Military Personnel: DOD Needs to Assess Certain Factors in	 
Determining Whether Hazardous Duty Pay Is Warranted for Duty in  
the Polar Regions (29-APR-03, GAO-03-554).			 
                                                                 
The 109th Airlift Wing, New York Air National Guard, conducts	 
supply missions for scientific research in the polar regions.	 
Most unit members do not spend more than 30 consecutive days in  
the polar regions. Therefore, they are not eligible for hardship 
duty pay, which requires more than 30 consecutive days of duty in
a designated hardship location. Congress considered legislation  
in 2002 to make an exception to the 30-day hardship duty pay	 
threshold for polar duty. This legislation was not approved. In  
addition, the 109th Airlift Wing proposed designating polar duty 
as a hazardous duty. The Conference Report accompanying the	 
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2003 directed 
GAO and DOD to conduct separate reviews of special and incentive 
pays for polar duty. GAO assessed DOD's rationale for hardship	 
duty pay and the implications of making an exception to hardship 
duty pay. In addition, GAO assessed the 109th Airlift Wing's	 
justification for hazardous duty pay for polar duty.		 
-------------------------Indexing Terms------------------------- 
REPORTNUM:   GAO-03-554 					        
    ACCNO:   A06731						        
  TITLE:     Military Personnel: DOD Needs to Assess Certain Factors  
in Determining Whether Hazardous Duty Pay Is Warranted for Duty  
in the Polar Regions						 
     DATE:   04/29/2003 
  SUBJECT:   Hazardous duty pay 				 
	     Hazardous military-duty pay			 
	     Antarctica 					 
	     C-141 Aircraft					 
	     Greenland						 
	     LC-130 Aircraft					 
	     NSF U.S. Antarctic Program 			 

******************************************************************
** This file contains an ASCII representation of the text of a  **
** GAO Product.                                                 **
**                                                              **
** No attempt has been made to display graphic images, although **
** figure captions are reproduced.  Tables are included, but    **
** may not resemble those in the printed version.               **
**                                                              **
** Please see the PDF (Portable Document Format) file, when     **
** available, for a complete electronic file of the printed     **
** document's contents.                                         **
**                                                              **
******************************************************************
GAO-03-554

Report to the Senate Committee on Armed Services and the House Committee
on Armed Services

United States General Accounting Office

GAO

April 2003 MILITARY PERSONNEL

DOD Needs to Assess Certain Factors in Determining Whether Hazardous Duty
Pay Is Warranted for Duty in the Polar Regions

GAO- 03- 554

Hardship duty pay is intended to compensate military personnel assigned to
areas for more than 30 consecutive days where quality- of- life conditions
are substantially below those in the continental United States. DOD did
not support the hardship duty pay legislation on the basis that this pay
was not intended to compensate stays of short duration and the legislation
circumvented a DOD process designating hardship duty locations and rates.
Granting an exception to the 30- day hardship duty pay threshold for

109 th Airlift Wing personnel deployed to the polar regions would result
in minimal costs, but this exception could set a precedent for DOD
personnel performing other short- term missions and could further increase
costs. Had this exception been in effect in 2001- 2002, the 109 th Airlift
Wing estimated the costs would have totaled about $127,000. The National
Science Foundation would incur most of these costs because it reimburses
DOD for logistic support in the polar regions. The costs of granting an
exception for short- term missions conducted by DOD personnel at other
hardship locations are unknown. Based on its review of the intent of
hardship duty pay and the implications of granting an exception, GAO
believes that an exception to the 30- day threshold is not justified under
current DOD policy. The 109 th Airlift Wing justified its proposal for
hazardous pay on the basis of

extreme working conditions and exposure to medical hazards. For example,
maintenance personnel work in temperatures as cold as minus 59 degrees
Fahrenheit without the protection of hangars and are exposed to potential
medical hazards such as frostbite, hypothermia, and carbon monoxide
poisoning. Unit officials expressed concern about the retention of
personnel who require additional training for polar operations, but they
did not know what impact hazardous duty pay would have on retention.
Recent data from exit surveys show that dissatisfaction with pay was not
among the most frequently cited reasons for leaving.

The 109 th Airlift Wing Operates 10 LC- 130 Ski- Equipped Aircraft in the
Polar Regions

MILITARY PERSONNEL

DOD NEEDS TO ASSESS CERTAIN FACTORS IN DETERMINING WHETHER HAZARDOUS DUTY
PAY IS WARRANTED FOR DUTY IN THE POLAR REGIONS www. gao. gov/ cgi- bin/
getrpt? GAO- 03- 554. To view the full report, including the scope

and methodology, click on the link above. For more information, contact
Derek B. Stewart (202) 512- 5140 or stewartd@ gao. gov. Highlights of GAO-
03- 554, a report to the

Senate Committee on Armed Services and the House Committee on Armed
Services.

April 2003

The 109 th Airlift Wing, New York Air National Guard, conducts supply
missions for scientific research in the polar regions. Most unit members
do not spend more than 30 consecutive days in the polar regions.
Therefore, they are not eligible for hardship duty pay,

which requires more than 30 consecutive days of duty in a designated
hardship location. Congress considered legislation in 2002 to make an
exception to the 30- day hardship duty pay threshold for polar duty. This
legislation was not approved. In addition, the 109 th Airlift Wing
proposed designating polar duty as a hazardous duty. The Conference Report

accompanying the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2003
directed GAO and DOD to conduct separate reviews of special and incentive
pays for polar duty. GAO assessed DOD*s rationale for hardship duty pay
and the implications of making an exception to hardship duty pay. In

addition, GAO assessed the 109 th Airlift Wing*s justification for
hazardous duty pay for polar duty. GAO recommends that DOD, in conducting
its congressionally mandated study of special and incentive pays for
reservists

performing polar duty, assess certain factors to determine if personnel
performing polar duty

should receive hazardous duty pay. DOD concurred with this recommendation.

Page i GAO- 03- 554 Military Personnel Letter 1 Results in Brief 3
Background 4 DOD*s Rationale for Hardship Duty Pay 7 Granting a Hardship
Duty Exception for the Polar Regions Could

Set a Precedent for Other Short- Term Missions 8 Factors Cited as
Justifying Hazardous Duty Pay for Personnel Performing Duty in Polar
Regions 10 Conclusions 14 Recommendation for Executive Action 15 Agency
Comments 15 Scope and Methodology 15 Appendix I Extreme Operating
Conditions and Potential

Medical Hazards Encountered by Personnel Deployed to the Polar Regions 17

Difficult Working Conditions 17 Potential Medical Hazards 18 Appendix II
Comments from the Department of Defense 20

Figures

Figure 1: Ski- Tipped LC- 130 Aircraft Operated by the 109th Airlift Wing,
New York Air National Guard 5 Figure 2: Main Factors Influencing Members
of the 109th Airlift

Wing to Leave the Unit (2001- 2003) 13 Contents

This is a work of the U. S. Government and is not subject to copyright
protection in the United States. It may be reproduced and distributed in
its entirety without further permission from GAO. It may contain
copyrighted graphics, images or other materials. Permission from the
copyright holder may be necessary should you wish to reproduce copyrighted
materials separately from GAO*s product.

Page 1 GAO- 03- 554 Military Personnel April 29, 2003 The Honorable John
W. Warner Chairman

The Honorable Carl Levin Ranking Minority Member Committee on Armed
Services United States Senate

The Honorable Duncan Hunter Chairman The Honorable Ike Skelton Ranking
Minority Member Committee on Armed Services House of Representatives

Military personnel serving outside the continental United States may
perform duty in locations with adverse living conditions. Personnel who
spend more than 30 consecutive days in areas designated by the Office of
the Secretary of Defense (OSD) as hardship duty locations are eligible for
hardship duty pay. 1 OSD has designated 170 hardship duty locations and
has authorized a monthly pay rate of $50, $100, or $150, depending on the
severity of living conditions. The polar regions of Antarctica and

Greenland have been designated as hardship duty locations qualifying for
the maximum monthly pay rate of $150. The 109th Airlift Wing, New York Air
National Guard, conducts supply missions in the polar regions in support
of scientific research programs sponsored primarily by the National
Science Foundation. However, according to a 109th Airlift Wing official,
most unit members who perform polar duty do not serve more

1 Section 305 of title 37 U. S. C. authorizes special pay for uniformed
servicemembers performing hardship duty and directs the Secretary of
Defense to prescribe regulations implementing hardship duty pay. There are
two types of hardship duty pay. *Hardship duty pay for location
assignment* is payable to members for duty in a designated hardship

location for more than 30 consecutive days. Personnel must be in a
designated hardship location at least 31 days to qualify for this pay.
*Hardship duty pay for mission assignment* is payable to members who
perform investigative or remains- recovery duty in remote, isolated areas
such as Vietnam and Cambodia regardless of the time spent on the mission.
This report focuses solely on hardship duty pay for location assignment,
which hereafter is referred to as hardship duty pay.

United States General Accounting Office Washington, DC 20548

Page 2 GAO- 03- 554 Military Personnel than 30 consecutive days and are
therefore not eligible to receive hardship duty pay. With the goal of
securing incentive pay for polar duty, the 109th Airlift

Wing developed a proposal in 2000 to authorize hazardous duty pay for duty
performed in the polar regions. Hazardous duty pay, which is separate from
hardship duty pay, is intended as an incentive for personnel to occupy
hard- to- fill occupations that involve risky or hazardous duty. 2 The
proposal was submitted to the New York Guard and subsequently

brought to the attention of Congress, but it was not provided to the
Department of Defense (DOD) for consideration in DOD*s process for
reviewing personnel compensation proposals. Although the 109th Airlift
Wing*s proposal addressed hazardous duty pay, Congress considered a
legislative provision in 2002 to authorize hardship duty pay, on a
prorated basis, for each day of work performed in the polar regions. 3 The
provision would, in effect, have made an exception to DOD*s 30- day
threshold

requirement and would have increased the monthly rate established by DOD
from $150 to $240. Although the provision was not approved, the Conference
Report accompanying the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year
2003 4 directed us to review special and incentive pays for reservists 5
who perform frequent and continuous duty on ski- equipped aircraft
operating in the polar regions while assigned temporarily to

locations where conditions are extremely harsh. The Conference Report also
directed DOD to include a study of the same issue in a review of reserve
component personnel compensation directed by the Senate. 6 In response to
the mandate, we reviewed (1) DOD*s rationale for hardship

2 Both hardship duty pay and hazardous duty pay are categorized as
*special and incentive pays,* which are compensation to uniformed
servicemembers in addition to their basic pay and allowances. These pays
are authorized to help the uniformed services meet specific

manpower requirements. 3 House Resolution 4546, National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2003, section 615. 4 H. Rept. 107- 772.

5 For this report, we use the terms *reserves* and *reservists* to refer
to the collective forces of the Air National Guard, the Army National
Guard, the Army Reserve, the Naval Reserve, the Marine Corps Reserve, and
the Air Force Reserve.

6 Senate Report 107- 151 accompanying the National Defense Authorization
Act for Fiscal Year 2003 directed the Secretary of Defense to conduct a
reserve personnel compensation review aimed at determining the extent to
which personnel compensation policies and

statutes appropriately address the demands placed on guard and reserve
personnel. The results of this review are to be submitted no later than
August 1, 2003.

Page 3 GAO- 03- 554 Military Personnel duty pay, including the 30- day
threshold; (2) the potential implications, including costs, of making an
exception to the 30- day threshold; and

(3) the 109th Airlift Wing*s justification for granting hazardous duty pay
for polar duty. In subsequent discussion with your staff, we agreed to
provide an assessment of granting an exception to the 30- day hardship
duty threshold for personnel performing duty in the polar regions.
Hardship duty pay is intended to compensate military personnel assigned

to areas where quality- of- life conditions are substantially below those
experienced by most personnel assigned in the continental United States.
OSD, which establishes and reviews hardship duty pay locations and rates,
concluded that personnel on duty in a hardship location for 30 consecutive

days or less do not endure the same range of physical hardships
experienced by those who are permanently assigned. According to an OSD
official, an OSD working group linked the 30- day hardship duty threshold
to family separation allowance, which compensates military personnel
deployed away from their family for more than 30 consecutive days. OSD did
not support the legislative provision to create an exception to the 30-
day threshold for missions to the polar regions. OSD asserted that the
proposed legislation circumvents DOD*s hardship duty location and rate
designation process. We found no basis to disagree with the criteria DOD
has established for hardship duty pay.

Allowing an exception to the 30- day threshold for members of the 109th
Airlift Wing deployed to the polar regions would result in minimal costs,
but this exception could set a precedent for DOD personnel performing
other short- term missions. The 109th Airlift Wing estimated that granting
this exception for its personnel would cost approximately $125,000 to
$130, 000 a year based on past years* deployment trends. The National

Science Foundation, which reimburses DOD for 109th Airlift Wing logistic
support in the polar regions, would incur most of these increased costs.
DOD officials said granting this exception would set a precedent for
additional exceptions at other hardship duty locations that, if approved,
could increase future hardship duty pay costs. DOD refused a similar
request from the Navy in 2002 for an exception to the 30- day threshold
for duty on Vieques Island, Puerto Rico. The costs of granting an
exception for DOD personnel performing short- term missions conducted at
other hardship locations are unknown.

The 109th Airlift Wing justified its proposal for hazardous duty pay for
military personnel performing duty in the polar regions on the basis of
the extreme working conditions they encounter and their exposure to
Results in Brief

Page 4 GAO- 03- 554 Military Personnel potential medical hazards. For
example, flight crews routinely conduct takeoffs and landings in remote
areas on snow and ice, and maintenance personnel work in temperatures as
low as minus 59 degrees Fahrenheit,

without the protection of hangars. Furthermore, personnel are exposed to
potential medical hazards such as hypothermia, frostbite, carbon monoxide
poisoning, ultraviolet radiation exposure, and dehydration. Unit officials
also expressed concern about the retention of unit personnel who require
additional training for the unit*s specialized missions in the polar
regions. However, they did not know what impact the proposed hazardous
duty pay for polar duty would have on retention. Exit surveys conducted at
the unit with separating personnel show that dissatisfaction with pay

was not among the most frequently cited reasons for leaving. Based on our
review of the intent of hardship duty pay and the implications of granting
an exception, we believe that granting an exception to the 30- day
hardship duty threshold is not justified under current DOD policy.
Concerning the 109th Airlift Wing*s request for hazardous duty pay for
polar operations, this report contains a recommendation that DOD, in
conducting its congressionally mandated study of special and incentive
pays for reservists performing duty in the polar regions, assess certain
factors in determining whether personnel performing polar duty should
receive hazardous duty pay. In commenting on a draft of this report, DOD
concurred with our recommendation.

The National Science Foundation conducts scientific research in the polar
regions of Antarctica and Greenland and funds and manages the U. S.
Antarctic Program. This program sends nearly 3,000 scientists and support
personnel to Antarctica each year to support scientific research in areas
such as astrophysics, atmospheric chemistry, biology, earth sciences,
ocean and climate systems, and glaciology. The National Science Foundation
also chairs an interagency committee to coordinate the scientific research
efforts of all federal agencies in the Arctic region, including Greenland.
The 109th Airlift Wing is the main provider of air logistic support for
National Science Foundation activities in Antarctica. The unit also
supports the activities of the National Science Foundation and other
agencies in Greenland. Members of the 109th Airlift Wing train on and
operate unique LC- 130 ski- equipped aircraft that take off and land on
snow and ice (see fig. 1). The unit operates 10 LC- 130 aircraft.
Background

Page 5 GAO- 03- 554 Military Personnel Figure 1: Ski- Tipped LC- 130
Aircraft Operated by the 109th Airlift Wing, New York Air National Guard
The 109th Airlift Wing supports U. S. Antarctic Program mission
requirements from mid- October to the end of February each year. 7 It

employs 220 full- time Active Guard and Reserve members whose principal
task is to support this program. It receives additional support from
*traditional* guardsmen, other Active Guard and Reserve members, and
military technicians of the 109th Airlift Wing, as well as members from

7 Under a 3- year transition period beginning in fiscal year 1997, the
109th Airlift Wing assumed responsibility for operating and maintaining
the LC- 130 aircraft from the Department of the Navy in support of the U.
S. Antarctic Program. The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal
Year 1996 authorized the Air National Guard to assume the Navy*s role in
air logistic support to the National Science Foundation. The Navy had
provided support to this program since 1955 when U. S. presence at McMurdo
Station, Antarctica, was established. The 109th Airlift Wing began to
support the Navy in 1988.

Page 6 GAO- 03- 554 Military Personnel other military units. 8 Operations
are conducted from McMurdo Station, the permanent logistics station for U.
S. operations in Antarctica. The

109th Airlift Wing schedules between 450 and 500 flights in Antarctica for
the 5- month operational season to meet National Science Foundation
requirements. According to the 109th Airlift Wing, personnel typically
deploy for a period of 1 to 13 weeks, which includes up to 1 week of
travel from New York to Antarctica. These deployments are conducted on a
rotational basis. The 109th Airlift Wing maintains a presence of
approximately 120 personnel (50 operational, 61 logistic, and 9 support)
at McMurdo Station from October to the end of February.

In Greenland, the 109th Airlift Wing performs training missions for unit
personnel who will deploy to Antarctica. The unit also performs scientific
support missions for the National Science Foundation as well as for the
National Aeronautics and Space Administration and European research
programs. 9 Unit operations in Greenland run from mid- March to September
each year and are conducted from staging locations at Thule Air Base and
Kangerlussuaq. Missions are flown to all parts of the Greenland Ice Cap,
northern Canadian locations, and Arctic Ocean camps. The 109th conducts 10
to 12 1- week deployments to Greenland.

Within OSD, the Under Secretary of Defense (Personnel and Readiness) is
responsible for DOD personnel policy, including oversight of reserve
affairs and military personnel pay and benefits. The Under Secretary of
Defense (Personnel and Readiness) leads the Unified Legislation and
Budgeting process, which was established in 1994 to develop and review
personnel compensation proposals. 10 In addition, the Office of the Under
Secretary of Defense (Personnel and Readiness) is conducting the

8 Active Guard and Reserve members provide full- time active duty support
to Guard, Reserve, and Active Component organizations. Military
technicians are dual status active duty members who perform day- to- day
management, administration, and maintenance. They are civil service
employees of the federal government who must be military members of the
unit that employs them. 9 The 109th Airlift Wing took over the mission of
supporting the Defense Early Warning radar installations located on the
Greenland Ice Cap from the Air Force Alaskan Air

Command in 1975 and has conducted support for scientific research since
1978. 10 The Under Secretary of Defense (Personnel and Readiness) chairs
biannual meetings, which are attended by the principal voting members from
the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense (Personnel and Readiness),
including the Assistant Secretary of Defense (Reserve Affairs), the
Assistant Secretary of Defense (Health Affairs), and the Assistant
Secretary of Defense (Force Management Policy); the Office of the Under
Secretary of Defense (Comptroller); the Joint Staff; and the service
secretaries.

Page 7 GAO- 03- 554 Military Personnel congressionally mandated review of
special and incentive pays for reservists performing duty in the polar
regions.

Hardship duty pay compensates military personnel on duty for more than 30
consecutive days in harsh or difficult living conditions. The Secretary of
Defense has the authority to establish implementing regulations for such
pay, including the designation of hardship duty locations and rates. 11
Within OSD, the Assistant Secretary of Defense (Force Management

Policy) tasked a working group in 1998 to develop hardship duty pay
policy. 12 The working group determined that (1) uniformed members who
perform duty in designated hardship locations for more than

30 consecutive days are eligible for hardship duty pay and (2) this pay is
not intended to compensate for difficult working conditions. According to
DOD, personnel assigned to an area for a short period do not endure the

same range of physical hardships as those in the area on a long- term
basis. According to an OSD official, the working group linked the 30- day
hardship duty threshold to family separation allowance, 13 which

compensates members who are away from their families for more than 30
consecutive days. We found no basis to disagree with the criteria DOD has
established for hardship duty pay.

OSD, in its appeal submitted in response to the National Defense
Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2003, opposed the legislation creating
an exception to the 30- day hardship duty threshold for missions to the
polar regions on the grounds that it *unnecessarily circumvents a process
that has proven to be a fair and equitable means of setting hardship duty
pay location rates worldwide.* The Assistant Secretary of Defense (Force
Management Policy) 14 regularly reviews and determines hardship duty
locations and rates. In certain instances, the Assistant Secretary of
Defense (Force Management Policy) automatically designates hardship duty
locations. All installations located on land areas or an ice shelf above
66 degrees 33 minutes north latitude (Arctic region) or below 60 degrees
south latitude (Antarctica) are designated as hardship duty locations. For

11 37 U. S. C. 305. 12 Hardship duty pay was authorized in 1999 and went
into effect on January 1, 2001. 13 37 U. S. C. 427. 14 This position has
been replaced by the Principal Deputy Under Secretary of Defense
(Personnel and Readiness). DOD*s Rationale for

Hardship Duty Pay

Page 8 GAO- 03- 554 Military Personnel all other locations, unified
commanders with regional responsibilities submit a completed Hardship Duty
Location Assessment Questionnaire to the Assistant Secretary of Defense
(Force Management Policy), who

reviews these requests twice a year. Monthly pay rates for hardship duty
are $50, $100, and $150 and are based on the severity of living
conditions. Living conditions are placed into three categories: (1)
physical environment, which includes factors such as climate and physical
and social isolation; (2) living conditions, including sanitation,
disease, medical

facilities, housing, food, and recreational and community facilities; and
(3) personal security, including political violence, harassment, and
crime. Hardship duty performed for more than 30 consecutive days in
Antarctica and Greenland qualifies at the $150 monthly rate.

Allowing an exception to the 30- day hardship duty threshold for members
of the 109th Airlift Wing who deploy to the polar regions would result in
minimal additional costs. The National Science Foundation reimburses DOD
for 109th Airlift Wing logistic support in the polar regions and would
incur most of these additional costs. However, allowing this exception
could set a precedent for DOD personnel performing other missions lasting
30 days or less. The costs of granting an exception for short- term
missions conducted at other hardship locations are unknown.

The 109th Airlift Wing estimated that granting an exception to the 30- day
hardship duty threshold for unit members deployed to the polar regions
would cost approximately $125,000 to $130,000 a year based on deployment
trends in past years. We did not verify the cost data. In fiscal

year 2002, for example, the unit had a total of 1,478 deployments to the
polar regions, including 690 to Antarctica and 788 to Greenland. 15 Unit
members deployed for a total of 15, 846 days, including 11,906 days in
Antarctica and 3,940 days in Greenland. According to a unit official,
approximately 30 unit members deployed for more than 30 consecutive days.
The 109th Airlift Wing estimated that if the exception to the 30- day
threshold had been in effect in fiscal year 2002, hardship duty pay costs
for that year would have increased by about $127,000, including 15 These
figures include unit members who deployed more than once to the polar
regions.

Thus, the total number of individuals deployed was less than the total
number of deployments. Granting a Hardship Duty Exception for

the Polar Regions Could Set a Precedent for Other Short- Term Missions

Estimated Costs of Granting the 109th Airlift Wing an Exception to the 30-
Day Threshold

Page 9 GAO- 03- 554 Military Personnel approximately $95,000 for
deployments to Antarctica and approximately $32,000 for deployments to
Greenland.

The National Science Foundation would incur most of these increased costs.
It directly reimburses DOD for 109th Airlift Wing logistic support
performed in Antarctica, including personnel and training costs above and
beyond the unit*s wartime task requirements. The reimbursements from the
National Science Foundation include funding for the 220 full- time Active
Guard and Reserve members employed for the polar mission and for all
flying training hours required for these personnel to maintain their
qualifications. The National Science Foundation reported that the total
costs in fiscal year 2002 for the unit*s support of Antarctic missions
were $22.7 million. For operations in Greenland, the 109th Airlift Wing is
reimbursed by its customers, including the National Science Foundation,
based on a rate structure established by DOD for each particular mission.

For example, the National Science Foundation reimbursed the 109th Airlift
Wing about $375,000 in fiscal year 2002 for missions in Greenland.

Other military personnel performing short- term assignments in the polar
regions would also benefit from an exception to the 30- day hardship duty
threshold. For example, the Air Force Reserve*s 445th Airlift Wing and the
452nd Airlift Mobility Wing conduct passenger and cargo flights on C- 141
wheeled aircraft between Christchurch, New Zealand, and McMurdo Station,
Antarctica. An OSD official said information was not readily available on
the additional estimated costs of granting the exception for these
personnel.

According to officials within the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense
(Personnel and Readiness), allowing an exception to the 30- day hardship
duty threshold would set a precedent for other short- term missions that
last 30 consecutive days or less. Of the 170 hardship duty locations, 67
locations (39 percent) qualify at the maximum monthly pay rate of $150. 16
In 2002, DOD refused a request by the Navy for an exception to the 30- day
threshold for duty on Vieques Island, Puerto Rico. 17 The Navy stated that
security personnel who are deployed to the island on a 14- day

16 Locations qualifying at the $150 monthly rate include Kazakhstan,
Turkmenistan, and Vietnam. 17 While DOD rejected the Navy*s request for an
exception to the 30- day threshold, DOD approved the Navy*s request to
designate Vieques Island as a hardship duty location. Other Short- Term
Missions

Could Claim an Exception to the 30- Day Threshold

Page 10 GAO- 03- 554 Military Personnel rotational schedule live in
*substandard conditions.* DOD, in turning down the request, stated that
*members on a short- term duration tour- of- duty do

not endure the range of physical hardships experienced by those who are
permanently assigned.* According to an official within the Office of the
Under Secretary of Defense (Personnel and Readiness), granting an

exception to the 30- day threshold for other short- term missions would
result in additional hardship duty pay costs, but these costs are unknown
because DOD has not conducted a cost analysis.

The 109th Airlift Wing justified its proposal for hazardous duty pay for
military personnel performing duty in the polar regions on the basis of
the extreme working conditions they encounter and their exposure to
potential medical hazards. Unit officials also expressed concern about the
retention of unit personnel, but they did not know what impact hazardous
duty pay for polar duty would have on retention. A senior unit official
said the unit submitted a proposal in 2000 to the New

York Guard seeking modifications to a DOD regulation 18 to designate polar
operations as hazardous duty. Hazardous duty pay is a type of incentive
pay intended to induce personnel to volunteer for duties that may be
hazardous. According to the senior unit official, the New York Guard
submitted the proposal to Congress. The proposal was not provided to DOD
for consideration in the DOD Unified Legislation and Budgeting process,
which reviews personnel compensation proposals. Although the 109th Airlift
Wing*s proposal addressed hazardous duty pay, Congress developed a
legislative provision in 2002 to grant an exception to the 30- day
hardship duty pay threshold. The senior 109th Airlift Wing official said
the unit*s justification for hazardous duty pay for polar operations

could also be applied to hardship duty pay. According to information
provided by the 109th Airlift Wing, military personnel performing duty in
the polar regions encounter extreme working conditions and face exposure
to potential medical hazards. Flight crews routinely conduct takeoffs and
landings in remote areas on snow and ice. In zero visibility conditions,
they must use emergency whiteout landing procedures. Maintenance personnel
work in temperatures as low

18 DOD Financial Management Regulation 7000. 14- R, vol. 7A, ch. 24,
*Parachute Duty, Flight Deck Duty, Demolition Duty, Experimental Stress
Duty and Others Listed.* Factors Cited as

Justifying Hazardous Duty Pay for Personnel Performing Duty in Polar
Regions

Extreme Operating Conditions and Exposure to Potential Medical Hazards

Page 11 GAO- 03- 554 Military Personnel as minus 59 degrees Fahrenheit
without the protection of hangars. Operations in these conditions expose
personnel to potential medical

hazards such as hypothermia, frostbite, carbon monoxide poisoning, and
ultraviolet radiation exposure. In addition, the unit indicated that the
dry conditions in Antarctica can lead to dehydration and fatigue. A small
clinic at McMurdo station is capable of treating minor injuries, but all
major injuries and surgeries must be treated in Christchurch, New Zealand.
(App. I provides a more detailed description of the conditions in which

deployed members operate and their exposure to potential medical hazards.)

National Science Foundation officials acknowledged that the operating
environment in Antarctica can be harsh and that employees from all
participating agencies and organizations * not just 109th Airlift Wing
personnel * face difficult working conditions. 19 They said the National
Science Foundation has adopted a variety of procedures that mitigate the
hazards faced by U. S. Antarctic Program participants, including
scientists, support contractor personnel, civilian federal employees, and
DOD civilian and military personnel. National Science Foundation officials
said operational improvements were implemented to make Antarctic flight
operations safer and to mitigate the impact of the harsh environment on
personnel. For example, an emergency divert airfield was established in
2002, and navigational aids and more accurate weather forecasting
capabilities have been implemented and remain a high priority.

While duty performed for more than 30 consecutive days in the polar
regions of Antarctica and Greenland qualifies for hardship duty pay, duty
in the polar regions has not been designated as a hazardous duty. Section
301 of title 37 of the United States Code designates certain duties
entitled to hazardous duty pay. These duties include parachute jumps,
demolition of explosives, and participation in flight deck operations on
an aircraft carrier. Other hazardous duties include exposure to above-
normal levels of toxic fuels or propellants, and the handling of chemical
munitions. Personnel handling these materials are compensated for the
potential for accidental or inadvertent exposure and not for actual
detectable exposure to these materials.

19 The National Science Foundation reimburses its personnel for travel
expenses in addition to their regular salary while deployed to the polar
regions. National Science Foundation personnel also receive a pay
differential equivalent to 25 percent of their regular salary effective on
the 43rd day of their deployment and continuing through the end of their
deployment. This pay differential is not retroactive.

Page 12 GAO- 03- 554 Military Personnel A 109th Airlift Wing official
expressed concern over the retention of unit personnel who require
additional training for polar duty. Flight crews

receive training in Greenland and Antarctica on how to land on and take
off from snow and ice and in zero visibility conditions. Flight crews are
also required to attend arctic survival training in Greenland where they
learn how to survive on an ice cap for extended periods with no heat and
limited survival gear. Flight crews typically take 3 years to receive
their qualification to fly ski- equipped aircraft. Maintenance personnel
attend a maintenance recovery school in Greenland, which teaches basic
polar survival skills to enable them to cope with the extreme conditions
they confront when they repair aircraft with little support equipment.

A 109th Airlift Wing official said the unit is experiencing a high
turnover of Active Guard and Reserve members who directly support polar
missions in aerospace maintenance (pay grades E- 5 and E- 7) and aircraft
hydraulics (pay grades E- 5 and E- 7). For the entire 109th Airlift Wing,
the unit has difficulty retaining *traditional* guardsmen in the following
critical skills: aerospace maintenance and ground equipment, avionics, and
aircraft fuels. Despite retention difficulties in some critical skills,
the unit filled

98 percent of the Active Guard and Reserve positions who directly support
operations in Antarctica in 2002. The retention fill rate for the entire
unit was 97 percent during the same year.

A unit official said it is unknown what impact hazardous duty pay for
polar duty would have on retention of unit personnel. Exit surveys
conducted with separating personnel show that dissatisfaction with pay is
one of

several reasons for leaving, but is not the primary separation factor.
Between 2001- 2003, 165 members left the unit. The most frequently cited
separation factors were family conflict, civilian job conflict, 20 and
weekend drills (see fig. 2).

20 According to a unit official, civilian job conflict would be a
separation factor only for traditional guardsmen and for not Active Guard
and Reserve members since the latter serve full time. No Clear Linkage
between

Retention and Performance of Duty in Polar Regions

Page 13 GAO- 03- 554 Military Personnel Figure 2: Main Factors Influencing
Members of the 109th Airlift Wing to Leave the Unit (2001- 2003)

Notes: Includes 2003 data as of February 3, 2003. One hundred sixty- five
persons completed the exit survey, and each respondent could give multiple
reasons for separating.

The unit cannot track specific mission concerns such as deployments to the
polar regions as separation factors. The exit surveys used by the 109th
Airlift Wing do not indicate whether an individual*s reason for leaving is
connected specifically with polar duty. A unit official stated that, based
on responses for reasons for leaving, it is possible to *subjectively
deduce that length of deployments and distance from home, as in polar
deployments, are key factors influencing retention decisions.* The exit
surveys also do not track separation factors based on personnel categories
such as military technicians, Active Guard and Reserve, Active Guard and
Reserve who support the U. S. Antarctic Program, and drilling reservists.
Based on our discussions with the 109th Airlift Wing concerning the exit

Page 14 GAO- 03- 554 Military Personnel surveys, the unit has modified the
exit survey to track deployments to the polar regions as a separation
factor.

The hardship duty pay legislation introduced in 2002 * directed at the
109th Airlift Wing * would have created an exception to (1) the 30- day
hardship duty pay threshold and (2) the monthly hardship duty rate
established by DOD for the polar regions. We believe that granting such an
exception for hardship duty pay is not justified under current DOD policy.
First, DOD intends for hardship duty pay to compensate military personnel
who endure a range of hardship on a long- term basis * defined by DOD as
more than 30 consecutive days. Granting this exception could set a
precedent for DOD personnel performing other missions that do not meet the
30- day threshold, which could increase hardship duty pay costs. Second,
under current DOD policy, hardship duty pay is intended to compensate
personnel for harsh or difficult living conditions, rather than for
difficult working conditions. However, the 109th Airlift Wing cited the
extreme working conditions encountered by personnel deployed to the polar
regions.

According to the 109th Airlift Wing, unit personnel are subjected to
extreme conditions and are exposed to potential medical hazards while on
duty in the polar regions. These factors warrant consideration as part of
DOD*s review of special and incentive pays for personnel performing duty
in the polar regions. In addition, because one of the purposes of
hazardous duty pay is to induce personnel to volunteer for duties that may
be hazardous, we believe that retention data should also be considered as
part of DOD*s review. Officials from the 109th Airlift Wing expressed
concerns about current retention rates, but they did not know what impact
hazardous duty pay for polar duty would have on retention. Exit surveys
conducted with separating personnel show that dissatisfaction with pay was
not among the most frequently cited reasons that members of the unit
provided for leaving. At the time we conducted our review, the 109th
Airlift Wing was not collecting retention data related to members who were
deployed to the polar regions. Collecting this data would be helpful to
target retention incentives to the personnel categories experiencing the
highest turnover rates. According to an official of the 109th Airlift
Wing, the unit has modified the exit survey it uses to track deployments
to the polar regions as a separation factor. Conclusions

Page 15 GAO- 03- 554 Military Personnel Congress has directed DOD to study
special and incentive pays for reservists performing duty in the polar
regions. As part of this study, we

recommend that the Secretary of Defense direct the Under Secretary of
Defense (Personnel and Readiness) to assess certain factors in determining
whether personnel performing polar duty should receive

hazardous duty pay. These factors are  the extreme working conditions
that military personnel encounter

while performing polar duty,  the exposure of military personnel to
potential medical hazards related

to polar duty, and  retention data for military personnel performing
polar duty.

In written comments on a draft of this report, DOD concurred with our
recommendation on assessing certain factors to determine whether personnel
performing polar duty should receive hazardous duty pay. DOD*s comments
are reprinted in appendix II.

DOD and the National Science Foundation also provided technical comments
that we incorporated as appropriate.

Our review focused on special and incentive pay for DOD personnel
performing duty in the polar regions. To develop the information in this
report, we interviewed DOD officials in the Office of the Assistant
Secretary of Defense for Reserve Affairs, the Office of Military
Compensation, and the Air National Guard. We also met with officials at
the National Science Foundation. We visited Stratton Air Guard Base, where
we interviewed officials from the 109th Airlift Wing, New York Air
National Guard. In addition, we reviewed DOD Financial Management
Regulations related to hardship duty pay and hazardous duty pay.

To assess DOD*s rationale for hardship duty pay, including the 30- day
threshold, we reviewed the legislative history concerning hardship duty
pay, analyzed DOD policies implementing this pay, and interviewed OSD
officials. To assess the potential implications, including costs, of
making an exception to the 30- day threshold, we reviewed cost data from
the 109th Airlift Wing and interviewed officials from OSD, the 109th
Airlift Wing, and the National Science Foundation. We did not verify cost
data provided by the 109th Airlift Wing. To assess the justification for
Recommendation for

Executive Action Agency Comments Scope and Methodology

Page 16 GAO- 03- 554 Military Personnel hazardous duty pay for polar duty,
we obtained documentation on the 109th Airlift Wing*s operational
activities and the conditions unit members

encounter when deployed to polar regions. We also obtained and analyzed
retention data for 109th Airlift Wing personnel performing duty in the
polar regions.

We conducted our review from December 2002 to March 2003 in accordance
with generally accepted government auditing standards.

We are sending copies of this report to the Secretary of Defense; the
Under Secretary of Defense (Personnel and Readiness); the Director,
National Science Foundation; and the Director, Office of Management and
Budget. In addition, the report will be available at no charge on GAO*s
Web site at www. gao. gov.

If you or your staff have any questions regarding this report, please call
me at (202) 512- 5140 or Brenda S. Farrell at (202) 512- 3604. Major
contributors to this report were Kelly Baumgartner, Thomas W. Gosling, and
Timothy Wilson.

Derek B. Stewart Director, Defense Capabilities and Management

Appendix I: Extreme Operating Conditions and Potential Medical Hazards
Encountered by Personnel Deployed to the Polar Regions

Page 17 GAO- 03- 554 Military Personnel The 109th Airlift Wing submitted a
proposal in 2000 to the New York Guard seeking to modify the Department of
Defense*s (DOD) current

hazardous duty pay regulation by designating as hazardous duty (1) duty
involving frequent and regular participation in flight operations in
skiequipped LC- 130 aircraft conducting ski landings and takeoffs on snow
in polar locations and (2) duty involving maintenance of LC- 130 ski-
equipped aircraft as a primary duty in polar locations. The 109th Airlift
Wing justified its proposal to designate polar operations as hazardous
duty on the basis of two primary factors * difficult working conditions,
including cold temperatures, and exposure to potential medical hazards.

According to the 109 th Airlift Wing, flight crews and maintenance
personnel operate and maintain LC- 130 ski- equipped aircraft in difficult
working conditions. Specific hazards and risks include the following:

 Ski takeoffs include steering with asymmetrical use of the throttles and
the rudder only, since use of the nose wheel will cause aircraft damage.
The aircraft is highly susceptible to sliding off ski ways in high winds,
particularly at low speeds (below 60 knots), when the rudder is not
effective.

 Ski landings are performed in extreme, remote areas of Antarctica and
Greenland, hundreds of miles from any station or site; on glaciers and
open snow locations in areas not surveyed and never before visited by
humans; on crevasses that are hidden under snow bridges; and in katabatic
winds that often make landing and taxiing on skis extremely difficult.

 Whiteout procedures require flight crews to perform an approach and
landing in a designated area in zero visibility weather conditions.  Ski
approaches in bad weather include a lack of external navigation

aids to orient the aircraft on approach, flying in weather conditions down
to 300 feet above ground and 1 mile visibility, and flying in conditions
that can induce extreme vertigo when there is no contrast between the
white snow and white clouds.

 Many missions are flown to high altitude elevations. Each year over 250
missions are flown to the South Pole at an elevation of over 9,300 feet.
Many missions are flown to camps in Antarctica and Greenland at field
elevations greater than 10,000 feet and some as high as 12,000 feet.
Appendix I: Extreme Operating Conditions

and Potential Medical Hazards Encountered by Personnel Deployed to the
Polar Regions

Difficult Working Conditions

Appendix I: Extreme Operating Conditions and Potential Medical Hazards
Encountered by Personnel Deployed to the Polar Regions

Page 18 GAO- 03- 554 Military Personnel  Assisted take- off rockets are
routinely used for getting an aircraft airborne on a takeoff from high
altitude sites. Aircraft must achieve a

higher than normal ground speed to reach the proper indicated airspeed to
get enough lift for takeoff due to thin air. The snow at high altitude
locations is often unprepared, which creates additional drag and makes it
more difficult to build up speed during the takeoff slide.

 Unit personnel fly missions to locations where there is no camp, no
personnel, and no equipment, which creates the risk of being stranded.
There is no rescue capability at these locations other than another LC-
130 aircraft.

 Personnel are exposed to extremely cold temperatures as low as minus 59
degrees Fahrenheit. Wind chills can be as high as minus 100 degrees
Fahrenheit.  All fueling and cargo operations are conducted with engines
running,

which requires a flight engineer to operate the refueling panel outside
for 30 to 40 minutes directly behind running engines. Loadmasters are also
outside of the aircraft for periods of 1 to 3 hours off- loading and on-
loading cargo from the snow with engines running.

 Cargo loading and unloading are extremely difficult, often with little
or no material handling equipment. Two to three hours of manual labor are
often required by the flight crews to load and unload cargo in the snow.
This activity is extremely hazardous due to the extreme physical exertions
required with little oxygen in the atmosphere and exhaust fumes from the
aircraft engines.

According to the 109 th Airlift Wing, polar operations expose 109th
Airlift Wing personnel to a variety of potential medical hazards.
Potential medical hazards include the following:

 Frostbite and hypothermia * Brief exposure to polar temperatures can
have a severe impact. For example, exposed flesh freezes at minus 59
degrees Fahrenheit within 1 minute, with no wind.

 Carbon monoxide poisoning * Aircraft maintenance and unloading
activities expose flight crews over a prolonged period to potentially
hazardous exhaust fumes.

 Continuous exposure to intense sunlight * Operations during the 5 months
in Antarctica are conducted in 24- hour direct sunlight. Potential Medical

Hazards

Appendix I: Extreme Operating Conditions and Potential Medical Hazards
Encountered by Personnel Deployed to the Polar Regions

Page 19 GAO- 03- 554 Military Personnel Exposure to ultraviolet radiation
is greatly increased due to the hazard of the *ozone hole* over the
Antarctic continent.

Appendix II: Comments from the Department of Defense

Page 20 GAO- 03- 554 Military Personnel Appendix II: Comments from the
Department of Defense

Appendix II: Comments from the Department of Defense

Page 21 GAO- 03- 554 Military Personnel (350281)

The General Accounting Office, the audit, evaluation and investigative arm
of Congress, exists to support Congress in meeting its constitutional
responsibilities and to help improve the performance and accountability of
the federal government for the American people. GAO examines the use of
public funds; evaluates federal programs and policies; and provides
analyses, recommendations, and other assistance to help Congress make
informed oversight, policy, and funding decisions. GAO*s commitment to
good government is reflected in its core values of accountability,
integrity, and reliability.

The fastest and easiest way to obtain copies of GAO documents at no cost
is through the Internet. GAO*s Web site (www. gao. gov) contains abstracts
and fulltext files of current reports and testimony and an expanding
archive of older products. The Web site features a search engine to help
you locate documents using key words and phrases. You can print these
documents in their entirety, including charts and other graphics.

Each day, GAO issues a list of newly released reports, testimony, and
correspondence. GAO posts this list, known as *Today*s Reports,* on its
Web site daily. The list contains links to the full- text document files.
To have GAO e- mail

this list to you every afternoon, go to www. gao. gov and select
*Subscribe to daily E- mail alert for newly released products* under the
GAO Reports heading.

The first copy of each printed report is free. Additional copies are $2
each. A check or money order should be made out to the Superintendent of
Documents. GAO also accepts VISA and Mastercard. Orders for 100 or more
copies mailed to a single address are discounted 25 percent. Orders should
be sent to: U. S. General Accounting Office 441 G Street NW, Room LM
Washington, D. C. 20548 To order by Phone: Voice: (202) 512- 6000

TDD: (202) 512- 2537 Fax: (202) 512- 6061

Contact: Web site: www. gao. gov/ fraudnet/ fraudnet. htm E- mail:
fraudnet@ gao. gov Automated answering system: (800) 424- 5454 or (202)
512- 7470 Jeff Nelligan, managing director, NelliganJ@ gao. gov (202) 512-
4800

U. S. General Accounting Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7149 Washington, D.
C. 20548 GAO*s Mission Obtaining Copies of

GAO Reports and Testimony

Order by Mail or Phone To Report Fraud, Waste, and Abuse in Federal
Programs Public Affairs
*** End of document. ***