providing 
transparency for victims as cases progress through the military justice 
system. The OSTC utilizes a three-tiered structure, with:
    (1) a headquarters element in the National Capitol Region, (2) 
eight circuits, and (3) teams of special trial counsel and support 
personnel located at 28 installations with world-wide coverage. The 
organization includes approximately 160 personnel, including 63 
certified special trial counsel. The Sexual Harassment/Assault Response 
and Prevention (SHARP) Program is actively incorporating reforms 
derived from the 90-Day-Independent Review Commission on Sexual Assault 
in the Military Services.
    As part of these efforts, the Army is introducing SHARP Prevention 
Specialists at each installation for the first time since the program's 
inception. To date, we have recruited and onboarded 10 SHARP Program 
Prevention Specialists. These specialists are tasked with spearheading 
the planning, execution, coordination, and evaluation of prevention 
activities, encompassing policies, programs, and practices.
    Their responsibilities extend to providing training, education, and 
outreach initiatives focused on the prevention of sexual harassment and 
assault. Collaboration with various stakeholders such as the Integrated 
Prevention Advisory Group (I-PAG), Family Advocacy Program, Behavioral 
Health, and Equal Opportunity enhances the effectiveness of their 
efforts. By deploying SHARP Prevention Specialists at each 
installation, the Army is equipping itself with dedicated professionals 
who possess the requisite capabilities, skills, and tools necessary to 
combat sexual misconduct at its core.
    In addition, the Army is establishing a Victim Support Specialist 
implementation plan. Victim Support Specialists will serve a vital role 
in deployed settings by facilitating 2 victim care and support. Upon 
returning to home station, these specialists will assist commands with 
prevention and training requirements under the oversight of SHARP 
Prevention Specialists. The rollout of these specialists is anticipated 
in Fiscal Year (FY) 2025.
    The Army OSTC reached full operational capability (FOC) on December 
28, 2023 and began exercising its statutory authority over all covered 
offenses. Special trial counsel, rather than commanders, now make 
independent case disposition decisions and prosecute courts-martial. 
Since December 28, 2023, special trial counsel have exercised authority 
over nearly 1700 reported offenses. By employing a justice-focused and 
victimcentered approach to sexual assault cases, the OSTC will improve 
accountability efforts, increasing trust in the military justice 
system.
    The National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for FY 2022 required 
the Department of Defense (DoD) to publish a plan to address the manner 
in which they will analyze effects in law and policy with respect to 
the disposition of offenses over which special trial counsel exercise 
authority.
    The plan was published by the General Counsel of the DoD on 
December 15, 2023. It includes seven categories of systemic performance 
measures and data collection categories to assess the effects of the 
creation of the OSTC and monitor the disposition of offenses over which 
special trial counsel exercise authority.
    The categories of performance measures and data collection 
established are: (1) Due Process Protections: measures intended to 
assess protection of the rights of the accused; (2) Victims' 
Experience: measures intended to assess the participation and 
experience of victims throughout the military justice process as well 
as adherence to their rights; (3) Accountability: measures intended to 
assess the accountability imposed on the accused with regard to 
substantiated allegations; (4) Timeliness and Resource Prioritization: 
measures intended to assess the efficiency and timeliness of case 
processing and the appropriate prioritization of OSTC resources; (5) 
Competence and Capacity: measures intended to assess the experience 
levels and capacity of special trial counsel; (6) Communication: 
measures intended to assess communication between special trial 
counsel; and (7) Demographics: measures intended to capture demographic 
factors of the accused and victim(s) at various stages of the military 
justice process.
    Additionally, the Army will provide input to the DoD as part of the 
report to Congress in February 2025 assessing the holistic effect of 
the military justice reforms contained in the NDAA for FY 2022. The 
Army OSTC utilizes a three-tiered structure, with: (1) a headquarters 
element in the National Capitol Region, (2) eight circuits, and (3) 
teams of special trial counsel and support personnel located at 28 
installations with world-wide coverage.
    The organization includes approximately 160 personnel, including 63 
certified special trial counsel. As part of the initial manning 
approved by the Secretary of the Army, the OSTC will grow to 
approximately 180 personnel in FY25. While individuals choose 
restricted reporting for a variety of reasons, conversion of these 
reports may be an indicator of trust in the response system. The Army's 
SHARP Program is actively engaged in initiatives aimed at facilitating 
the transition of restricted reports to unrestricted reports, ensuring 
that victims have access to the necessary support and resources they 
require.
    By implementing stringent confidentiality measures and prioritizing 
victim empowerment, the SHARP Program underscores its commitment to 
creating a supportive environment conducive to unrestricted reporting. 
Victims who opt for restricted reporting are assured access to a 
comprehensive array of support services, 3 including behavioral health, 
medical assistance, legal services, and victim advocacy, as are 
unrestricted cases.
    The Army also continues to offer adult victims making restricted 
reports the option to participate in the Catch a Serial Offender 
(CATCH) Program, where they can anonymously submit suspect information 
to help identify serial offenders. Through continuous monitoring of 
conversion trends and initiatives like CATCH, the Army is dedicated to 
fostering trust in the response system, thereby encouraging victims to 
seek the assistance they need without barriers.   [See page 18.]
    Admiral Cheeseman. The Navy has fully implemented the Fiscal Year 
2022 National Defense Authorization Act (FY22 NDAA) requirement to 
establish the Office of Special Trial Counsel. The office reached full 
operational capability in October 2023, before the mandated December 
2023 date. It is led by an O-7 Lead Special Trial Counsel and is 
staffed by 91 personnel in 10 locations worldwide.
    The Office of Special Trial Counsel is manned by independent, 
specialized, and expert counsel. The office is fully executing the 
mission of screening and prosecuting covered offense cases, including 
exercising discretionary reach-back authority where appropriate to make 
disposition decisions on cases that predate 28 December 2023, as 
authorized by the FY24 NDAA. The office reports directly to the 
Secretary of the Navy without any intervening authority and completes 
its duties independent from the victims' or suspects' chain of command.
    Successes include the Navy-wide effort to train and educate legal 
professionals, Fleet leaders, and legal partners on military justice 
reforms. Early indications are that the Fleet has received these 
changes well and adapted to them. Challenges common with setting up a 
new organization include ensuring that optimal facilities are available 
to support the mission.
    It is too soon for us to know what impact these changes may be 
having on the force writ large. Performance measures and data 
collection categories have been developed in accordance with 
Congressional direction in Sec. 547(c) of the FY22 NDAA. Military 
justice reform remains an ongoing and evolving effort. The Navy is 
continually assessing the efficacy of new policies and practices and is 
ready to adjust as needed. The Navy, in close partnership with the 
Office of Special Trial Counsel, is spearheading an initiative to 
develop a comprehensive, ongoing assessment framework using a wide 
range of qualitative and quantitative factors. These assessments 
include a newly developed military justice reform survey to obtain 
victim and other user input on their perception and confidence in the 
system as the significant military justice reforms are implemented.
    We are continually assessing the staffing needs of the Office of 
Special Trial Counsel (OSTC). The number of new cases the Navy OSTC 
receives is on an upward trajectory as a result of mandatory reviews of 
domestic violence cases and, as of January 2025, the anticipated 
addition of substantiated allegations of Article 134, UCMJ sexual 
harassment cases. The Navy is assessing the resourcing impacts of these 
projected caseloads that may generate additional manpower needs.
    All reporting options-Restricted Reports and Unrestricted Reports- 
have access to the following care and recovery services: SARC/SAPR VA 
advocacy services, healthcare, mental healthcare, Sexual Assault 
Forensic Examination (SAFE), consultation and representation through 
Special Victims' Counsel/Victims' Legal Counsel/Victims' Counsel, 
spiritual support through Military Chaplains, and victim safety 
assessments. DoD's Restricted Reporting policy permits adult victims of 
sexual assault to officially report incidents of sexual assault to 
specified individuals: (Sexual Assault Response Coordinators (SARC), 
Sexual Assault Prevention and Response (SAPR) Victim Advocate (VA), or 
healthcare personnel.
    These personnel ensure the victim receives these services without 
triggering an investigation. Navy affirms victims' rights to the full 
range of supportive services without participating in the military 
justice process triggered by an Unrestricted Report. SARCs and SAPR VAs 
routinely provide victims with the information necessary to make 
informed decisions about their reporting options and recovery. A 
victim's decision to make a restricted report (or to convert to an 
unrestricted report) will depend on a number of factors, to include the 
victim's desired pathway for recovery. Navy's SAPR Program trains all 
SARCs and SAPR VAs in the provision of victimcentered, culturally 
sensitive, and trauma-informed care that takes into account each 
victim's safety, needs, autonomy, and desired privacy.  [See page 18.]
    General Glynn. The Marine Corps stood up the Office of Special 
Trial Counsel ahead of the Department's target date of 28 December 
2023, is hiring a primary prevention workforce, and has implemented 
various other measures to prevent and address destructive behaviors. 
The Marine Corps is expanding the integrated prevention workforce, as 
well as the sexual assault prevention and response workforce, and is 
enhancing entry-level training to teach the continuum of harm, address 
healthy communication, boundaries, and relationships.
    These include modernizing SAPR annual training commensurate with 
respective rank and leadership positions. We are also implementing "no 
wrong door" and "warm handoff" protocols among SAPR, Equal Opportunity, 
Family Advocacy Program, and other victim services. Further, the Marine 
Corps is taking an integrated approach as part of our strategic focus 
on preventing all harmful behaviors, including sexual assault and 
sexual harassment. These efforts align with Marine Corps Total Fitness 
(MCTF), which strengthens Marines and families holistically across four 
domains: social, spiritual, mental, and physical fitness. Strengthening 
Marines and enhancing resilience across all domains supports prevention 
of harmful behaviors.
    The statutorily mandated transfer of disposition authority for 
covered, known, and related offenses from Commanders to an independent 
Office of Special Trial Counsel (OSTC) has occurred with the full 
support of Commanders and their Staff Judge Advocates, which in turn 
has facilitated necessary dialogue and coordination regarding the care 
and treatment of victims and accused. Further, continuous dialogue and 
communication with the Victims' Legal Counsel Organization as outlined 
in the OSTC's victim engagement plan ensures victims remain informed 
and heard. Lastly, close coordination and collaboration with other 
services' OSTCs has allowed for the sharing of best practices.
    Early challenges encountered by the OSTC include the volume of 
cases requiring a disposition decision, the complex nature of covered 
offense cases, and the number of Military Criminal Investigators and 
Special Trial Counsel available. Some of the challenges are due to 
working with, understanding, and executing new processes and 
procedures, which we believe will improve over time as the OSTC 
construct matures.
    We will continue to assess staffing levels to ensure appropriate 
staffing in the OSTC. The addition of sexual harassment as a covered 
offense next year will require additional assessment.
    Regardless of their chosen reporting method, all victims are 
provided access to the following care and recovery services: SARC/SAPR 
VA advocacy services, healthcare, mental healthcare, Sexual Assault 
Forensic Examination (SAFE), consultation and representation through 
Special Victims' Counsel/Victims' Legal Counsel/Victims' Counsel, 
spiritual support through Military Chaplains and victim safety 
assessments. Education is the key to empowering victims to make the 
best choice for themselves on reporting and we continually work to 
improve our training.
    We make sure all victims know that they can change a Restricted 
Report to an Unrestricted Report during the process and that they know 
the implications of doing so. We understand that at times, restricted 
reporting may be the safest choice, especially amongst domestic abuse 
victims and intimate partner sexual assault victims, as seeking outside 
support may increase risk to victims from their abusers.
    In these cases, victims are still afforded access to medical 
services, legal advice, and advocacy services. Furthermore, we 
participate in DoD's Catch a Serial Offender (CATCH) program, which 
serves as an avenue for victims to anonymously submit suspect 
information to help military law enforcement identify serial offenders 
in cases with both Restricted and Unrestricted reports, or in cases 
where no report is submitted. Our overarching goal is to encourage all 
reporting.  [See page 18.]
    Ms. Kelley. Consistent with the mandates of the Fiscal Year 2022 
(FY22) National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), the Department of Air 
Force (DAF) Office of Special Trial Counsel (OSTC) reached full 
operational capability on December 27, 2023. Focused on accountability 
for offender misconduct, Special Trial Counsel (STC) provide expert, 
specialized, independent, and ethical representation of the United 
States in the investigation and trial-level litigation of covered 
offenses. OSTC is headquartered at Joint Base Anacostia-Bolling, D.C., 
and field operations occur from six District Offices worldwide, in 
order to facilitate effective communication between OSTC personnel and 
installation command, legal, and law enforcement teams.
    OSTC reached full operational capability with 35 active component 
judge advocates, 5 reserve component judge advocates, and 6 enlisted 
paralegals. The Office will continue to grow through FY27 to an 
anticipated total of 67 judge advocate billets and 15 paralegal and 
civilian support billets. During the period of growth, OSTC operations 
are augmented by reserve component judge advocates who are certified 
STC. Although OSTC operates independently of the chain of command, it 
exercises its authority in a unified prosecutorial effort that includes 
local legal, law enforcement, and command personnel.
    In conjunction with the servicing legal office, OSTC serves as the 
lead advisor to law enforcement on critical investigative steps and 
alerts command to appropriate disposition decisions. OSTC personnel 
collaborate with installation legal personnel, from initial report 
through trial-level litigation, and they ensure robust victim 
engagement throughout the administration of justice. To ensure 
effective operations, OSTC worked with the Office of the Judge Advocate 
General (AF/JA) to revise 14 DAF policy directives, instructions, and 
manuals.
    Continued partnership further enabled position-tailored training on 
military justice reform, reaching over 2,000 command team members and 
2,500 total force JA personnel at 128 DAF locations. Currently, STC are 
leading the investigation and prosecution of hundreds of qualifying 
offenses. To measure mission success and impact, OSTC is implementing 
the Department of Defense's "Plan for Assessing Effects of Changes in 
Law," as directed by FY22 NDAA Section 547(c). The plan includes seven 
categories of performance measures and data collection categories.
    Similarly, OSTC is evaluating the optimal timelines for the 
investigation and prosecution of covered offenses, as outlined by the 
Department of Defense's Study Team Report on Recommendation 1.8 of the 
Independent Review Commission on Sexual Assault in the Military. It is 
too early to identify discernible trends in the data, but OSTC and (AF/
JA) are evaluating these performance measures in advance of the 
February 1, 2025 congressional reporting deadline established under 
Section 541 of the FY23 NDAA.
    The DAF, through the Independent Review Committee for Sexual 
Assault in the Military, has expanded the full-time Sexual Assault 
Prevention and Response (SAPR) workforce which ensures dedicated 
personnel to provide top-tier advocacy, care, and support to victims. 
In addition to expanding the SAPR workforce, the DAF has also stood up 
a dedicated prevention workforce to implement prevention strategies to 
eradicate interpersonal violence before it starts. The US Space Force's 
Holistic Health Approach includes primary prevention skill-building 
focused on healthy relationships and interactions.
    This research-informed skill-building is taught across the career 
cycle of a Guardian and includes relationship green flags (to signal 
what healthy relationships look like), healthy boundaries, conflict 
resolution, empathy, communication, mindfulness, and self-care. Each 
offering includes activities to provide learners with the opportunity 
to practice skills. Regardless of the reporting option chosen, victims 
receive full care and support for as long as needed. Victims who elect 
to make a restricted report may receive medical (physical and mental) 
care, advocacy and/or legal consultation. Victims are empowered to 
select their reporting method and are fully supported if they decide to 
switch to an unrestricted report, which will potentially initiate an 
investigation.  [See page 18.]
    General Miller. Consistent with the mandates of the Fiscal Year 
2022 (FY22) National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), the Department 
of Air Force (DAF) Office of Special Trial Counsel (OSTC) reached full 
operational capability on December 27, 2023. Focused on accountability 
for offender misconduct, Special Trial Counsel (STC) provide expert, 
specialized, independent, and ethical representation of the United 
States in the investigation and trial-level litigation of covered 
offenses.
    OSTC is headquartered at Joint Base Anacostia-Bolling, D.C., and 
field operations occur from six District Offices worldwide, in order to 
facilitate effective communication between OSTC personnel and 
installation command, legal, and law enforcement teams. OSTC reached 
full operational capability with 35 active component judge advocates, 5 
reserve component judge advocates, and 6 enlisted paralegals.
    The Office will continue to grow through FY27 to an anticipated 
total of 67 judge advocate billets and 15 paralegal and civilian 
support billets. During the period of growth, OSTC operations are 
augmented by reserve component judge advocates who are certified STC. 
Although OSTC operates independently of the chain of command, it 
exercises its authority in a unified prosecutorial effort that includes 
local legal, law enforcement, and command personnel.
    In conjunction with the servicing legal office, OSTC serves as the 
lead advisor to law enforcement on critical investigative steps and 
alerts command to appropriate disposition decisions. OSTC personnel 
collaborate with installation legal personnel, from initial report 
through trial-level litigation, and they ensure robust victim 
engagement throughout the administration of justice. To ensure 
effective operations, OSTC worked with the Office of the Judge Advocate 
General (AF/JA) to revise 14 DAF policy directives, instructions, and 
manuals.
    Continued partnership further enabled position-tailored training on 
military justice reform, reaching over 2,000 command team members and 
2,500 total force JA personnel at 128 DAF locations. Currently, STC are 
leading the investigation and prosecution of hundreds of qualifying 
offenses. To measure mission success and impact, OSTC is implementing 
the Department of Defense's "Plan for Assessing Effects of Changes in 
Law," as directed by FY22 NDAA Section 547(c). The plan includes seven 
categories of performance measures and data collection categories.
    Similarly, OSTC is evaluating the optimal timelines for the 
investigation and prosecution of covered offenses, as outlined by the 
Department of Defense's Study Team Report on Recommendation 1.8 of the 
Independent Review Commission on Sexual Assault in the Military. It is 
too early to identify discernible trends in the data, but OSTC and (AF/
JA) are evaluating these performance measures in advance of the 
February 1, 2025 congressional reporting deadline established under 
Section 541 of the FY23 NDAA. The DAF, through the Independent Review 
Committee for Sexual Assault in the Military, has expanded the full-
time Sexual Assault Prevention and Response (SAPR) workforce which 
ensures dedicated personnel to provide top-tier advocacy, care, and 
support to victims.
    In addition to expanding the SAPR workforce, the DAF has also stood 
up a dedicated prevention workforce to implement prevention strategies 
to eradicate interpersonal violence before it starts. The US Space 
Force's Holistic Health Approach includes primary prevention skill-
building focused on healthy relationships and interactions. This 
research-informed skill-building is taught across the career cycle of a 
Guardian and includes relationship green flags (to signal what healthy 
relationships look like), healthy boundaries, conflict resolution, 
empathy, communication, mindfulness, and self-care.
    Each offering includes activities to provide learners with the 
opportunity to practice skills. Regardless of the reporting option 
chosen, victims receive full care and support for as long as needed. 
Victims who elect to make a restricted report may receive medical 
(physical and mental) care, advocacy and/or legal consultation. Victims 
are empowered to select their reporting method and are fully supported 
if they decide to switch to an unrestricted report, which will 
potentially initiate an investigation.  [See page 18.]
    
=======================================================================


              QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY MEMBERS POST HEARING

                             April 17, 2024

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

      

                    QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY MR. WALTZ

    Mr. Waltz. The new GENESIS system allows health care providers to 
understand a patient's complete medical history with an integrated 
health record and delivers new capabilities. Service members 
consistently ranked medical care as a top cause of dissatisfaction 
during a series of focus groups conducted by the Office of the Naval 
Inspector General in 2023, according to the report. They cited their 
inability to access care in a timely manner for everything from routine 
primary care visits to mental health appointments.
    As we look to improve Quality of Life and Service for our military, 
have the extensive electronic issues and downtime of this online 
GENESIS program been corrected for our servicemembers and veterans?
    How are you working with DHA to address the red flags GENESIS 
identifies going back to a Servicemembers' childhood?
    How has the Medical Assessment Record Pilot (MARP) improved medical 
capability in the GENESIS system?
    The GENESIS system allows DoD access to all of service members 
medical history from birth including medical history, prescriptions, 
etc. into one data base.
    How are you addressing HIPPA concerns from servicemembers and 
prospective recruits pulling healthcare and prescription information 
from civilian medical centers into a massive electronic data center - 
the largest electronic healthcare electronic repository in the U.S. - 
long before enlistment?
    Admiral Cheeseman. Ensuring quality of life improvements continues 
to be a vital priority and the rollout of MHS GENESIS provided a 
significant opportunity to streamline several aspects of military 
requirements. As demonstrated, the program revealed unintended 
challenges that are currently being addressed and the Navy continues to 
collaborate with the office of the Under Secretary of Defense for 
Personnel and Readiness as the program owner of MHS GENESIS.
    As an accessions tool, the Navy is a key member of the Deputy 
Secretary of Defense directed MHS GENESIS Task Force to modernize and 
review how the Department of Defense (DoD) accesses new Service 
members. Three key ongoing initiatives include: increased and enduring 
medical staffing, development of machine learning capabilities, and a 
review of defining medical qualifications.
    Relatedly, the Joint Accessions and Retention Military Service 
Working Group and the Medical Accession Records Pilot program are both 
efforts that address restrictions on certain disqualifying health 
conditions and are reviewing requirements with an emphasis on 
incorporating mental health parameters. MHS GENESIS pulls data from 
civilian medical systems for inclusion in a patient's medical record.
    Having a full and complete picture of any patient's medical care is 
critical to ensuring the quality and safety of healthcare provided. 
Specific to recruits, it also gives Military Departments a full and 
comprehensive view of recruits' medical needs, to ensure the health of 
prospective recruits is consistent with military service.
    Patient privacy and safeguarding patient data in accordance with 
the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA) 
is foundational to the Military Health System. To safeguard data in MHS 
GENESIS, DoD mandates users undergo Cyber Awareness, HIPAA and Privacy 
Act training, and sign an acceptable use policy. Only those with an 
official need can access protected health information (PHI), as per 
standards provided by DoD policy. Additionally, Military Medical 
Treatment Facilities conduct system activity reviews to identify and 
prevent unauthorized PHI access.
    Mr. Waltz. The new GENESIS system allows health care providers to 
understand a patient's complete medical history with an integrated 
health record and delivers new capabilities. Service members 
consistently ranked medical care as a top cause of dissatisfaction 
during a series of focus groups conducted by the Office of the Naval 
Inspector General in 2023, according to the report. They cited their 
inability to access care in a timely manner for everything from routine 
primary care visits to mental health appointments.
    As we look to improve Quality of Life and Service for our military, 
have the extensive electronic issues and downtime of this online 
GENESIS program been corrected for our servicemembers and veterans?
    How are you working with DHA to address the red flags GENESIS 
identifies going back to a Servicemembers' childhood?
    How has the Medical Assessment Record Pilot (MARP) improved medical 
capability in the GENESIS system?
    The GENESIS system allows DoD access to all of service members 
medical history from birth including medical history, prescriptions, 
etc. into one data base.
    How are you addressing HIPPA concerns from servicemembers and 
prospective recruits pulling healthcare and prescription information 
from civilian medical centers into a massive electronic data center - 
the largest electronic healthcare electronic repository in the U.S. - 
long before enlistment?
    General Glynn. The medical readiness of our Marines is a top 
priority, and ensuring protection of personal information is important. 
We look forward to the Department's assessment of the medical screening 
process from the Military Health System GENESIS Task Force with a focus 
on finding efficiencies and increasing staffing of MEPCOM's medical 
providers. In my role as Deputy Commandant for Manpower and Reserve 
Affairs for the Marine Corps, I support USD(P&R) who has direct 
oversight of MHS Genesis and its associated policies and protocols.
                                 ______
                                 
             RESPONSE TO QUESTION SUBMITTED BY MR. FINSTAD
    Mr. Finstad. Minnesota has approximately 463 active duty Service 
Members and 17,375 Reserve and National Guard Service Members. This 
shows that many States have greater Reserve and National Guard equities 
than active component equities. The biggest branch in the US Military, 
the US Army, even has approximately 60,000 more Soldiers in the Reserve 
and National Guard than the active component.
    What accounts for the disparity between promotion timelines and 
zones of consideration between active component and Reserve, and 
National Guard promotion boards for officers? Do the Services plan to 
create more parity in promotion timeline for Reserve and National Guard 
officers?
    Constituents that also serve in the Reserve and National Guard, 
while holding down another job as a Citizen-Service Member, have 
provided notice to my office about the lack of parity in promotion 
timelines between themselves and their active component counterparts or 
peers. That is, it appears that officers in the active component get 
promoted to the next higher grade between 1-3 years faster or earlier 
than Reserve and National Guard Service Members. This lack of parity in 
promotion timeline does not reward or treat fairly Reserve and National 
Guard officers who often carry double weight by also serving their 
cities, towns, counties, and state. The Services should create parity 
between their components, such that an officer in the Reserve and 
National Guard can receive the same promotion opportunities in the same 
timeline as active component officers.
    General Stitt. The Reserve Components (United States Army Reserve 
and Army National Guard) work within statutory requirements, DoD 
Policy, and Army policy to provide promotion opportunities and career 
progression for all Soldiers. Officers are promoted through mandatory 
promotion boards (10 USC 14101), promotion vacancy boards for the USAR, 
and Federal recognition boards for the ARNG. Officers are subject to 
time in grade requirements which are set by statute (10 USC 14303 and 
14404) and policy. Promotions may also be limited by authorized 
strength and positions. Officers recommended for promotion must be 
assigned to positions commensurate with grade in order to promote; 
otherwise they must transfer to the IRR to be promoted upon reaching 
maximum time in grade. Within these constraints, it is important to 
note that officer promotions are designed to promote officers with the 
greatest potential and are not an award solely for time in service. For 
all of these reasons, it would be detrimental to align Regular Army 
eligibility with the Reserve Components.
    Mr. Finstad. Minnesota has approximately 463 active duty Service 
Members and 17,375 Reserve and National Guard Service Members. This 
shows that many States have greater Reserve and National Guard equities 
than active component equities. The biggest branch in the US Military, 
the US Army, even has approximately 60,000 more Soldiers in the Reserve 
and National Guard than the active component.
    What accounts for the disparity between promotion timelines and 
zones of consideration between active component and Reserve, and 
National Guard promotion boards for officers? Do the Services plan to 
create more parity in promotion timeline for Reserve and National Guard 
officers?
    Constituents that also serve in the Reserve and National Guard, 
while holding down another job as a Citizen-Service Member, have 
provided notice to my office about the lack of parity in promotion 
timelines between themselves and their active component counterparts or 
peers. That is, it appears that officers in the active component get 
promoted to the next higher grade between 1-3 years faster or earlier 
than Reserve and National Guard Service Members. This lack of parity in 
promotion timeline does not reward or treat fairly Reserve and National 
Guard officers who often carry double weight by also serving their 
cities, towns, counties, and state. The Services should create parity 
between their components, such that an officer in the Reserve and 
National Guard can receive the same promotion opportunities in the same 
timeline as active component officers.
    Admiral Cheeseman. There is parity between the Navy officer 
promotion timelines of the Active and Reserve Components. The vast 
majority of Navy Reserve officer communities promote within the same 
DoD standard required for Active Component officers (described below). 
When there is variation, it is minimal (+/- 1 year), and it is 
attributable to breaks in service between Active and Reserve, 
conversion to a different officer community, or other career changes 
that impact time-in-grade or time-in-service.
    Additionally, both the Active and Reserve Components have the same 
minimum time-in-grade requirements for officer promotion. Federal law 
establishes the requirement for each Military Department to maintain an 
Active Duty List (ADL) and Reserve Active Statue List (RASL). The ADL 
and RASL are governed by two separate pieces of law. For Active 
Component officers, DoD directs the promotion timing on the ADL, by 
grade: O-4 = 10 years +/- 1 year O-5 = 16 years +/- 1 year O-6 = 22 
years +/- 1 year For Reserve Component officers, those officers on the 
RASL, DoD policy dictates that the Secretary of the Military Department 
determines the timing for promotion based on force requirements.
    Title 10, U.S.C. 14303 and 14304 sets forth 
minimum and maximum years of service in grade for reserve component 
officers to be eligible for promotion to the next grade. Those reserve 
officers in grades of O-3, O-4, and O-5 must complete three years time-
in-grade, but no more than seven years time-in-grade to be eligible to 
promote to the next grade. Additionally, Title 10, U.S.C. 
14305 requires a relatively similar promotion opportunity over 
a five-year period in each grade and competitive category. Navy policy 
defines this as a variance of +/- 10 percent for active component 
officers, and the Secretary of the Navy, under the authority of DoD 
policy, has established the same percentage for reserve component 
officers.
    Mr. Finstad. Minnesota has approximately 463 active duty Service 
Members and 17,375 Reserve and National Guard Service Members. This 
shows that many States have greater Reserve and National Guard equities 
than active component equities. The biggest branch in the US Military, 
the US Army, even has approximately 60,000 more Soldiers in the Reserve 
and National Guard than the active component.
    What accounts for the disparity between promotion timelines and 
zones of consideration between active component and Reserve, and 
National Guard promotion boards for officers? Do the Services plan to 
create more parity in promotion timeline for Reserve and National Guard 
officers?
    Constituents that also serve in the Reserve and National Guard, 
while holding down another job as a Citizen-Service Member, have 
provided notice to my office about the lack of parity in promotion 
timelines between themselves and their active component counterparts or 
peers. That is, it appears that officers in the active component get 
promoted to the next higher grade between 1-3 years faster or earlier 
than Reserve and National Guard Service Members. This lack of parity in 
promotion timeline does not reward or treat fairly Reserve and National 
Guard officers who often carry double weight by also serving their 
cities, towns, counties, and state. The Services should create parity 
between their components, such that an officer in the Reserve and 
National Guard can receive the same promotion opportunities in the same 
timeline as active component officers.
    General Glynn. We are committed to ensuring that all qualified 
officers, regardless of component, have equal opportunities for 
advancement in the Marine Corps. The Marine Corps Reserve places great 
emphasis on maintaining the authorized strength of the Reserve 
Component, ensuring a capable and ready reserve force to augment, 
reinforce, and sustain the Active Component. This focus inherently 
shapes promotion timelines and zones of consideration.
    Overall, the promotion flow points for Marine Corps Reserve 
officers may deviate somewhat from those of the Active Component, but 
typically by less than a year. The difference in timing is largely 
attributed to the transition timeline of Active Component officers into 
the reserves. Transitioning officers who actively engage and maintain 
an adequate level of participation once in the Reserves promote 
equitably with their activeduty peers. In some cases, these Marines 
transition to the Individual Ready Reserve following End of Active 
Service and have limited to no participation in the Reserves as they 
establish civilian employment.
    This transition period often limits their reserve participation, 
thereby delaying their eligibility or consideration for selection by 
promotion boards. We continuously assess and refine our promotion 
processes to ensure fairness and consistency across all components of 
the Marine Corps.
    Mr. Finstad. Minnesota has approximately 463 active duty Service 
Members and 17,375 Reserve and National Guard Service Members. This 
shows that many States have greater Reserve and National Guard equities 
than active component equities. The biggest branch in the US Military, 
the US Army, even has approximately 60,000 more Soldiers in the Reserve 
and National Guard than the active component.
    What accounts for the disparity between promotion timelines and 
zones of consideration between active component and Reserve, and 
National Guard promotion boards for officers? Do the Services plan to 
create more parity in promotion timeline for Reserve and National Guard 
officers?
    Constituents that also serve in the Reserve and National Guard, 
while holding down another job as a Citizen-Service Member, have 
provided notice to my office about the lack of parity in promotion 
timelines between themselves and their active component counterparts or 
peers. That is, it appears that officers in the active component get 
promoted to the next higher grade between 1-3 years faster or earlier 
than Reserve and National Guard Service Members. This lack of parity in 
promotion timeline does not reward or treat fairly Reserve and National 
Guard officers who often carry double weight by also serving their 
cities, towns, counties, and state. The Services should create parity 
between their components, such that an officer in the Reserve and 
National Guard can receive the same promotion opportunities in the same 
timeline as active component officers.
    General Miller. Air Force Reserves: Regardless of component, 
Regular AF (active-duty component) (RegAF) and Air Force Reserve (AFR) 
promotion timelines are driven by the needs of the US Air Force 
determined by the number of officers required in each grade, along with 
the average length of service of members within the grade and projected 
vacancies.
    The disparity between RegAF and AFR officer promotion is primarily 
due the size and makeup of the AFR officer reserve corps compared to 
the RegAF. The AFR is a smaller component compared to the RegAF; 
therefore, it requires less officers. Equally as impactful is the AFR's 
primary sustainment strategy based on capturing talent leaving the 
Regular Component.
    This results in officers joining the AFR with various years of 
service as well as time-in-grade compared to the RegAF. It also means 
that inventory levels are less stable, fluctuating year to year, making 
it challenging to accurately project long-term need.
    Additionally, AFR officers tend to serve longer than their Regular 
Component counterparts. For example, most AFR lieutenant Colonels 
retire with 28 years of service compared to 22 years for RegAF 
officers. When you need less officers; the ones you have generally join 
with longer time-in-service/grade; and the ones you have serve longer, 
it limits the number of available vacancies to promote officers into 
resulting in longer promotion timelines.
    To create parity among the components would result in officers 
being promoted into grades without positions for them to fill. Air 
National Guard: The promotion process for National Guard (ANG) officers 
differs from the Reserve and Active-Duty Components and is based on 
meeting time-in-grade (TIG) requirements and they can be promoted 
through either the Mandatory Promotion process or Position Vacancy (PV) 
process. If an officer is not chosen to promote through the PV process, 
they will meet the board in the Mandatory Promotion process - both 
processes and timelines outlined below.
    Ultimately, the commander plays a crucial role in promoting 
officers based on their qualifications and the needs of the unit, 
ensuring that deserving officers advance in their careers. The ANG 
officer promotion process typically takes between 6 -12 months which is 
time needed to conduct a board and comply the requirements in the 
Reserve Officer Promotion Act (ROPMA). Timelines should be comparable 
with the Defense Officer Promotion Act (DOPMA). ANG Mandatory Officer 
Promotions: The mandatory promotion process for ANG Officers to the 
grades of first lieutenant and captain occur two times per calendar 
year.
    Eligibility for the Federal promotion selection lists is determined 
by the officer's time-in-grade. For promotion to first lieutenant and 
captain, the time in grade requirement is 2 years. For promotion to 
major and lieutenant colonel, the time in grade requirement is 7 years.
    Mandatory promotions to the grades of major and lieutenant colonel 
are required to meet the Reserve Officer Personnel Management Act 
(ROPMA) selection board annually held at Air Reserve Personnel Center 
(ARPC), Buckley Air Force Base. The process estimated from start 
(eligibility) to finish (Senate confirmation) is 345 days. ANG Officer 
PV Promotions:
    This process allows for timely promotions based on eligibility and 
available positions. Position vacancies are nominative promotions and 
contingent on position vacancy and minimum TIG. Major & Lieutenant 
Colonel requires four years TIG, and Colonel requires three years TIG. 
The ANG holds six PV boards throughout the year and two Colonel 
promotion boards per year in the spring and fall.
    PV promotions to the grades of major through colonel are selected 
for promotion through their State Federal Recognition Examination Board 
(FREB) and then required to meet a Federal Recognition Review Board 
(FRRB) held at Air Reserve Personnel Center (ARPC), Buckley Air Force 
Base to extend federal recognition. The process from start 
(eligibility) to finish (Senate confirmation) is on average 6 to 8 
months.

                                  [all]