S. HRG. 112–80, PT. 6 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION FOR 

APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2012 AND 

THE FUTURE YEARS DEFENSE PROGRAM 

HEARINGS 

BEFORE THE

COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES 

UNITED STATES SENATE 

ONE HUNDRED TWELFTH CONGRESS 

FIRST SESSION 

ON 

S. 1253 

TO AUTHORIZE APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2012 FOR MILITARY 

ACTIVITIES OF THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AND FOR MILITARY 

CONSTRUCTION, TO PRESCRIBE MILITARY PERSONNEL STRENGTHS 

FOR FISCAL YEAR 2012, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES 

PART 6 

PERSONNEL 

APRIL 13; MAY 4, 11, 2011 

( 

Printed for the use of the Committee on Armed Services 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION FOR APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2012 AND THE FUTURE YEARS 

DEFENSE PROGRAM—Part 6 PERSONNEL 

U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office

Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800

Fax: (202) 512–2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402–0001

68–089 PDF 2012

S. HRG. 112–80 PT. 6 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION FOR 

APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2012 AND 

THE FUTURE YEARS DEFENSE PROGRAM 

HEARINGS 

BEFORE THE

COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES 

UNITED STATES SENATE 

ONE HUNDRED TWELFTH CONGRESS 

FIRST SESSION 

ON 

S. 1253 

TO AUTHORIZE APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2012 FOR MILITARY 

ACTIVITIES OF THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AND FOR MILITARY 

CONSTRUCTION, TO PRESCRIBE MILITARY PERSONNEL STRENGTHS 

FOR FISCAL YEAR 2012, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES 

PART 6 

PERSONNEL 

APRIL 13; MAY 4, 11, 2011 

Printed for the use of the Committee on Armed Services 

( 

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

COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES 

CARL LEVIN, Michigan, Chairman 

JOSEPH I. LIEBERMAN, Connecticut 

JACK REED, Rhode Island 

DANIEL K. AKAKA, Hawaii 

E. BENJAMIN NELSON, Nebraska 

JIM WEBB, Virginia 

CLAIRE MCCASKILL, Missouri 

MARK UDALL, Colorado 

KAY R. HAGAN, North Carolina 

MARK BEGICH, Alaska 

JOE MANCHIN III, West Virginia 

JEANNE SHAHEEN, New Hampshire 

KIRSTEN E. GILLIBRAND, New York 

RICHARD BLUMENTHAL, Connecticut 

JOHN MCCAIN, Arizona 

JAMES M. INHOFE, Oklahoma 

JEFF SESSIONS, Alabama 

SAXBY CHAMBLISS, Georgia 

ROGER F. WICKER, Mississippi 

SCOTT P. BROWN, Massachusetts 

ROB PORTMAN, Ohio 

KELLY AYOTTE, New Hampshire 

SUSAN M. COLLINS, Maine 

LINDSEY GRAHAM, South Carolina 

JOHN CORNYN, Texas 

DAVID VITTER, Louisiana 

RICHARD D. DEBOBES, Staff Director 

DAVID M. MORRISS, Minority Staff Director 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON PERSONNEL

JIM WEBB, Virginia, Chairman 

JOSEPH I. LIEBERMAN, Connecticut 

DANIEL K. AKAKA, Hawaii 

CLAIRE MCCASKILL, Missouri 

KAY R. HAGAN, North Carolina 

MARK BEGICH, Alaska 

RICHARD BLUMENTHAL, Connecticut 

LINDSEY GRAHAM, South Carolina 

SAXBY CHAMBLISS, Georgia 

SCOTT P. BROWN, Massachusetts 

KELLY AYOTTE, New Hampshire 

SUSAN M. COLLINS, Maine 

DAVID VITTER, Louisiana 

(II) 

C O N T E N T S 

CHRONOLOGICAL LIST OF WITNESSES 

ACTIVE, GUARD, RESERVE, AND CIVILIAN PERSONNEL PROGRAMS

APRIL 13, 2011

Page 

Nelson, Hon. Bill, U.S. Senator from the State of Florida ................................... 3 

Chandler, SGM Raymond F., III, Sergeant Major of the Army, USA ................. 6 

Kent, Sgt. Maj. Carlton W., Sergeant Major of the Marine Corps, USMC ......... 10 

West, MCPON Rick D., Master Chief Petty Officer of the Navy, USN .............. 25 

Roy, CMSAF James A., Chief Master Sergeant of the Air Force, USAF ............ 33 

Barnes, Master Chief Joseph L., USN (Ret.) ......................................................... 68 

Strobridge, Col. Steven P., USAF (Ret.), Director of Government Relations, 

Military Officers Association of America ............................................................ 76 

Moakler, Kathleen B., Government Relations Director, National Military 

Family Association ............................................................................................... 106 

Puzon, CAPT Ike, USN (Ret.) ................................................................................. 132 

Roth-Douquet, Kathy, Chairman, Blue Star Families .......................................... 146 

CONTINUATION OF TESTIMONY ON THE ACTIVE, GUARD, RESERVE, AND CIVILIAN

PERSONNEL PROGRAMS

MAY 4, 2011

Stanley, Hon. Clifford L. Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness ........................................................................................................................ 189 

Hale, Hon. Robert F., Under Secretary of Defense, Comptroller, and Chief 

Financial Officer ................................................................................................... 225 

McCarthy, Hon. Dennis M., Assistant Secretary of Defense for Reserve Affairs ....................................................................................................................... 232 

Woodson, Hon. Jonathan, M.D., Assistant Secretary of Defense for Health 

Affairs, Director of TRICARE Management Activity ........................................ 248 

CONTINUATION OF TESTIMONY ON THE ACTIVE, GUARD, RESERVE, AND CIVILIAN

PERSONNEL PROGRAMS

MAY 11, 2011

Lamont, Hon. Thomas R., Assistant Secretary of the Army for Manpower 

and Reserve Affairs .............................................................................................. 308 

Bostick, LTG Thomas P., USA, Deputy Chief of Staff G–1, U.S. Army .............. 320 

Garcia, Hon. Juan M., III, Assistant Secretary of the Navy for Manpower 

and Reserve Affairs .............................................................................................. 321 

Ferguson, VADM Mark E., III, USN, Chief of Naval Personnel, U.S. Navy ...... 345 

Milstead, Lt. Gen. Robert E., Jr., USMC, Deputy Commandant for Manpower 

and Reserve Affairs, U.S. Marine Corps ............................................................ 346 

(III) 

Page

IV 

Ginsberg, Hon. Daniel B., Assistant Secretary of the Air Force for Manpower 

and Reserve Affairs .............................................................................................. 347 

Jones, Lt. Gen. Darrell D., USAF, Deputy Chief of Staff for Manpower, 

Personnel, and Services, U.S. Air Force ............................................................. 355 

(1) 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION 

FOR APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 

2012 AND THE FUTURE YEARS DEFENSE 

PROGRAM 

WEDNESDAY, APRIL 13, 2011 

U.S. SENATE, SUBCOMMITTEE ON PERSONNEL, COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES, Washington, DC. 

ACTIVE, GUARD, RESERVE, AND CIVILIAN PERSONNEL 

PROGRAMS 

The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 1:34 p.m. in room 

SR–222, Russell Senate Office Building, Senator Jim Webb (chairman of the subcommittee) presiding. 

Committee members present: Senators Webb, Blumenthal, and 

Ayotte. 

Majority staff members present: Jonathan D. Clark, counsel; 

Gabriella E. Fahrer, counsel; and Gerald J. Leeling, counsel. 

Minority staff members present: Diana G. Tabler, professional 

staff member; and Richard F. Walsh, minority counsel. 

Staff assistants present: Jennifer R. Knowles and Christine G. 

Lang. 

Committee members’ assistants present: Juliet Beyler and Gordon Peterson, assistants to Senator Webb; Lindsay Kavanaugh, assistant to Senator Begich; Jeremy Bratt, assistant to Senator 

Blumenthal; Charles Prosch, assistant to Senator Brown; and Brad 

Bowman, assistant to Senator Ayotte. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR JIM WEBB, CHAIRMAN 

Senator WEBB. The subcommittee will come to order. 

I would like to begin by saying we are awaiting the arrival of 

Senator Nelson, who is scheduled to be the first witness, but we’re 

going to go ahead and proceed. If he has not arrived by the time 

I finish with my opening statement, if he arrives while you’re testifying, then we will interrupt the testimony and take his statement. 

The subcommittee meets today to receive testimony on the Active, Guard, Reserve, and civilian personnel programs in review of 

the National Defense Authorization Request for Fiscal Year 2012 

and the Future Years Defense Program. 

Today, we hear from the senior enlisted advisor of each military 

Service, as well as representatives from servicemember-oriented 

beneficiary groups. 

2 

The Committee on Armed Services is an authorizing committee 

with the responsibility to examine and oversee all Department of 

Defense (DOD) programs and budgets. The Subcommittee on Personnel is responsible for oversight of all personnel programs, to include military personnel policy, pay, and benefits for Active Duty, 

Reserve, and retired military personnel and their families, military 

healthcare, and civilian personnel policy for DOD civilian employees. 

I am delighted to be serving with Senator Graham, as the ranking member, of this subcommittee. I don’t believe he’s going to be 

able to make the hearing today. But, for the record, and again, I’d 

point out that his experiences as a member of this subcommittee 

and as an Air Force Reserve officer adds a valuable perspective to 

our considerations. I’ve really enjoyed working with Senator 

Graham during my first year as chair of this subcommittee, and I 

know we’re going to have that same cooperation again. 

I’d like to also welcome Senators Blumenthal and Ayotte to the 

subcommittee. I think it’s the first time we’ve met this year. We 

have a really great group of people here on these issues. I think 

we’re very bipartisan in looking to the well-being of our men and 

women in uniform. 

In the event that the past few weeks and months have not made 

it obvious, Congress is taking a very careful look at budgets and 

spending levels; and DOD is not immune. Secretary Gates has embarked on an ambitious effort to realize efficiencies and save taxpayer dollars within the Department. As Joint Chiefs Chairman 

Admiral Mullen has said, the national debt may be our biggest national security threat as we move forward. 

In this spirit during our hearings this year on this subcommittee, 

I intend to take a closer look at department programs, the justifications, what they cost, and whether they are achieving their stated 

goals. To ensure that DOD obtains the greatest return on investment for every dollar it spends, Congress must do its part to make 

sure that funded programs are effective and efficient. Those that 

are not should be eliminated, and those that are should be sustained properly or perhaps even expanded, if necessary. This approach is fully in keeping with our roles as stewards of the public 

trust and taxpayer dollars. It’s also a practice that was in place in 

the 1980s, when I was Assistant Secretary of Defense and Secretary of the Navy. 

Our witnesses today do not have responsibility for developing the 

Department’s budget. What they do have, collectively, is more than 

120 years of military service among them, an acute sense of the 

challenges that our soldiers, sailors, airmen, marines, and their 

families face as we enter, now, the 10th year of sustained combat 

operations. I will look to each of our witnesses today, as the senior 

enlisted advisors of their Services, to give their frank advice regarding the health of the enlisted force, what programs and activities work, and which of them might need to be eliminated, expanded, or changed to ensure that we are properly attending to the 

well-being of our enlisted servicemembers and their families. 

In reading past testimony, it’s clear that all of these senior advisors rightly focus on quality of life in military families. Our miliVerDate Aug 31 2005 09:55 Jan 25, 2012 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 Y:\BORAWSKI\DOCS\68089.TXT JUNE PsN: JUNEB
3 

tary families, while by and large handling the stress of frequent 

and lengthy deployments, continue to face serious challenges. 

Having served in combat as a marine in Vietnam, I know what 

it’s like to be deployed. Having grown up in a military family, I 

know what it’s like to have a parent deployed. As a father and father-in-law of enlisted infantry marines, I also know what it’s like 

to have a child deployed, although I don’t think either of those marines would appreciate the fact that I just called them a ‘‘child.’’ 

[Laughter.] 

Senator WEBB. I am acutely mindful of our special obligation to 

see to the needs of servicemembers and their families and I take 

that responsibility very seriously. 

In this regard, I have, in the past, declined to support the administration’s proposed fee increase for military healthcare for certain 

military retirees. I think most of you know that. I start from the 

presumption that lifetime healthcare for career military personnel 

is part of a moral contract between our government and those who 

step forward to serve. In my view, they have earned this benefit 

through their years of service, and it would be wrong to change 

that benefit after they’ve held up their end of a moral contract. I’ll 

keep an open mind about discussion on this and other initiatives 

to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of our military 

healthcare benefits. I’m interested in what our witnesses today 

might have to say about these and other proposals. 

Finally, I’d like to acknowledge the work done by the First Lady, 

Michele Obama, and Dr. Jill Biden in support of military families. 

Yesterday, they launched Joining Forces, a program that seeks to 

bring together the private and public sectors to ensure that military families have the support they need. I know that Blue Star 

Families and the National Military Family Association (NMFA), 

represented on the second panel, have worked with the White 

House on this promising effort, and I look forward to hearing more 

about it. 

Before introducing our witnesses, I would like to welcome Senator Bill Nelson to the hearing and back to the Armed Services 

Committee, on which he spent many years. He has asked to appear 

before us to deliver a statement, relative to a piece of legislation 

that he has introduced—I believe he has introduced it every year 

over the past decade—to repeal the offset of the Survivor Benefit 

Plan (SBP) Annuity by Dependency and Indemnity Compensation 

(DIC). 

Senator Nelson, welcome. We appreciate your presence today. 

STATEMENT OF HON. BILL NELSON, U.S. SENATOR FROM THE 

STATE OF FLORIDA 

Senator NELSON. Mr. Chairman, thank you for your long service 

to the country and for your continued service. Even though you’ve 

announced your retirement from the Senate, that service that has 

been, as we say in the south, ‘‘in your bones,’’ will continue, and 

we appreciate it very much. 

I want to come and speak about this legislation, that you accurately noted that we have filed every year, about the inequity in 

the treatment of military survivors. 

4 

There’s a longstanding problem in our military survivor benefit 

system. The requirement for a dollar-for-dollar reduction in the 

SBP annuity by the amount—and offset by the amount of the Dependency and Indemnity Compensation received by the Department of Veterans Affairs—it’s that inequity that I want to address 

and that I have addressed each year that I have been here. Over 

the years, we have chipped away at it, but the basic inequity is still 

there. 

Obviously, we are in a tough fiscal environment, and obviously, 

there are many worthy pieces of legislation to be funded. I realize 

that, in this environment, we are going to have to find an offset. 

What has typically happened, we always pass this in the Senate 

and it goes to the conference. Because of the cost of this legislation, 

it’s dropped in the conference or it is whittled away at in a minor 

way. 

Interestingly, the cost is dropping. As the survivors increasingly 

diminish in number, the cost of this, actuarially projected, is dropping. 

But, nevertheless, I am here to say to your subcommittee, Mr. 

Chairman, that I am committed to finding an offset. 

I don’t want to tell you what the offset ought to be, because what 

I learned from last week’s experience is that you can be very creative in finding offsets and new sources of revenue, as we found in 

the negotiations that went on between the President and the Majority Leader and the Speaker of the House last week. 

This benefit plan is an optional program for military retirees, offered by DOD. The military retirees pay a premium out of their retirement pay to ensure that their survivors will have income, upon 

their death. It’s reasonably priced insurance. But, from the public 

marketplace, that’s not necessarily available, reasonably priced, 

usually because there are service-connected disabilities and health 

issues. So, SBP is a way for retirees to provide income insurance 

for their survivors, their family, and it pays them 55 percent of 

their retired pay. SBP is also paid to survivors when a 

servicemember dies on Active Duty. So, it’s an insurance program. 

On the flipside, DIC is a survivor benefit administered by the 

Department of Veterans Affairs (VA). When military service caused 

the servicemember’s death, either due to service-connected disability or illness or Active-Duty death, survivors are entitled to 

monthly compensation of just over $1,100 a month from the VA. 

Of the 270,000 survivors receiving SBP, about 54,000 of them are 

subject to the offset. According to the Defense actuary, for 31,000 

survivors, SBP is completely offset by DIC; meaning that the survivor receives no SBP and must live on that $1,100, alone. Retirees 

bought into the Survivors Benefit Plan in good faith, they paid 

good money. These military families planned for the future, and 

the government offsets it. 

There are other complications to the existing offset, including a 

court decision, in 2009. It requires surviving widows to remarry 

after age 57 in order to eliminate the offset. I can’t figure that one 

out, and obviously, this shouldn’t be tolerated. 

Mr. Chairman, I had a little bit of experience in insurance, before I came to the Senate, as the elected insurance commissioner 

of Florida. This offset is troubling when somebody buys an insurVerDate Aug 31 2005 09:55 Jan 25, 2012 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 Y:\BORAWSKI\DOCS\68089.TXT JUNE PsN: JUNEB
5 

ance policy and there’s another government program over here, 

called Disability Indemnity. I know of no purchased annuity that 

would deny payment based on the receipt of a different payment. 

You are not only a student of history, Mr. Chairman, you are a 

historian and you are a great writer. You certainly recall those immortal words of President Lincoln, in his second inaugural address, 

in which he said, ‘‘Finish the work we are in to bind up the Nation’s wounds, to care for him who shall have borne the battle, and 

for his widow and his orphan.’’ That encapsulates what I am trying 

to say here, and have been trying to say for over a decade. To 

honor these servicemembers, the government should take care of 

the veterans, their widows, and their orphans. 

Since 2005, the Senate has supported this almost every year. 

Then we go, in the provision being offset when we get into conference. 

We made some steps in the right direction. I hope that we can 

find mandatory spending offsets to pay for this legislation, which 

is always the reason that is given to ax it. 

The Congressional Budget Office informs me that it will cost roughly $6.6 billion to completely eliminate the offset over 10 

years. When I started out on this, a decade ago, the cost was upwards of $12- and $15 billion for a 10-year period. I would ask you 

all, in this subcommittee, to consider that as we put the legislation 

together for the authorization bill. 

I would just conclude, Mr. Chairman, by saying that, as the 

President, in his second inaugural address, in the midst of the Civil 

War, said, ‘‘To take care of him, his orphan, and his widow is a cost 

of war,’’ one of the costs of war is not only what we buy in the way 

of equipment and salaries, but a cost of war is taking care of our 

veterans and their survivors. 

I humbly submit this to the committee for your consideration. 

Senator WEBB. It’s very compelling testimony. I thank the Senator very much. 

Senator NELSON. By the way, Mr. Chairman, there are several 

members of this subcommittee that are cosponsors of the legislation. 

Senator WEBB. Just as a matter of historical record, my father 

paid into SBP from 1969 to 1997 in order to be able to have my 

mother have an annuity when he passed away. When he passed 

away, there was another problem in this program that you’re 

aware of, where they offset out of her Social Security when she 

started receiving the SBP annuity in 1997. 

So, this is a program that’s had kind of a complicated history, 

and we’ll certainly take a strong consideration of your legislation, 

as has been done in the past. We thank you very much for your 

testimony today. 

Senator NELSON. Thank you very much. 

Senator WEBB. I’d like to now welcome the first panel of witnesses for this hearing: Sergeant Major of the Army, Raymond 

Chandler III; Master Chief Petty Officer of the Navy, Rick B. West; 

Sergeant Major of the Marine Corps, Carlton W. Kent; and Chief 

Master Sergeant of the Air Force, James Roy. 

We welcome all of you, look forward to hearing your frank and 

candid testimony, which I have no doubt we will be receiving. 

6 

I’ll have to get advice from counsel, is there a protocol done by 

Services? I’m a little partial to the Marine Corps. [Laughter.] 

Okay. We’re going to start with the Army and move over to the 

Air Force. 

Sergeant Major Chandler, welcome. 

STATEMENT OF SGM RAYMOND F. CHANDLER III, SERGEANT 

MAJOR OF THE ARMY, USA 

Sergeant Major CHANDLER. Good afternoon. 

Senator WEBB. I would ask that you summarize your statements 

in 5 minutes, and your full statements will be entered into the 

record as if read. 

Sergeant Major CHANDLER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Chairman Webb, members of this committee, thank you for your 

invitation to testify today on our Army’s quality of life. I truly appreciate this committee’s commitment to our 1.1 million soldiers, 

their families, and our Department of the Army civilians. 

I’m still relatively new to this job, but after being around the 

Army for almost 30 years, I have seen first-hand the important decisions this committee makes on behalf of our military every day. 

I pledge to always be a point of contact, should you ever have 

any questions or comments about our soldiers, equipment, training, 

or quality-of-life programs. 

Our top priorities will be to continue to maintain our combat 

edge while reconstituting our force and building resilience in our 

soldiers and families. During the last several years, we have made 

significant progress in restoring balance to our four imperatives: 

sustain, prepare, reset, and transform. 

Increasing the dwell time between deployments is the single 

most important component of restoring balance. Most of our Active 

Duty soldiers deploying in October 2011 have the expectation that, 

after 1 year of deployment, they will be able to spend 2 years at 

home. Most of our Army National Guard and Army Reserve soldiers will be home for 4 years before possibly deploying again. 

I truly appreciate all the work Congress has done for our soldiers 

in the areas of behavioral health, wounded warrior care, and 

TRICARE. With your help, we have provided our soldiers, families, 

and civilians the best possible care, support, and services. 

Our focus continues to be improving access to, and predictability 

for, our services. We continue to enhance support for our wounded, 

families of our fallen, victims of sexual assault, and those with behavioral health issues. 

Our soldiers have also begun chain-teaching to prepare for the 

repeal of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell. We are currently conducting chainteaching classes, with a completion date of mid- to late August. 

One of the main reasons our soldiers are so successful around the 

world is our diversity. The Army offers opportunities to men and 

women of all backgrounds to be an integral part of our All-Volunteer Force. In this time of globalization, our Army needs diverse 

leaders in order to successfully interact with different cultural 

groups. 

The women of our Army continue to serve this Nation with honor 

and distinction. The Army has reviewed our assignment policies 

and regulations to ensure they are relevant and meet the needs of 

7 

current conditions and emerging requirements. This ensures all 

soldiers, regardless of gender, are offered the opportunity to reach 

their highest potential. 

Financial responsibility is everyone’s business. We must serve as 

good stewards of the financial resources we receive from our Nation. As part of our efficiencies review, we are currently looking at 

removing redundant programs while streamlining those that serve 

a vital purpose. I welcome your ideas on this process. 

In closing, I want to stress the amazing work done every day by 

our Army team. As Sergeant Major of the Army, the best part of 

my job is visiting our soldiers, families, and civilians across the 

world. The professionalism, dedication, and sacrifice they display 

every day is the reason our Army, your Army, is the envy of every 

other in the world. 

I appreciate this opportunity to speak before you today to tell the 

Army’s story. I welcome your questions at this time. 

Thank you, and Army Strong. 

[The prepared statement of Sergeant Major Chandler follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT BY SGM RAYMOND F. CHANDLER III, USA 

INTRODUCTION

Chairman Webb, Senator Graham, and members of this subcommittee, thank you 

for your invitation to testify today on our Army’s quality of life. I truly appreciate 

this committee’s commitment to the 1.1 million soldiers, their families, and the Department of Army civilians. I am still relatively new in this job, but after being 

around the Army for almost 30 years, I have seen first-hand the important decisions 

this committee makes on behalf of our military every day. 

This subcommittee has a tremendous responsibility, ensuring we have the correct 

end strength and policies in place for our soldiers today and in the foreseeable future. I pledge to always be a point of contact should you ever have any questions 

or comments about our soldiers, training, or quality of life programs. 

The Army recognizes that it is our responsibility to serve as good stewards of the 

financial resources we receive from our Nation. As part of our efficiencies review, 

we are currently looking at removing redundant or underperforming programs while 

streamlining those that serve a vital purpose and we welcome your ideas on this 

process. 

The Army continues to prevail against insurgents around the world while protecting our country and the rights of our citizens. We have completed combat operations in Iraq by transitioning to Operation New Dawn, continuing to provide much 

needed support to the people and government of Iraq. We have also surged soldiers 

into Afghanistan to support a new strategic direction. We have reshaped our Army 

to better align ourselves for the challenges of tomorrow. We have accomplished 

much over the last year, but there is still much to do. 

Our top priorities will be to continue to maintain our combat edge while reconstituting our force and building resilience in our soldiers and families. During the last 

several years, we have made significant progress in restoring balance through our 

four imperatives: sustain, prepare, reset, and transform. 

Increasing the dwell time between deployments is the single most important component of restoring balance. A recent study said that soldiers require at least 2 to 

3 years to fully recover mentally and physically from the stresses of a 1-year deployment. As we continue to draw down our forces in Iraq, we have been able to continually increase our dwell time. Soldiers deploying in October 2011 have the expectation that after 1 year of deployment they will be home for 2 years in the Active component. After October, our Army National Guard (ARNG) and U.S. Army Reserve 

(USAR)soldiers can expect to see 1 year deployed and 4 years at home. 

In order to meet the demands of today’s strategic environment, we had to responsibly grow the Army, which we accomplished ahead of schedule in 2009. But even 

with this growth, we were not able to meet the high demands during this era of 

persistent conflict. As a result, Congress and the Secretary of Defense approved an 

additional 22,000, with the last 7,000 added during 2010. The Army’s goal is to return to our approved active strength of 547,400 by the end of fiscal year 2013. It 

is imperative that as we begin to draw down, we do not sacrifice our combat experiVerDate Aug 31 2005 09:55 Jan 25, 2012 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 Y:\BORAWSKI\DOCS\68089.TXT JUNE PsN: JUNEB
8 

ence and unit cohesion by cutting large numbers of soldiers. The Army is in the 

planning phase of this deliberate process. 

I truly appreciate all the work Congress has done for our soldiers in the areas 

of Behavioral Health, Wounded Warrior Care and TRICARE. With your help, we 

have provided our soldiers, families, and civilians the best possible care, support 

and services. Our focus continues to be improving access to and predictability of 

services. We continue to enhance support for our wounded, Families of our Fallen, 

victims of sexual assault and those with mental health issues. 

The Army continues to provide top care for our wounded warriors and their families through 29 Warrior Transition Units (WTU) across the United States and Europe. Currently, WTUs provide healing, rehabilitation, and reintegration to more 

than 10,000 wounded, ill, or injured soldiers, up about 11.5 percent from last year. 

In addition to the WTUs, nine Community Based Warrior Transition Units allow 

recuperating soldiers to utilize health care facilities in their home communities, 

while working at local U.S. Army armories and Reserve centers. To better support 

the housing of our wounded warriors, the Army has completed 6 Warrior Transition 

Complexes with 18 currently under construction. 

Through the U.S. Army Wounded Warrior Program (AW2), the most severely 

wounded, ill, and injured soldiers receive personalized support, regardless of location or length of care. More than just medical care, AW2 advocates assist warriors 

and their families with career and education opportunities, benefit information, and 

local resources. There are more than 8,000 soldiers enrolled in the program, up 24 

percent from last year. 

Our Army Medical Command continues to meet the increased behavioral health 

demand of our soldiers and families. Even with the influx of behavioral health providers, the Army has seen a range of operational-related stress reactions including 

post-traumatic stress disorder, depression, anxiety, alcohol and substance abuse, 

family and relationship problems, increased risk taking behavior, compassion fatigue and suicide behaviors. 

Our soldiers receive top-notch behavioral health care, but access to this care is 

impacted by shortages of behavioral health professionals. Since 2005, the number 

of behavioral health visits has doubled, from 900,000 to more than 1.8 million. We 

continue to maximize the use of authorities that Congress has provided us to attract 

both military and civilian behavioral health providers to the Army. We have had 

some success hiring behavioral health professionals, increasing our staff by 65 percent, but we are still about 400 professionals short of our goal. Between fiscal year 

2012–2017, we aim to hire 1,000 additional behavioral health care providers. 

Finally, the Army has lacked a standardized resiliency promotion program, which 

is a key component of psychological health. Through three key plans, the Comprehensive Soldier Fitness, the Army’s Campaign Plan for Health Promotion, Risk 

Reduction and Suicide Prevention, and Warrior and Community resiliency training, 

the Army is closer than ever to standardizing resiliency for soldiers from all three 

components. 

Overall, the Army has implemented over 45 initiatives to fix or change access to 

care, resiliency, quality of care and surveillance. We have shifted our focus to providing care and support for those serving in Operation Enduring Freedom and have 

expanded our telebehavioral health and automated behavioral health clinics. We are 

working hard to increase our behavioral health care providers for all components 

by approximately 1,000 across all components between 2012 and 2017. 

TRICARE is the health care program for active duty servicemembers, ARNG, 

USAR, retirees, family members, survivors, and certain former spouses worldwide. 

This program is a network of military and civilian health care professionals working 

together to foster, protect, sustain, and restore health for those entrusted to their 

care. Over the last year, TRICARE has introduced several new programs to provide 

care to those soldiers and families who need it most. 

The TRICARE Reserve Select (TRS) program continues to be a huge success for 

our ARNG and USAR soldiers and families. TRS gives these citizen-soldiers and 

their families access to an affordable benefit while serving in part-time status. TRS 

offers a health care plan similar to the TRICARE Standard and TRICARE Extra 

programs with a monthly premium. These rates did rise a little for fiscal year 2011. 

Single soldier rates increased from $49.62 to $53.16 and the family rate from 

$197.65 to $197.76. In addition to the TRS program, eligible ARNG and USAR soldiers and families can begin receiving TRICARE benefits up to 180 days before activating for a contingency operation. Under the Transitional Assistance Management 

Program, soldiers from all three components can receive an extra 180 days of 

TRICARE health benefits after separating from the Army. 

The TRICARE Retired Reserve (TRR) is a premium-based, worldwide health plan 

that provides care for USAR and USARNG soldiers and their families who have reVerDate Aug 31 2005 09:55 Jan 25, 2012 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 Y:\BORAWSKI\DOCS\68089.TXT JUNE PsN: JUNEB
9 

tired but are not yet eligible for TRICARE for Life coverage. TRR offers comprehensive health coverage from any TRICARE-authorized provider. Costs for TRR Member-Only coverage is $408.01 and TRR member and family coverage runs $1,020.05. 

TRICARE plans to roll out its new Young Adult Program this spring to extend 

parent’s health care benefits to their children up to the age of 26. This program is 

for young adults who do not have access to employer-sponsored health care coverage. TRICARE is still working out the details for the Young Adult program including eligibility, coverage criteria, costs, etc. 

We are in our final year of our 5-year effort to improve work and training facilities for our soldiers and civilians, as well as new or improved housing, medical, and 

child care facilities for our families. Under the base realignment and closure program, we have disposed of more than 24,000 acres and closed 3 Active installations 

and 5 U.S. Army Reserve Centers. We are on track to complete BRAC in fiscal year 

2011. 

The Army’s Child, Youth, and School Services program supports the readiness 

and well-being of Army families by reducing the conflict between on-the-job military 

missions and parental responsibilities. Generally, Army families are younger than 

the average American family and more geographically dispersed from extended families in their hometown and communities. 

The Army has added 128 child development centers and 24 youth centers since 

fiscal year 2008. Last year, we were able to meet and maintain the DOD standard 

of 80 percent of the child care demand and 35 percent of the youth program demand. 

The modernization of Army Family Housing and Soldier Barracks is critical to 

maintaining our All-Volunteer Force. The Army continues to make huge strides for 

both, expanding housing services and creating a secure and affordable environment 

for all of our soldiers and families. 

As part of the fiscal year 2012 budget, the Army has asked for $681.8 million for 

Army family housing. With this funding, the Army hopes to eliminate all inadequate 

family housing worldwide by replacing inadequate homes, improving existing homes 

and leasing where appropriate. This funding will be used to construct 128 new 

homes, renovate 276 homes, and operate and maintain the government-owned 

homes. 

We are on schedule to finish our barracks modernization plan for the 35 percent 

of our single soldiers by the end of fiscal year 2013. The Army is planning to fund 

14 projects to construct 3,880 spaces at 9 garrison locations for fiscal year 2012. 

The Army continues to fix and build all Army Initial Entry and Advanced Individual Training Barracks by 2015. Many of our outdated training barracks range 

in age from 40 to 100 years old. By the end of fiscal year 2011, the Army will only 

have funded 55.2 percent of the required spaces. During fiscal year 2012, we are 

planning to fund 3 military construction projects and 14 OMA funded modernization 

projects. We also plan to allocate funding to eliminate inadequate training barracks 

by fiscal year 2015 and complete new barracks by fiscal year 2017. We ask for your 

continued support to help us complete this important program. 

One of the main reasons our soldiers are so successful around the world is our 

diversity. The Army offers opportunities to men and women of all backgrounds to 

be an integral part of our All-Volunteer Force. In this time of globalization, our 

Army needs diverse leaders in order to successfully interact with different cultural 

groups from across the world. 

Women in the Army continue to serve this Nation with honor and distinction in 

the roles, positions, units, and specialties in which we allow them to serve. Since 

2002, more than 100 women have been killed in combat due to enemy contact and 

more than 14,000 are currently serving in Iraq and Afghanistan. It is no secret that 

women are an integral part of our force. They are on the front line, engaging the 

enemy, and making a difference. 

The Army has reviewed our assignment policies and regulations to ensure they 

are relevant and meet the needs of current conditions and emerging requirements. 

This ensures all soldiers, regardless of gender, are afforded the opportunity to reach 

their highest potential. 

Our soldiers have also begun chain-teaching to prepare for the repeal of ‘‘Don’t 

Ask, Don’t Tell.’’The Secretary of Defense has said that certification and the repeal 

must be accomplished across the entire Department at the same time. He added 

that this should be done consistent with the standards of military readiness, military effectiveness, unit cohesion, and recruiting and retention. 

For the Army, the guiding principles for implementation are: leadership matters 

most; minimize management; communicate and educate; and implement consistent 

with Army Core values. These principles have been instituted in our training and 

education efforts. The training and education has been implemented in three tiers 

10 

beginning last month with Tier 1. We are currently conducting chain teaching classes with our Tier 2 and Tier 3 soldiers. Our goal is to have all three tiers complete 

by mid to late August. 

In closing, I want to stress the amazing work being done every day by our Army 

Team. As the Sergeant Major of the Army, the best part of my job is visiting our 

soldiers, families, and civilians across the world. The professionalism, dedication 

and sacrifice they display every day is the reason our Army is the envy of every 

other in the world. Our soldiers are the best trained, best manned, best equipped, 

and best led force in our history. I appreciate this opportunity to speak before you 

today to tell the Army story. I welcome your questions at this time. Thank you and 

Army Strong. 

Senator WEBB. Thank you, Sergeant Major. 

Sergeant Major Kent. 

I should have pointed out earlier that I believe this would be Sergeant Major Kent’s final appearance before this subcommittee before his retirement. 

Sergeant Major KENT. Yes, sir. 

Senator WEBB. I’d like to add my own personal appreciation for 

all your years of service, Sergeant Major, and for the terrific job 

that you have done in your position as Sergeant Major of the Marine Corps. 

Sergeant Major KENT. Thank you, sir. 

Senator WEBB. Welcome. 

STATEMENT OF SGT. MAJ. CARLTON W. KENT, SERGEANT 

MAJOR OF THE MARINE CORPS, USMC 

Sergeant Major KENT. Thank you, sir. 

Thank you, Chairman Webb, members, for the opportunity to 

testify for the last time as a United States marine on Active Duty 

on the important issues that directly impact the quality of life of 

our marines and families. 

I am leaving the active ranks, but ‘‘once a marine, always a marine.’’ So, these will continue to be important issues to all marines 

who have served. 

First of all, I’d like to report that your marines are honored to 

serve this great Nation and happy to be doing what marines do 

best, fighting and winning our Nation’s battles. They are truly living up to the great warfighting legacy of our Corps that was founded in 1775. Your marines, including their spouses and family members who support them, remain our most valuable asset and our 

number one priority. 

As our Commandant, General James F. Amos, has said, ‘‘We will 

keep faith with marines, sailors, and our families.’’ I’m proud to report to you that we’re keeping the faith with all marines, sailors, 

and their families. We invest in the marines, sailors, and our family, to include housing, Bachelor Enlisted Quarters (BEQs), wounded warriors, ill and injured, and also families of our fallen warriors. 

Both the Commandant and I receive feedback from our marines 

and their families as we travel the globe and look them eye-to-eye. 

They notice and they appreciate the much-needed improvements in 

quality of life, but they also have no problem looking us in the eye 

and telling us we have additional work to do. As we move forward, 

we will continue to keep the faith with marines, sailors, and families by assessing the effect of our support services and demonstrating, through our direct actions that we are committed to improving them. 

11 

We are grateful for the support of the Senate and the American 

people who continue to provide for the men and women who proudly wear our uniform. We’re also grateful for the increased attention 

placed on support for our families. It is true that, while we recruit 

marines, we retain families. Their readiness is directly linked to 

the readiness of our Corps. 

Again, thank you very much for this opportunity to testify for my 

last time. I am available for questions. 

[The prepared statement of Sergeant Major Kent follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT BY SGTMAJ CARLTON W. KENT, USMC 

INTRODUCTION

Chairman Webb, Senator Graham, and distinguished members of the subcommittee, as I finish my last tour of duty, I want to thank you for this final opportunity to report to you on the state of your Marine Corps and our families’ personal 

and family readiness. 

Throughout the last 10 years of war, our marines and their families have faced 

many challenges and made great sacrifices. Their endurance has been bolstered by 

your generous and sustained support which has enabled our continued success, on 

the battlefield and at home, and ensured our ability to maintain a high state of personal and family readiness. As we continue to serve this great Nation, we are grateful to you and the American people and thank you for your unwavering support. 

As our Commandant, General James F. Amos, has said, our marines and their 

families are our greatest and most valuable assets and caring for their welfare will 

be one of our top priorities. My testimony today will outline the progress we have 

made as well as the actions we are taking to fulfill that mandate. 

YOUR MARINE CORPS

Today, through your ongoing support and that of the American people, your Marine Corps is a cohesive, total force of 202,100 Active Duty marines; 39,600 Selected 

Reserve marines; and 25,000 civilian marines. At any given time, approximately 

30,000 marines are forward deployed in ongoing global operations in support of our 

Nation’s defense. Your Marine Corps is also the youngest, most junior, and least 

married of the four military Services. 

• Sixty-five percent of marines are 25 or younger; 

• Twenty-one percent of marines are not old enough to legally consume alcohol; 

• Forty percent of marines are lance corporal or below (other Services are 

between 20 to 24 percent); 

• Forty-nine percent of marines are married (next closest is Navy at 54 percent); and 

• Has 1 officer per 8.3 marines (next closest is Navy with 1 officer per 5.1 

sailors). 

In addition, the Marine Corps has approximately the same number of active duty 

personnel as family members. There are 207,194 family members: 90,566 spouses, 

116,335 children, and 293 parents. This close relationship, 49:51, is unique among 

the military Services. The active duty to family member ratios of the Army, Navy, 

and Air Force are all approximately 40 percent servicemembers to 60 percent family 

members. 

PERSONNEL READINESS

For our deployed and next-to-deploy forces, personnel readiness is extremely high. 

We continue to source our best-trained and most ready marines and sailors to meet 

geographic combatant commander requirements in Afghanistan and around the 

globe. The Marine Corps is prepared to sustain this for as long as the Nation requires. 

OPERATION IRAQI FREEDOM

This past year, we completed our mission in Iraq, effecting the retrograde of more 

than 25,000 marines; 382,000 items of equipment; 10,800 short tons of aviation support equipment; and nearly 11,000 containers from al Anbar province via Jordan 

and Kuwait to the United States and elsewhere. At present, approximately 100 maVerDate Aug 31 2005 09:55 Jan 25, 2012 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 Y:\BORAWSKI\DOCS\68089.TXT JUNE PsN: JUNEB
12 

rines remain in Iraq serving in individual augment, transition team and other miscellaneous billets. 

OPERATION ENDURING FREEDOM

In Afghanistan, the mission has expanded. Over the past year, we increased our 

force strength in Afghanistan from 10,600 in December 2009, to 20,700 in December 

2010. We will continue to provide forces in Afghanistan capable of full-spectrum, 

counterinsurgency operations while balancing our capabilities to perform what the 

Nation will likely ask of us in the future. 

END STRENGTH

Current authorized end strength is 202,100 marines in the Active component and 

39,600 marines in the Selected Reserve. During fiscal year 2012, the Marine Corps 

will concentrate on sustaining and shaping the Active Force. Our success can be attributed to four factors: quality recruiting, exceptional retention, reduced personnel 

attrition, and a great young generation of Americans who want to serve their country during wartime. Also, key to sustaining the force is an effective Enlistment 

Bonus and Selective Reenlistment Bonus programs which allow us to access and retain quality marines to sustain the Active Force. The Marine Corps Reserve is a full 

partner of the Marine Corps’ Total Force. The Marine Corps Reserve continues to 

provide critical support for overseas contingency operations and noncontingency 

combatant commander requirements. At home, Marine Forces Reserve maintains 

marines and assets prepositioned throughout the country who are ready to assist 

with not only national defense missions, but also civil-military missions such as providing disaster relief. 

DWELL TIME

In light of our operational demands, and through the support of Congress in authorizing our end strength of 202,100 Active-Duty Forces, our combat units are beginning to realize an approximate 1-to-2 dwell time. Other units vary at more favorable dwell time levels depending on their mission. We anticipate the 1:2 dwell ratio 

for combat units to remain relatively stable provided current deployed force levels 

are not increased; however, increased operational demands in Afghanistan or elsewhere may result in dwell times inconsistent with fostering a resilient Total Force. 

We are actively working to recruit, promote, and retain the right number of marines 

in the right occupational specialties to promote resiliency of our Total Force and reduce the stress on our families. 

KEEPING FAITH WITH MARINES, SAILORS, AND FAMILIES

Just as our marines are required to be in a constant state of readiness, so must 

our families. Our Nation has been at war for a decade, placing unprecedented burdens on marines, sailors, their families, wounded warriors, and the dependents of 

the fallen. They have all made tremendous sacrifices in the face of danger. We owe 

them all a reciprocal level of loyalty. 

Our approach to caring for their needs is based on the same unwavering faithfulness they have demonstrated to the Marine Corps. We will ensure their needs are 

met during times of deployment and in garrison by providing the services, facilities, 

and programs to develop the strength and skills to thrive on the challenges of operational tempo. When needed, we will restore them to health. We will also transition 

them back to civilian life, and in the cases of our fallen marines, we will support 

and protect their surviving spouses and dependents. We know that in order to develop, maintain, and sustain their personal and family readiness and resiliency, we 

must provide innovative programs and services that are timely and relevant. We 

will do this by focusing on several key areas during this fiscal year. 

In his 2010 Planning Guidance, our 35th Commandant directed us to ‘‘look across 

the entire institution and identify areas that need improvement and effect positive 

change.’’ Specifically, he asked us to evaluate all of our family readiness programs, 

to determine which require enhancement and/or expansion and which can be 

streamlined to reduce redundancy. This is not just about efficiencies; it is also about 

effectiveness. As part of that mandate, we have been directed to continue our behavioral health program integration; institutionalize resiliency training; and reorganize 

our Transition Assistance Management Program. My testimony today will outline 

the progress we have made and the actions we are taking in these and other critical 

areas. 

13 

FAMILY READINESS

In 2010, the Marine Corps increased baseline funding for family support programs by $110 million to ensure an appropriate wartime footing. Programs benefitting 

from this measure include: Unit, Personal and Family Readiness Program; Marine 

Corps Family Team Building Program; Exceptional Family Member Program; 

School Liaison Program; and other miscellaneous Marine Corps Community Services 

Programs supporting remote and isolated commands, deployed marines, and independent duty marines and families. As we continue the process of providing marines 

and their families with the most effective and relevant services, we are assessing 

all of our family support programs, identifying gaps and overlapping or duplicative 

efforts, and looking for opportunities to develop partnership programs and share resources with other agencies. Some of our notable accomplishments include the following: 

• Established over 400 full-time civilian Family Readiness Officers to facilitate family contact and provide critical information and referral services to 

support the resiliency needs of marines and their families. 

• Developed an inventory of Deployed Support and Life Skills Education 

and Training courses that address the challenges of military life, as well 

as personal and family life. 

• Transformed the Exceptional Family Member Program to ensure that enrolled family members are provided a continuum of care, while providing 

the sponsor opportunity for a successful career. 

• Established school liaisons who form strong partnerships with schools 

and other supporting agencies to improve access and availability to quality 

education. 

• Implemented program and infrastructure enhancements at remote and 

isolated commands, including investments in child care, single marine programming, fitness and recreation centers, and recreational equipment to 

support deployed marines. 

• Increased Marine Corps child care capability from 64 percent to 73 percent with projection to meet 80 percent of potential need by fiscal year 

2012. 

DEPLOYED AND WARRIOR SUPPORT

Deployed support is one of the most important services we provide. Our Exchange; 

Recreation and Fitness; and Communication services not only boost and maintain 

morale but also help to reduce mission-related stress. 

• Exchange. Ongoing missions in Afghanistan include the operation of two 

Direct Operation Exchanges at Camps Leatherneck and Dwyer, and one 

Tactical Field Exchange at Camp Delaram II. 

• Recreation and Fitness. We assist in providing sports, recreational, and 

fitness equipment to units throughout Helmand Province with the joint 

support of USFOR–AJI. This transportable equipment includes sports/recreation cooler kits filled with sports gear and board games, electronic game 

kits, Theater-in-a-Box kits, and functional fitness equipment for use in austere environments. Reading materials, both electronic and paperback, are 

also distributed. 

• Communication. Morale satellite services are available to forward operating bases, combat outposts, and other austere locations. We have delivered 13 satellite communications systems to units in Afghanistan. Each system has 2 phones that provide 6,000 free minutes per month and 5 laptops 

that allow internet browsing, social networking and chat/video capabilities 

to deployed marines. 

FAMILY CARE PROGRAMS

Exceptional Family Member Program 

The most tender of our families, those enrolled in the Marine Corps Exceptional 

Family Member Program (EFMP), have strongly endorsed the improvements made 

to their level of support and our focus on providing a continuum of care. Year after 

year since our program expansion, we have gained the trust of our families. This 

is demonstrated in our increasing enrollments and reduction in issues experienced 

by families relocating to new duty stations. I am proud to state that the Department 

of Defense (DOD) and the other Services recognize our EFMP as a premier, fullservice program based on the quality and efficiency of program operations. 

Our EFMP sponsors will always be an advocate for their special needs family 

member, but when they need legal help, our EFMP attorneys are ready to assist 

14 

families with obtaining benefits and services under Federal and State education and 

disability laws, special needs trusts, landlord-tenant issues and other legal areas. 

In 2001, EFMP had only 4,500 enrolled family members. This number has grown 

to over 9,850 today. In the past year, we have taken multiple actions to transform 

the program, including: 

• Utilizing Family Case Workers, at ratio of 1 FCW: 225 sponsors, to support families during relocation, deployments, and life events and assist families with gaining access to medical, educational, and financial support services. 

• Establishing installation-level Training Education Outreach specialists to 

provide training and support for families and the programs that support 

them. 

• Utilizing a Continuation on Location policy that ensures the assignment 

and relocation process is sensitive to EFMP family needs and meets statutory stabilization requirements. 

In addition, the Marine Corps continues to underwrite the cost of up to 40 hours 

of short-term respite care per month for EFMP enrolled families. To date, we have 

provided more than 450,000 hours of respite care. Since the cost is underwritten by 

the Marine Corps, families are able to use their TRICARE Extended Care Health 

Option benefit for needed therapies and equipment. Nevertheless, challenges remain, such as: 

• the lack of portability of services for adults with autism; 

• the inability of military families to gain access to Medicaid; and 

• national economic impacts and subsequent State budget cuts, particularly 

at local and State levels, which impede school districts’ abilities to provide 

special education services and impact access and availability to critical 

services. 

To address some of the State access issues, we have partnered with the National 

Council on Disabilities to study this problem. Results are under review. 

Children, Youth, and Teen Programs 

Whether parents are working, experiencing family emergencies, or needing respite 

from single parent responsibilities connected to deployments, child care services remain a high priority quality of life requirement. In 2010, we provided 13,431 child 

care spaces and met 73 percent of potential need requirements. Within these totals, 

we are caring for approximately 2,500 special needs children. 

The Marine Corps, with your support, is executing an aggressive Military Construction program and is opening six Child Development Centers in fiscal year 2011 

and five more in fiscal year 2012. Nevertheless, as you might expect, the demand 

for quality child care on- and off-installation continues to grow and outweighs the 

availability of resources. To address this growing demand and help further define 

requirements, we have contracted for the development of a Child Development Program and Facility Master Plan. Using market assessments and analysis tools, the 

plan will evaluate on- and off-base access, unmet need, and will provide prioritized 

recommendations for meeting the need across the Marine Corps. We anticipate results this summer. 

In 2011, we will work with Marine Forces Reserve and Marine Corps Recruiting 

Command to identify opportunities to enhance availability of child care for Marines 

and their families serving on independent duty and at locations that are separated 

from military bases and stations. In addition, we are partnering with Boys & Girls 

Clubs of America for developmental youth programs, and working to identify ways 

to better support our youth and teens affected by a parent’s deployment. We have 

reviewed the results of the National Military Family Association and RAND Study 

related to impacts on youth from deployments and are considering ways to address 

this situation. 

School Liaison Program 

To help school-age children of marines flourish in new school environments, our 

School Liaison Program partners with Local Education Agencies (LEAs) to raise the 

educational capacity and standard of our military children. Supporting more than 

80 school districts surrounding major Marine Corps installations, our school liaisons 

provide LEAs with information on Marine Corps families’ needs and access to beneficial training and counseling services to support teachers and students. Marine parents have the comfort of talking with and being supported by a local education expert who provides meaningful insight and support to new transfers and those with 

questions on local education policies. In addition, school liaisons provide Marine parents with connections to online curricular resources that are linked to State standVerDate Aug 31 2005 09:55 Jan 25, 2012 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 Y:\BORAWSKI\DOCS\68089.TXT JUNE PsN: JUNEB
15 

ards, permanent change of station checklists to assist parents with pre-relocation 

planning and registration in the receiving school districts, on-line tutoring and other 

resources. 

PERSONAL AND PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT

Throughout the Nation, veterans aged 18–24 have experienced traditionally higher unemployment rates than their non-veteran counterparts. Our Commandant is 

focused on this problem and has directed the Marine Corps to conduct a thorough 

‘‘bottom up’’ assessment of our Transition Assistance Management Program to revolutionize the process, embrace best practices, and ensure we are providing the right 

educational and career assistance to marines leaving the Corps. We believe transition assistance should be a process not an event. We have established a goal to 

make the Marine Corps Transition Assistance Management Program more value 

added for our departing marines. 

From 2009 to 2010, we conducted functionality assessments of the Transition Assistance Management Program and the Lifelong Learning Program and noted many 

deficiencies. In response, we established two Transition Assistance Operational 

Planning Teams in 2010 to assess existing programs. These teams identified issues, 

stakeholders and a conceptual framework for improved services and ways in which 

we will integrate Marine Corps Community Services transition assets. Key stakeholders involved in this process include servicemember recruiters, commanders, unit 

transition coordinators, and most importantly—our marines and their family members. 

With our predominately first-term force, we are committed to reaching our marines at designated touch points, helping them develop roadmaps that support their 

Marine careers, and better equipping them to reintegrate back into civilian life upon 

leaving active duty service. We have developed an ‘‘end to end’’ process improvement 

plan that will begin at the point of initial accession into the Marine Corps and continue through post separation. 

Marines have expressed a desire for assistance navigating Department of Veterans Affairs benefit processes such as in cases of enrollment for and access to education benefits. We will modify existing websites to improve access and enhance opportunity for separating marines to speak directly to Marine Corps support personnel who are trained to remove administrative benefit processing barriers. In addition, we will adapt our current job fairs to support increased networking opportunities that will allow marines to meet mentors and employers and find meaningful 

employment. 

Marines have also asked for an opportunity to connect with employers and learn 

how to translate their intangible and tangible attributes. Our transition workshops 

will be overhauled to address these needs. Marines are also seeking help to simplify 

enrollment processes for the Post-9/11 GI Bill and to gain access to academic institutions that will provide the quality and level of business education and skills private 

industry demands. We have initiated a Leader-Scholar Program, which includes 

academic institutions who value marines’ service commitment and pledge special enrollment consideration. While the support varies from school to school, we now have 

75 participating institutions with the goal of an additional 25 by the end of this 

year. We are initiating actions and integrating existing capabilities that will most 

directly improve the quality of support provided to marines 6 months prior to separation as well as the support provided to marines who have been separated at least 

6 months. 

• Establishing formal processes to initiate periodic lifecycle contact to offer 

education, career, and financial advice/counseling to marines and their families. 

• Creating an Individual Development Plan for each marine, with execution and delivery of required transition services. 

• Improving the current Active-to-Reserve transition process to better educate marines on Reserve opportunities to retain the best talent. An enhanced, streamlined transition process will increase the number of valuable, trained marines who consciously choose to affiliate with the Reserves. 

As we gain momentum, we will continue to change the transition assistance program from its current event focus to that of a process that reintegrates marines into 

the civilian sector with the knowledge, skills, and abilities to leverage and communicate their Marine Corps time and experience. We believe this effort will result in 

an innovative program that addresses the Commandant’s concerns, assists our families with their education and career goals, and meets the needs of our marines as 

they progress through their military life cycle, whether a single enlistment or a lifetime of military service, and transition to a successful post-military career. 

16 

BEHAVIORAL HEALTH INTEGRATION

Since September 11, behavioral health needs have become increasingly complex 

with individuals often requiring assistance in a number of areas at one time. Marines with three or more deployments have been identified as particularly at risk. 

As a result of risk factors, our Combat Operational Stress Control (COSC) Program 

is currently developing a policy that will direct commanders to conduct face-to-face 

interviews with marines who have had three or more deployments. These commanders’ interviews will identify marines at some level of elevated risk; allow commanders to engage their marines (pre- and-post-deployment); and provide an opportunity for intervention (medical and non-medical). 

As directed by the Commandant, we continue to move forward with the integration of our prevention and intervention programs—Family Advocacy, COSC, Suicide 

Prevention, Sexual Assault Prevention and Response, and Substance Abuse—initiated in 2009. We have established a new Behavioral Health Branch at our headquarters for Marine and Family Programs, Manpower & Reserve Affairs which will 

assess common behavioral health trends, risk factors, training needs, and protective 

factors to ensure maximum use of resources and to enhance existing prevention capabilities. We are also more fully utilizing the Institute of Medicine’s ‘‘Behavioral 

Health Prevention Intervention Spectrum’’, which establishes common definitions, to 

focus our prevention efforts on marines and families. 

Through collaboration of services, we will deliver effective, evidence-based practices and behavioral health programs that are seamlessly woven into the larger support network of Marine Corps command structures, health and human services, and 

are in concert with building resilience and strengthening marines and their families. 

Sexual Assault Prevention and Response 

Marine Corps leadership has initiated aggressive actions to elevate and highlight 

the importance of the Sexual Assault Prevention and Response (SAPR) Program and 

institutionalize a zero-tolerance policy. SAPR is focused on several key initiatives: 

• Prevention: Commanders are accountable for creating a climate of respect 

in which sexual assault will not be tolerated and building trust within their 

units that enables victims of sexual assault to report the crime. Bystander 

intervention training has been identified as an evidence-based best practice 

for engaging marines in their role in sexual assault prevention. New videobased bystander intervention training is in development with a completion 

date of April 2011. 

• Risk Reduction: Alcohol has a tremendous impact on the prevalence of 

sexual assault. Research on best practices for addressing risk reduction, 

consent, and raising awareness within the Marine Corps is forthcoming in 

2011. 

• Victim Advocacy: During 2010, SAPR Program Managers were hired at 

18 installations to heighten sexual assault prevention efforts by serving as 

master trainers and reporting coordinators. A 24/7 helpline was established 

across all installations to provide victims with emotional support, information on reporting options, and critical resources. 

• Offender Accountability: The Trial Counsel Assistance Program (TCAP) 

and a Joint Mobile Training Team were implemented in 2010 to provide 

training for 40 Marine Corps investigators and prosecutors on best practices in handling sex crimes. Following-up on the success of the Case Review Project in 2009, the Judge Advocate Division Military Law Branch is 

reviewing closed cases of sexual assault to develop lessons learned. This information will be disseminated in the form of training techniques for investigators and prosecutors. 

Suicide Prevention 

During calendar year 2010, we saw a nearly 30 percent decrease in the number 

of suicides within our Total Force (52 in calendar year 2009; 37 in calendar year 

2010). We are too early in our suicide studies to identify what specific initiative(s) 

have resulted in this dramatic turnaround. However, we have implemented a number of measures on multiple fronts. Some of these include the following: 

• Evocative Peer-led Training Program: ‘‘Never Leave a Marine Behind’’ 

suicide prevention program for noncommissioned officers and Junior Marines. We are expanding this training to include staff noncommissioned officers and commissioned officers this year. 

• DSTRESS Line Pilot Program with TRICARE West: ‘‘By Marines—For 

Marines’’ call center designed to assist with problems at an early stage. The 

17 

call center is staffed by veteran marines, providing anonymous service to 

all current marines, veteran marines, their families, and loved ones. 

• Combat and Operational Stress Control and Operational Stress Control 

and Readiness Teams: Utilizing unique training programs across the Total 

Force and ensuring the presence of mental health professionals in front-line 

units as a primary prevention tool to help marines identify and mitigate 

stress. 

• Marine Resilience Study to Assess Risk and Resilience: We are participating in a longitudinal research study that will examine risk across three 

domains: biological, psychological, and social. The outcome of this study will 

inform our work in the area of building and maintain resiliency across the 

Corps. 

• Unit-Level Prevention Officer Training: Working with the American Association of Suicidology to develop effective training programs for these officers. 

We believe our training and other prevention efforts will help our marines and 

their family members maintain readiness and win their personal battles. 

Combat and Operational Stress Control—Resiliency Training 

Stress issues affect all marines and families regardless of deployment. Assisting 

marines who show signs of stress and preventing combat and operational stress is 

one of our highest leadership priorities. To improve their resilience, we are working 

aggressively and creatively to build a training continuum that better prepares them 

for the inevitable stress of combat operations and to equip them with the necessary 

skills required cope with the challenges of life as a marine. 

Instruction founded and focused on our core values helps provide some of this resilience, especially in irregular warfare and complex environments. A program combining the ’’best practices’’ of mental, spiritual and physical fitness will best instill 

in our marines the resiliency to endure the stressors of combat and enhance their 

ability to perform effectively across the range of military operations. 

Our COSC program’s goal is to help Commanders and Marine leaders maintain 

their warfighting capabilities and, with assistance from medical personnel, reduce 

the impact of negative stress reactions. By providing tools and resources to assist 

Marines with coping with the challenges of combat and the rigor of life as a marine, 

our COSC program implements activities focusing on force preservation and readiness and the long-term health and well-being of our marines and their families. 

COSC, with other behavioral health initiatives, aggressively combats these problems 

by strengthening marines, mitigating stress, identifying those who are at risk, and 

providing treatment when necessary, with the goal of re-integrating marines back 

into the force. 

Our Operational Stress Control and Readiness Program (OSCAR) embeds mental 

health professionals in operational units and provides training that helps the 

OSCAR team identify and mitigate negative stress reactions. The OSCAR team is 

comprised of 3 different groups: Providers (mental health professionals), Extenders 

(other medical and religious personnel), and Mentors (selected unit marines) who 

are trained to quickly intervene when marines show signs of stress reactions Currently, over 1,700 marines are trained as mentors. 

In fiscal year 2011, COSC will sustain and improve the OSCAR training by conducting a RAND evaluation, working with units who utilized OSCAR training while 

in combat environments and providing refresher training to OSCAR trainers. Extenders began receiving formal OSCAR training at Field Medical Schools in January 

2011, which also supports institutionalizing OSCAR enhancing resiliency training. 

Our COSC program continues to show positive results as indicated by outside 

evaluations and assessments. The Joint Mental Health Advisory Team-7 reports 

that marines surveyed in Afghanistan in July 2010 show increased exposure to 

heavy combat. Marines also indicate increased protective factors including unit resilience, small-unit cohesion, perceived readiness, and improved climate in asking 

for help. This assessment also shows increased training effectiveness in managing 

combat/deployment stress and significant reduction in stigma associated with seeking behavioral health treatment. 

POST-TRAUMATIC STRESS AND BRAIN INJURY

We will continue advocating to the medical community for better diagnostic and 

increased treatment options for marines with severe injuries including post-traumatic stress and traumatic brain injury. In collaboration with the other Services, 

we developed a set of events-based parameters, mandating that our leaders search 

out marines who have experienced a concussive event. This measure no longer relies 

18 

on identification of impacted servicemembers solely on their willingness to seek help 

on their own initiative. These protocols are in place now in Afghanistan, and we are 

already seeing a culture change in the attitude of marines about being treated early 

for a traumatic brain injury. 

We have established an in-theater Restoration Center that brings comprehensive 

concussion diagnosis and management as close to the front lines as possible to ensure that appropriate care is available as quickly as possible. We are currently developing policy and applications to track traumatic brain injury from ‘‘point of injury’’ to ‘‘return to full duty’’ separately but in parallel with medical documentation. 

These measures will empower commanders with the information they need to monitor the health of a marine who has suffered a concussive event and intervene appropriately for the duration of a marine’s career and long after the initial injury. 

WOUNDED WARRIOR REGIMENT

I am pleased to report on the progress of the Marine Corps’ Wounded Warrior 

Regiment (WWR) and the determined spirit of our Nation’s wounded warriors and 

their families. The WWR stood up in April 2007 and was built on a compressed 

timetable—it was essentially built in progress. Early efforts involved the identification of immediate requirements and the design and sourcing of a scalable organization that could expand or contract as needed. The initial focus was on a Marine’s 

and his or her family’s immediate needs, construction projects, basic administrative 

support, the stand-up of the Sergeant Merlin German Wounded Warrior Call Center, and the establishment of the Marine Corps’ Recovery Coordination Program. 

When the WWR was established, long recovery times were not expected and longterm recovery support requirements were not anticipated. Since then, the WWR has 

continually assessed changing requirements, its organizational structure, and 

resourcing needs. We are now adjusting our structure based upon confirmed requirements, sound assumptions, and findings in warrior care that will allow for the enduring care of wounded, ill, and injured (WII) marines and their families. 

In his 2010 Planning Guidance, General Amos stated his commitment to ‘‘enhance 

the capabilities of the WWR to provide added care and support to our wounded, ill, 

and injured.’’ Moreover, he affirmed the need to sustain the Regiment for the long 

term given the wounds of the war and the fact that the WWR also provides care 

for our young Marines who are not combat wounded, but are injured in training or 

other accidents, suffer from diseases, and other tragedies. 

The WWR will continue to meet the Commandant’s intent by refining our support 

capabilities and growing our care model to ensure we work toward healing the 

‘‘whole’’ marine. Through synchronization of our programs and resources and external programs, the WWR is striving to help each WII marine focus on their abilities 

to heal medically while strengthening their mind, body, spirit, and family. The 

WWR works to ensure marines’ medical treatments are harmonized with non-medical needs to optimize their recovery through their continuous engagement in productive activities. 

These activities include pursuing and reaching goals in areas that will improve 

readiness for return to duty or reintegration to communities, such as education, employment, physical fitness, and building strong families. For WII marines who are 

unable to continue their service, the Marine Corps has a moral obligation to them, 

their families, and this country to help them live productive and fulfilling lives and 

be good citizens. 

WWR Programs and Services 

The non-medical care needs of our WII marines and their families can be extensive, and vary in type and intensity throughout the recovery process. The WWR assists active duty, Reserve, retired, and veteran WII marines and their families with 

their non-medical care needs through all phases of care from recovery to rehabilitation and to community reintegration. Each phase brings new challenges for the marine, their family, and the support staff. The complexity of their care does not allow 

for isolated decisionmaking and it requires a heightened level of coordination between medical and non-medical care providers. There is no ‘‘one-size-fits-all’’ approach to care. The WWR has a cross-section of services and resources to ensure 

WII marines and families are provided for. 

Sergeant Merlin Gennan Wounded Warrior Call Center 

Our call center extends support to marines and families through advocacy, resource identification and referral, information distribution, and care coordination. 

Located at the call center are clinical services staff who provide immediate assistance and referral for marines with psychological health issues and/or traumatic 

brain injury. Outreach is an important aspect of the Regiment’s non-medical care 

19 

delivery and management. The call center also conducts outreach calls to offer assistance on a wide variety of issues, such as service disability ratings, awards, employment, financial assistance, education, and benevolent organizations. 

Administrative Support 

The WWR stresses at all levels that WII care is a relationship, not just an administrative process. With this in mind, the WWR provides WII marines and their families with one-on-one education on available benefits and compensation. 

• WWR staff strives to proactively track the progress of paperwork and 

keep marines and families informed on the status of claims, reimbursements, and any changes in benefits. 

• A family member’s funded travel to the bedside of their wounded marine 

is of particular concern to the WWR. The USMC issues Invitation Travel 

Orders (ITOs) that can authorize up to three individuals designated by a 

very seriously or seriously WII marine to travel to the medical facility providing care. 

• When on ITOs, travel to and from the hospital, hotel costs, meals, and 

incidental expenses are reimbursed by the government. 

• Additionally, for WII marines who require extended, outpatient care, the 

USMC may authorize Non Medical Attendant (NMAs) Orders. One person 

is typically authorized NMA travel entitlements similar to ITOs which provide per diem and lodging costs. 

• The WWR works to ensure that these types of entitlements are tracked 

and monitored so that reimbursements or compensation are provided in a 

timely manner. 

Family Support 

The care needs of families of WII marines are of particular concern to the WWR 

and the Marine Corps. 

• The WWR strives to proactively identify and solve the often unique family support needs of our WII marines, their families, and caregivers. 

• Families of WII marines have a heightened requirement for communication, information, and referral services to help them navigate through the 

various phases of recovery. 

• The WWR has family support staff in place at all locations to address immediate needs, provide a one-on-one orientation to the many resources 

available to support them, and to serve as subject matter experts on family 

support requirements for regimental staff. 

Medical Cell 

WWR headquarters has a Medical Section that advises the commanding officer regarding medical issues and emerging technologies/treatments impacting WII marines. 

• The section includes: a Regimental Surgeon, a Mental Health Advisor, a 

Nurse Case Manager, a Psychological Health Program Coordinator, a Traumatic Brain Injury Program Coordinator, and Licensed Clinical Consultants. 

• Together, this team works with public and private medical providers to 

ensure the best care for WII marines, particularly in the areas of post-traumatic stress and traumatic brain injury. 

Recovery Care Coordinators 

As WII marines transition through the phases of recovery, it is important that 

they have a consistent contact in place to help them navigate the system. The WWR 

has Recovery Care Coordinators who are assigned to WII marines to help them and 

their families develop Comprehensive Transition Plans to define and meet their individual goals for recovery, rehabilitation, and reintegration. 

Warrior Athlete Reconditioning Program 

Under this program, (which is mandatory for all marines joined to the WWR, but 

tailored to accommodate their medical limitations), marines engage in both physical 

and cognitive activities outside the traditional therapy setting. Activities are individualized to the WII marine’s needs, and encompass over 18 areas—from aquatic 

training to yoga. Supporting WII marines in individual or team settings, the program greatly improves overall physical and mental fitness and helps to improve 

their self-esteem. 

20 

Transition Support 

Many WII marines will not return to duty and will pursue careers in their communities. The WWR recognizes its commitment and moral obligation to marines 

who are unable to continue their service to help them live productive and fulfilling 

lives and understands the challenges associated with reintegration and obtaining a 

rewarding career. To enhance community reintegration, the WWR’s Transition Support Cell, manned by marines and representatives from the Departments of Labor 

and Veterans Affairs, proactively reaches out to identify employers and job training 

programs that help WII marines obtain positions in which they are most likely to 

succeed and enjoy promising and fulfilling careers. 

District Injured Support Cells 

District Injured Support Cells, consisting primarily of mobilized Reserve marines, 

are located throughout the country to conduct face-to-face visits and telephone outreach to WII marines and their families within their assigned region. They maintain 

oversight of the welfare and quality of life of all WII Reserve marines, Active Duty 

marines convalescing at home, and all OEF/OIF WII marine veterans. 

Reserve Support 

The WWR makes a special effort to ensure that WII Reserve marines do not fall 

through the cracks. The majority of the WWR’s staff consists of Reserve marines 

with a high level of subject matter expertise that allows for heightened advocacy 

with regard to Reserve-specific issues. Our staff is dedicated to supporting WII reservist needs. The WWR’s Reserve Medical Entitlements Determination Section 

maintains oversight of all cases of reservists who require medical care beyond their 

contract period for service-connected ailments. The Regiment also has Reserve specific Recovery Care Coordinators who provide the one-on-one support and resource 

identification needed to support reservists who are often times residing in remote 

and isolated locations away from base and station support. 

Integrated Disability Evaluation System (IDES) Support 

The WWR has Regional Limited Duty Coordinators to help marines processing 

through the IDES and Wounded Warrior Attorneys, to advise and support WII marines through this process. The WWR also published a pocket guide (via the web 

and hard copy) to help marines and families understand the Disability Evaluation 

System. 

Enduring Commitment to Wounded, Ill, and Injured Marines 

The Marine Corps is committed to the long-term care of its wounded warriors and 

their families. As warrior care evolves and innovates, the WWR will continue to adjust to ensure we are providing the best support possible. The WWR will continue 

to assess its current programs and support structure to evolve to meet the long-term 

recovery requirements of our WII marines and their families. 

• The USMC is proud to report that the results of our assessments thus 

far are positive. 

• The assessments have substantiated that the creation of the WWR has 

had a positive impact on the support offered WII marines and families. 

• Additionally, our assessments have shown positive satisfaction levels in 

important areas, such as our Recovery Care Coordination Program (executed by the WWR’s Recovery Care Coordinators) and our family support 

staff. 

Your WII marines are highly motivated, focused on their abilities, and remain in 

the fight. The Marine Corps is grateful for the exceptional support that you have 

provided to them and the families who support them. 

CASUALTY ASSISTANCE

The Marine Corps Casualty Assistance Program is committed to ensuring that 

families of our fallen marines are always treated with the utmost compassion, dignity, and honor. Our Casualty Assistance Program actively seeks opportunities to 

improve survivor assistance and has a demonstrated record of taking quick, effective 

action as needed. 

The Headquarters Casualty Section is a 24-hour-per-day operation manned by 

Marines trained in casualty reporting, notification, and casualty assistance procedures. Next-of-kin (NOK) are notified in-person by a marine in uniform—Casualty 

Assistance Calls Officer (CACO)—and a chaplain whenever possible. Notifications 

are typically completed within 4 hours of receipt of the casualty report. Marine 

CACOs are there for the NOK—to assist with burial arrangements, applications for 

benefits and entitlements, contact with benevolent and philanthropic organizations, 

21 

and obtaining reports of investigation. Within days of the incident, families are connected to representatives from the Tragedy Assistance Program for Survivors 

(TAPS), a nationally recognized provider of comfort and care to those who have suffered the loss of a military loved one and are experts at ‘‘taking care of the heart’’. 

TAPS services are no cost and available 24/7. Approximately 60 days following the 

death, we reach out to the NOK to help resolve any residual issues and let them 

know we are available to them for as long as they need us. 

INFRASTRUCTURE

The Marine Corps continues to strive for a prolonged commitment to facilities and 

infrastructure that supports operations and quality of life for our marines and their 

families. 

• The fiscal year 2012 budget request includes $4.6 billion (military construction, family housing construction and operations, sustainment, base 

operating support, and restoration and modernization) which continues our 

efforts to operate, maintain, and improve our infrastructure. This funding 

provides critical Military Construction and Facilities support for our Active 

and Reserve Forces. 

• For many years, we have funded only our most critical facility needs. As 

a result, our installations were in a poor position to properly house and operate with the additional forces required to meet our planned end strength 

increase. 

• In fiscal year 2007–2010, the Marine Corps received $6.9 billion in new 

construction and design. With this funding, we are providing new quality 

of life facilities, improved operational and training facilities, and more upto-date utility infrastructure systems. 

• Your generous assistance in the past has provided critical support that 

allows us to improve our installations. However, it is critical that Congress 

provide necessary legislative language in order to allow us to proceed with 

approximately $2.9 billion of military construction and family housing efforts in fiscal year 2011 to support the operational and quality of life needs 

of our marines. 

• Plans for fiscal year 2011 include construction of 5,000 new barracks 

spaces, improvements to existing family housing units, critical aviation facilities to support next generation aircraft, improvement of Professional 

Military Education, replacement of outdated and inadequate facilities, other 

quality of life facilities, and correction of safety and encroachment issues. 

• The USMC has four major funding areas where recapitalization and modernization initiatives in infrastructure and facilities are programmed: Bachelor and Family Housing; Facility Sustainment, Restoration and Modernization; Military Construction; and Military Construction, Navy Reserve. 

Bachelor Housing 

Bachelor enlisted housing is the Commandant’s top Military Construction priority. 

The Marine Corps currently maintains over 100,000 bachelor enlisted housing 

spaces worldwide. 

• In fiscal year 2012, the Marine Corps is requesting $58 million to support 

this program and we are working towards constructing approximately 800 

new barracks spaces. 

• This investment, along with nearly 25,000 new spaces programmed since 

fiscal year 2008, will provide much needed support to have all single marines adequately housed. 

• Barracks are a critical element in supporting our warfighters. The Bachelor-Enlisted-Quarters initiative focuses on our enlisted troops and their 

quality of life within our barracks. 

• The USMC is the youngest, most junior, and least married of the four 

military Services. Providing appropriate and comfortable living spaces that 

positively impact the morale and development of these young men and 

women makes sense. 

• We are also committed to funding whole room barracks furnishings on a 

7-year replacement cycle and prioritizing barracks repair projects to preempt a backlog of repairs. 

• The Marine Corps’ goal is to provide a 2+0 room standard that allows two 

junior enlisted marines (E1–E3) to share a room and bath. We believe that 

assigning two junior marines to a room is the correct balance between the 

privacy desired by the marines and the Marine Corps’ goals of providing 

companionship, camaraderie, and unit cohesion. 

22 

• This balance provides the atmosphere we believe is necessary to motivate, train, and develop marines, while fostering unit integrity. Noncommissioned officers (E4 and E5) are provided a private room with bath in a 2+0 

room. 

• With your continued support, the Marine Corps is on track to obtain our 

goal to achieve the 2+0 standard for all of our marines by 2014. 

Family Housing 

Marine Corps families are an integral component of readiness. We must always 

remember that marines and their families serve out of a sense of duty and loyalty 

to our country and, as they do so, face the difficulties of the military lifestyle—frequent relocations often far from extended family and frequent deployments that separate families for months at a time. We have a responsibility to provide adequate 

family housing to our families. 

• We continue to increase both the quantity and quality of our family housing inventory through public private ventures (PPVs) and military construction where necessary. 

• In addition to PPV initiatives for family housing, continued support for 

full funding of the Basic Allowance for Housing (BAH) allows more families 

to access quality, affordable housing in the local community. This is important since more than two-thirds of servicemembers do not live on a military 

installation. 

• However, many families continue to prefer to live in military or PPV 

housing for a number of reasons, including economics, safety, schools, and 

community support. PPVs, combined with traditional military construction, 

will continue to build and improve the homes necessary to supplement local 

community housing. 

• We have over 24,000 owned, leased, or PPV family housing units worldwide. 

• Thanks to your support over the last year, we were able to award projects 

for additional privatized housing at Marine Corps Base Camp Lejeune, NC; 

Marine Corps Air Ground Combat Center Twentynine Palms, CA; and at 

Marine Corps Base, HI. We were also able to continue progress on our series of planned renovations to our housing in Iwakuni, Japan. 

• In 2001, the Marine Corps had nearly 17,700 inadequate housing units, 

with the majority of those units requiring significant revitalization or replacement. 

• Based on contracts in place by the end of fiscal year 2007, the USMC has 

met DOD’s goal to eliminate inadequate housing by 2007 and will complete 

the build-out by 2014. 

• The funding provided by Congress in fiscal year 2010 provided almost 

$128 million for public private venture (PPV) seed money, operations, maintenance, sustainment and restoration for family housing. This request included $79 million for PPV seed money, $15 million for traditional military 

construction, and $34 million for family housing operations. 

• Your support for this request allowed us to continue to address the requirement for additional family housing resulting from Grow the Force increases and sustaining and modernizing our remaining government-owned 

housing. 

• This PPV seed money will permit construction of approximately 230 new 

units and a DOD Dependent school addition at Marine Corps Base Camp 

Lejeune, NC. 

• Our PPV program continues to allow the Marine Corps to leverage private sector funds. In addition to government financing, the private sector 

contributed development capital for PPV projects in fiscal year 2010. We 

are using traditional military construction to sustain and restore mid-rise 

units for marines at Marine Corps Air Station Iwakuni, Japan and restore 

the National Historic Landmark Home of the Commandants on the Marine 

Barracks in Washington, DC. 

• Our fiscal year 2012 family housing budget request of $53 million includes $26 million for improvements to 76 homes at MCAS Iwakuni, Japan 

and for the operations, maintenance, and leasing of 1,100 units located 

worldwide. 

Public Private Ventures 

We have privatized over 97 percent of our worldwide inventories to date and continue to see success from our PPV projects across Marine Corps installations in Arizona, California, Georgia, Hawaii, Massachusetts, Missouri, New York, North and 

23 

South Carolina, and Virginia. PPVs have not only improved the homes in which our 

families live, they are also providing community support facilities such as community centers, playgrounds, and greenscapes that help create neighborhoods and a 

sense of community for our marines and their families. Resident satisfaction with 

both the quality of their home and the service provided continues to increase every 

year. With almost our entire domestic inventory privatized, we will continue to build 

on our prior successes and use PPVs to help us address most of our remaining housing requirement. 

Facility Sustainment, Restoration, and Modernization 

Facility sustainment funding is critical to keeping our buildings ready to support 

the mission and provide an acceptable quality of life. In the past, our infrastructure 

could not be replaced at an appropriate rate, causing portions of it to deteriorate. 

As a consequence, the Marine Corps has had to use an increasing percentage of its 

facility sustainment funds to bind together old, inadequate buildings throughout the 

course of their service life, rather than maintaining newer, more economical structures resulting in significant numbers of facility sustainment projects being deferred 

due to a lack of funds. This directly impacted the living and working conditions in 

barracks, mess halls, and other facilities, in highly visible and negative ways. In addition, we suffered a ‘‘quiet crisis’’ with respect to less obvious repairs to steam 

plants, airfields, sewer lines, and roads. These requirements are no longer being ignored. 

• A few years ago, the Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD) developed 

a model to determine the amount of funding we need to sustain our facilities. This model continues to be refined and strengthened. 

• Since inception of the model, and because of the funding standards put 

in place by OSD, we have done very well in programming and execution 

of sustainment. 

• In fact, in fiscal years 2006, 2007, and 2008 our sustainment rate is over 

100 percent. In 2009 and out, however, OSD set our programmed 

sustainment rate at 90 percent of the model. 

• This equates to $592 million in fiscal year 2012. This level allows for a 

slow degradation of our facilities and allows the remaining 10 percent to 

move to meet more urgent operational needs elsewhere. 

• This, along with low Operation and Maintenance (O&M) recapitalization 

funding in fiscal year 2012 of $49 million, over the next few years will take 

us back to where we were prior to the implementation of the sustainment 

model. 

• However, since we now have metrics and tools that will alert us to the 

coming degradation, corrections can be made accordingly in future budgets. 

Military Construction 

For the fourth year in a row, the fiscal year 2010 funding provided by Congress 

represented a significant increase from historical funding levels. In 2010, over $2.7 

billion in funding will provide facilities that address longstanding requirements at 

our bases and stations and support the increased end strength across the Marine 

Corps. It is always a pleasure to visit our installations and hear young marines talk 

about the work they perform in these new facilities. 

• Our fiscal year 2012 budget request of $1.4 billion continues to support 

our marines. Funds are being requested to support Bachelor Enlisted Quarters, Joint Strike Fighter and MV–22 support facilities, quality of life improvements, such as a child development center and fitness facility at 

Twentynine Palms, utilities and infrastructure improvements, and training 

and professional military education facility improvements. 

• Additionally, the fiscal year 2012 budget request includes funding to support the relocation of marines to Guam. 

• Our Military Construction program is a key to success in achieving and 

sustaining our new force structure and maintaining the readiness of our 

marines. 

Marine Corps Exclusive, Military Construction, Navy Reserve 

The Marine Forces Reserve is an integral and vital portion of our Marine Corps 

total force. Marine Forces Reserve is comprised of almost 39,600 Select Marine 

Corps Reserve personnel at approximately 183 sites, dispersed throughout 48 

States, Washington DC, and Puerto Rico. The Military Construction, Navy Reserve 

program for exclusive Marine Corps construction must effectively allocate limited 

funding to address at least $140 million in deferred construction projects. As these 

24 

numbers suggest, maintenance of adequate Marine Corps Reserve facilities presents 

a considerable challenge: 

• Over 57 percent of the Reserve centers our marines train in are more 

than 30 years old and of these, 44 percent are more than 50 years old. 

• The equipment our marines use today is bigger, heavier, wider, and 

longer, creating support requirements that these antiquated facilities cannot meet. 

• The electrical demand on our facilities because of modem equipment has 

increased significantly. 

• Appropriately constructed or modified maintenance facilities, as well as 

adequate electrical power and other support infrastructure upgrades, are 

necessary to maintain combat readiness. 

• We still continue to use facilities built to accommodate manual typewriters, M151 jeeps, and M–48 tanks. 

To help us address these challenges, the fiscal year 2012 budget request includes 

$8 million for Military Construction, Navy and Marine Corps Reserves. This program addresses pressing requirements and will provide a new Reserve Training 

Center and a vehicle maintenance facility in Memphis, TN. Additionally, we and the 

Navy are working together with the Army to fund a joint Reserve complex in Indianapolis, IN. 

CONCLUSION

Whether serving in combat or in garrison, marines are guided by honor, courage 

and commitment. These core values have been the compass for every marine’s service throughout our rich history. Leadership, hard training, and a willingness to sacrifice have forged our Corps into one of the most capable fighting forces the world 

has ever known. Our Marine Corps has remained true to these values for 235 years. 

As we continue to transition and align our programs and services to meet current 

and future challenges, we will continue to be fiscally responsible and frugal with 

taxpayers’ dollars. As always, we are grateful for your sustained support. 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY BY SGTMAJ CARLTON W. KENT, USMC 

Chairman Webb, Senator Graham, and distinguished members of the subcommittee, as I finish my last tour of duty, I want to thank you for the support 

you and the American people have given the men and women who proudly serve 

and wear our uniform, especially over the last 10 years of war. Although I am leaving the active duty ranks, once a Marine, always a Marine. The quality of life issues 

we discuss today will continue to be important to all marines and their families. 

I am pleased to report that your marines are honored to serve this great Nation 

and are happy to be doing things that marines do best, fighting and winning our 

Nation’s battles. They are truly living up to the great warfighting legacy that marines have built since 1775. Your marines, including their spouses and family members who support them, continue to remain a valuable asset and our number one 

priority. 

Throughout the last 10 years of war, our marines and their families have faced 

many challenges and made great sacrifices. Their endurance has been bolstered by 

your generous and sustained support which has enabled our continued success, on 

the battlefield and at home, and ensured our ability to maintain a high state of personal and family readiness. It is true, that while we recruit marines, we retain families, and their readiness is directly linked to the readiness of our Corps. As we continue to serve this great Nation, we are grateful to you for the increased attention 

placed on the support of our families. 

As our Commandant, General James F. Amos has said, ‘‘We will keep faith with 

our marines, our sailors, and their families.’’ I am proud to report to you that we 

are keeping faith by providing the kinds of programs and services that are critical 

to their quality of life and overall well-being. Our approach to caring for their needs 

is based on the same unwavering faithfulness they have demonstrated to the Marine Corps. We will ensure their needs are met during times of deployment and in 

garrison by providing the services, facilities, and programs to develop the strength 

and skills to thrive in the challenges of operational tempo. When needed, we will 

restore them to health. We will also transition them back to civilian life, and in the 

cases of our fallen heroes, we will support and protect their surviving spouses and 

dependents. As both the Commandant and I travel the globe to visit our marines 

and their families, they provide us valuable feedback and let us know that they notice and appreciate the much improved quality of life programs, such as 

25 

transitioning our single marine and family readiness programs from a peacetime 

model to a wartime footing; expanding support to our wounded, ill, and injured marines; and investing in our infrastructure such as housing and bachelor enlisted 

quarters. However, our families also have no problem telling us that we have additional work to do. We know that in order to develop, maintain, and sustain their 

personal and family readiness and resiliency, we must provide innovative programs 

and services that are timely and relevant. We will do this by focusing on several 

key areas during this fiscal year. 

In his 2010 Planning Guidance, our 35th Commandant directed us to: ‘‘Review 

and Improve Family Readiness—Evaluate all Marine Corps Family Team Building 

Programs and make recommendations on optimum span of control, where we require further assistance to our families, and where we should streamline to erase 

redundancy.’’ To respond to the Commandant’s concerns, we have developed a deliberate process and are taking the following actions: 

1. Launching a web-based Program Prioritization Tool that will be sent, via 

email, to Active and Reserve Unit Commanders and Sergeants Major to ask 

them to prioritize our Marine Corps Family Programs based on the value to 

marines and their families. 

2. Initiating Operational Planning Teams to review the structure of the Unit, Personal and Family Readiness and Marine Corps Family Team Building Programs to redefine staffing requirements. 

3. Conducting focus groups with unit commanders, associated sergeants major, 

and respective spouses to obtain their insights on the effectiveness of Marine 

Corps Family programs; identify unmet needs of marines and families; and acquire recommendations to fix identified deficiencies. 

Based on the feedback we receive, we will develop recommendations for funding 

current and future programs. This is not just about efficiencies; it is also about effectiveness. As part of that mandate, we have been directed to continue our behavioral health program integration; institutionalize resiliency training; and reorganize 

our Transition Assistance Management Program. 

As we move forward, we will continue to keep faith with our marines and families 

by assessing the effectiveness of our support services, transitioning and aligning our 

programs to meet their current and future challenges, and demonstrating, through 

our direct actions, that we are committed to improving them. As always, we will 

continue to be fiscally responsible with taxpayers’ dollars. My testimony today will 

outline the progress we have made and the actions we are taking in these and other 

critical areas. Thank you. 

Senator WEBB. Thank you, Sergeant Major. 

Master Chief Petty Officer of the Navy, Rick West. 

Welcome, Master Chief. 

STATEMENT OF MCPON RICK D. WEST, MASTER CHIEF PETTY 

OFFICER OF THE NAVY, USN 

Master Chief Petty Officer WEST. Thank you very much, sir. 

Mr. Chairman, distinguished members of the subcommittee, I appreciate the opportunity to appear before you to discuss the health 

of our Navy’s enlisted force. 

Your steadfast support of our men and women in uniform has 

had a tremendous impact on their quality of life and quality of 

work. Both are vital to operational readiness and mission effectiveness. 

As I speak today, approximately 60 percent of our ships are underway, with 40 percent being on deployment worldwide. Other 

than our global presence, traditional maritime operations, and developing partnership capacity through worldwide engagement, a 

snapshot across our global Navy would look like the following: 

More than 14,000 sailors are on the ground and more than 

14,000 sailors at sea in Central Command, supporting operations 

in Iraq and Afghanistan. 

Our Navy is executing counterpiracy missions off the coast of Africa. 

26 

As part of our global reach, we are at the forefront of providing 

humanitarian assistance and disaster relief support to the victims 

of natural disasters, wherever they occur. 

Our Navy, America’s Navy, has no boundaries. We are a global 

force for good. 

In my travels this past year, I have enjoyed the visits I’ve had 

with the sailors who defend America every day. In these visits, I 

have taken a special note of the quality of life and the many programs that support our sailors and their families. Current operational demands and high operational tempo have placed added 

stress on the force. Our many personnel and family readiness programs remain one of our Navy’s highest priorities. 

One area that has a recent significant impact on the quality of 

life for our families that I feel a need to highlight is the Continuing 

Resolution (CR) for 2011. Under the CR, physical constraints, considerable delays, and permanent change-of-station orders occurred, 

resulting in more than 20,000 sets of orders being deferred. For 

those transfers that we were able to execute, we have reduced 

transfer times to 2 months or less. While relief is on the way, lingering effects of the CR will continue to place emotional and economic strain on our sailors and their families as they attempt to 

sell homes, seek follow-on employment for family members, enroll 

children in schools and complete necessary screening and training 

requirements prior to transfer. 

Though leadership has been resourceful in mitigating the impact, 

the CR has also affected our ability to execute contract for phased 

new construction and facility sustainment in our barracks while, at 

the same time, forcing us to curtail contracts for base operating 

support and delay necessary civilian hiring. 

Despite these challenges, our leadership remains focused on providing support to our sailors and their families to foster resiliency 

as well as family readiness. 

Our Navy team will accomplish any mission or task we ask 

them. They do this, knowing their families will be well supported 

and cared for when we go over the horizon into harm’s way. 

In closing, on behalf of our sailors and their families serving 

throughout the world, thank you for your continued support of our 

great Navy and the programs that support the quality of life of all 

personnel. I look forward to your questions, sir. 

Hooyah Navy. 

[The prepared statement of Master Chief Petty Officer West follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT BY MCPON RICK D. WEST, USN 

INTRODUCTION

Chairman Webb, Ranking Member Graham, and distinguished members of the 

Personnel Subcommittee of the Senate Committee on Armed Services, thank you for 

the opportunity to testify before you. As the Enlisted representative of the Navy, 

I am honored and privileged to speak before you on behalf of more than 430,000 

Active and Reserve sailors who make the finest Total Force in the history of our 

great Navy. 

Last year, I visited many commands around the world and most recently I traveled with our Chief of Naval Operations (CNO) to Afghanistan, Iraq, Kuwait, Bahrain, and Landstuhl, during which I was impressed by the quality of sailors serving 

with such great enthusiasm and devotion. I am constantly amazed and truly awed 

by the daily sacrifices and outstanding capabilities and resiliency of our sailors who 

27 

serve with distinction on ships, squadrons, submarines and on land. No matter 

where they are in the world or what they do for our great Navy, everything they 

do is very important and it all plays part in our Navy’s Maritime Strategy. Our sailors are the best we have ever seen as a Navy; they are performing their missions 

well and I am very proud of what they do everyday. 

Sailors in Action 

America’s Navy is a global force for good on station around the world, around the 

clock building partnerships through maritime security cooperation and spanning the 

core capabilities of our Maritime Strategy of forward presence, deterrence, power 

projection, sea control, maritime security, and humanitarian assistance, and disaster response. Our Navy’s responsibilities have increased because the challenges 

our country faces are so unpredictable and diverse. We need to be ready to confront 

these challenges, and we are. 

In addition to our traditional maritime mission, below, on or above our world’s 

oceans, we are boots-on-ground alongside our brothers and sisters in the Army and 

Marine Corps in places like Iraq and Afghanistan. In fact today, we have the second 

largest force operating in that Area of Responsibility (AOR). 

The Navy’s contribution in support of Overseas Contingency Operations (OCO) 

has been a vital component of our national effort to secure a safer world. At any 

given time, there are more than 15,000 sailors in the Individual Augmentee (IA) 

pipeline worldwide, either with orders, in training, or deployed, filling almost 11,000 

IA requirements. The Navy has almost 25,000 Active and Reserve sailors on the 

ground and at sea in the U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM) AOR supporting 

Navy, Joint Force, and combatant commander requirements in support of OCO. 

Using skills traditional to the Navy, our sailors continue to fill combat support 

and combat service support missions. These missions include medical support, Joint 

Task Force and headquarters staff, base operating support, detainee operations, engineering, intelligence and surveillance, embedded training teams and provincial reconstruction teams. 

To date, there have been more than 90,000 IAs in support of OCO with more than 

two-thirds of these sailors mobilized from the Navy Reserve. Most IAs are concentrated in the CENTCOM region, which includes Iraq, Afghanistan, Kuwait, and 

Bahrain. But there are also IAs serving in other regions to include, but not limited 

to, Germany, Philippines, Cuba, Horn of Africa, and Japan. I assure you that your 

sailors are ready to take on any challenge necessary to protect our great nation by 

providing a constant, well-trained forward presence throughout the world. 

With more than 40 percent of our ships deployed daily, America’s Navy is making 

the world a better place. Our Navy has conducted counter piracy operations in the 

Indian Ocean and deployed ships to provide proactive humanitarian assistance with 

global partners in missions such as Pacific Partnership and Continuing Promise 

2010 in the Caribbean. Our sailors perform remarkable and selfless feats every day 

out of devout patriotism and commitment to helping others. Last year, our sailors 

responded compassionately while providing humanitarian assistance and disaster 

relief following the earthquake in Haiti and flood in Pakistan, and today they are 

providing assistance in strength to the people of Japan after the devastating earthquake and tsunami. With all the events and coverage by our Navy worldwide we 

conducted the world’s largest maritime exercise, which brought together 14 nations 

and more than 20,000 military personnel, to improve coordination and trust in 

multi-national operations in the Pacific. Our Nation’s Navy has a global presence 

and are the first responders when the Nation and the world calls. 

PERSONNEL READINESS

We have been very successful in our recruiting and retention efforts over the past 

3 years. However, we are encountering challenges in recruiting health professionals, 

nuclear operators and special warfare operators in both the Active and Reserve components. To meet increased demands for these skills, we maintained bonus levels 

for nuclear officers and health professionals and continue to offer enlisted accession 

bonuses to special warfare/special operations and other critical ratings. 

In fiscal year 2010, Navy recruiting achieved all enlisted goals, including nuclear 

field, Naval Special Warfare/Special Operations and all OCO ratings, as well as 

total female and women in nontraditional ratings. We continue to exceed Department of Defense (DOD) quality standards in all recruit categories. For new contract 

quality in fiscal year 2010 we achieved 97.4 percent High School Diploma Graduates 

(HSDG) and 83 percent scored 50 or higher on their ASVAB (Test Score Category 

I–IIIA). We expect this trend to continue into fiscal year 2011. 

America’s Navy has transitioned from a posture of reducing end strength to one 

of shaping the force. Our force shaping efforts remain focused on maintaining a balVerDate Aug 31 2005 09:55 Jan 25, 2012 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00033 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 Y:\BORAWSKI\DOCS\68089.TXT JUNE PsN: JUNEB
28 

anced force in terms of seniority, experience and skills, while staying within our 

congressionally authorized end strength limits. We are projected to meet our fiscal 

year 2011 authorized Active end strength of 328,700 and Reserve end strength of 

65,500 by the end of the fiscal year. 

We are training and retaining superb sailors who are dedicated to serving our Nation. In particular, we remain focused on retaining sailors with critical skills in high 

demand in civilian sector and specialties that continue to experience high operation 

tempo in support of OCO. Key to sustaining the force are effective Enlistment and 

Selective Reenlistment Bonus programs which allow us to access and retain quality 

sailors to sustain the Active Force. 

We are finding ways to provide flexible service options and levels of participation 

to maximize each individual sailor’s ability to serve in the Navy over the course of 

a lifetime. 

Our Perform-to-Serve program which includes a Selected Reserve option, gives us 

the opportunity to retain our fully-qualified sailors within the Reserve component 

before they separate from active duty. We recently incorporated a Fleet Rating Identification Engine (Fleet RIDE) application with our Perform-To-Serve initiative. This 

tool provides a comprehensive assessment of sailors’ qualifications for alternate 

Navy enlisted ratings so we can transition them to an undermanned technical specialty. It further facilitates the Reserve affiliation process by providing each Active 

component sailor with information about Reserve opportunities and the ability to 

apply for a Reserve component quota. 

The Continuum of Service concept looks to develop programs that provide sailors 

with flexible career options within Navy’s Total Force construct. Our goal for the 

continuum of service initiative is to achieve a seamless transition between the active 

and Reserve components, and civilian work force, to meet mission requirements and 

encourage a lifetime of service. Since the establishment of the Career Transition Office (CTO) in May 2009, average transition time has decreased from more than 30 

days to 4 days. Transition from Active Duty to Reserve creates a ‘‘Recruit Once, Retain for Life’’ culture. We view a sailor’s career similar to driving down a highway. 

Sailors need the ability to make ‘‘lane changes’’ to meet life-work needs, and the 

CTO is there to make the ‘‘lane change’’ as seamless as possible. 

Existing transition assistance programs to facilitate sailors’ relocation to the civilian sector are robust but would benefit from expansion. In the last 5 years, more 

than 300,000 sailors have separated from Navy service while our end strength 

dropped by approximately 35,000 personnel. Although we expect this rate to plateau 

as we satisfy end strength requirements and shape our force, properly preparing our 

sailors for this transition will remain critical so that they are able to plan for and 

become equally productive citizens of society. 

NAVY RESERVE FORCE

Since 1915, Navy reservists have played an integral part in service to our Nation. 

From World War I to World War II, through Operation Desert Shield and Operation 

Desert Storm, to September 11, and to Overseas Contingency Operations (OCO), 

Navy reservists have continually stepped up, supported and defended our Nation 

against enemies, foreign and domestic. Since September 11, our Navy Reserve has 

filled more than 63,000 mobilization requirements. As of October 2010, more than 

7,000 reservists were mobilized to support of OCO. Our Navy Reserve makes up 

slightly more than 50 percent of the IA force, with slightly less than 50 percent 

being Active component sailors. Our Navy Reserve warriors continually prove they 

are more than capable of meeting any challenge and conducting any mission, anytime, anywhere. 

As I travel the world to meet and talk with sailors, I could not be more proud 

of the day-to-day efforts and tenacity of our sailors. I’m amazed at the integration 

that has taken shape over the years between our Active and Navy Reserve. We are 

one Force working side-by-side in all corners of the world; a Total Force integrated 

and executing the Navy’s mission wherever and whenever called. 

Even though we have always had an operational Navy Reserve, since the terrorist 

attacks on September 11 we have relied heavily on our Strategic Reserve Force in 

order to meet various Naval and joint military missions. Our Sailor’s Creed begins 

with ‘‘I am a United States Sailor’’ and that is exactly what I see when I travel 

throughout our Navy; Active and Reserve sailors from all walks of life working sideby-side as one team, one family and one Navy. 

We ensure that billets are filled and missions are manned properly, but our Navy 

families are top priority, and we remain committed to balancing mission requirements with family needs. 

29 

SAILOR AND FAMILY READINESS

As our Navy evolves and we continue to have the most advanced equipment, technology, weapons systems and platforms, one thing remains the same: The engine 

that truly drives our Navy and the reason we are the best is our people. 

I greatly enjoy every opportunity I get to travel around the world to meet and 

talk with sailors and their families. When I see our hard-working, high-spirited and 

amazingly capable sailors, it makes me very proud and humbled. Now, that I am 

toward the end of my career, I am entering a new career field, that of being a Navy 

family member. My oldest son, Zach, is a Navy Diver and my wife Bobbi and I know 

what it is like to watch our son deploy in harm’s way, waiting, wondering and praying that everything will be alright and he will return home safely. I also know what 

it feels like to be the spouse at home watching your loved one deploy. I experienced 

this first-hand this past year when my wife was deployed to Afghanistan with the 

Naval Criminal Investigative Service. As we all know, we certainly could not do our 

jobs and probably would not be where we are today without the love and support 

from our families and spouses. 

I could not be more proud of our Navy families for their remarkably selfless dedication and steadfast support of our sailors. Our families have sacrificed so much as 

they have supported their sailors and our great Navy. We are the greatest Navy 

in the world and a big part of that is our sailors being ready and able to focus on 

the mission and their individual jobs because they have the confidence that our 

Navy is taking care of their families. 

Deployments are an integral part of Navy life. We have been deploying our forces 

since we formed our great Navy during times of both peace and conflict, but it is 

important not to underestimate or take for granted the incredible strain that a long 

deployment imposes on our sailors and their families. Multiple deployments, frequent relocations and the stresses associated with being part of a military family 

all impact the overall readiness of the unit, the readiness of the individual sailor, 

and the readiness of their family. 

Keeping our Navy families informed about resources available to them to mitigate 

the strain of deployment and provide support is instrumental to their peace of mind 

while waiting for their sailors to return from year-long assignments in the Middle 

East or 6-month deployments safeguarding our seas. Through resources such as 

‘Navy for Moms,’ ‘Navy Dads,’ Military OneSource, Navy.mil and various other web 

sites, our sailors and their families are more informed today about the resources 

available to them than they have ever been in the history of our Navy. Another success in communication has been the use of smart phone applications such as ‘Navy 

Life’ and ‘Navy IA’ as well as social media web sites such as Facebook and Twitter 

to connect with sailors and families. Both CNO and I are committed to using social 

media because it is a great opportunity to remain connected with our sailors Navywide and a great tool in our outreach efforts for getting information out in a timely 

manner to our entire Navy family, which includes Active and Reserve sailors, families, retirees, and Department of the Navy civilians. 

Morale, Welfare, and Recreation (MWR) programs are also instrumental in our 

commitment to addressing Sailor and Family Readiness. The Navy has embraced 

a ‘‘Culture of Fitness’’ through incorporation of programs such as the Navy Operational Fitness and Fueling Series and Family Fitness Opportunities. We facilitate 

these and other initiatives through access to modern facilities and evolving approaches to holistic health. Sailors are required to meet physical fitness and body 

composition standards that necessitate a regimented approach regardless of environment, climate or other limitations. Ashore, our sailors and families also rely on 

MWR to strike a balance between the demands of military service and the importance of off-duty pursuits with loved ones. 

CONTINUUM OF CARE

Health care is one of our top recruiting and retention tools for our sailors, and 

I continuously hear just how important access to health care is for them and their 

family members. Navy Medicine continues to focus on developing an economic and 

quality-centric strategy for the delivery of top-quality health care to our beneficiaries, and the recruitment and retention of providers in critical specialties allowing the fulfillment of the wartime mission, while sustaining the benefit here at 

home. 

Operational tempo of the force remains at very high levels. To ensure the behavioral health needs of our sailors is met, we are seeking ways to refine existing programs, as well as exploring new opportunities to address future demands. In particular, our Navy’s Operational Stress Control Program, Navy Reserve Psychological 

Health Outreach Program, Warrior Transition Program, Returning Warrior WorkVerDate Aug 31 2005 09:55 Jan 25, 2012 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00035 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 Y:\BORAWSKI\DOCS\68089.TXT JUNE PsN: JUNEB
30 

shop, Navy Safe Harbor, and our Medical Home Port Program are critical elements 

of our comprehensive continuum of care and we must continue to support the expansion of these programs as the need requires. 

The Navy’s Safe Harbor Program is the Navy’s lead organization for providing the 

highest quality non-medical care to all seriously wounded, ill, and injured sailors, 

coastguardsmen, and their families. Using a holistic approach, Navy Safe Harbor offers a lifetime of individually tailored assistance designed to optimize the success 

of a sailor’s or coastguardsmen’s recovery, rehabilitation and reintegration activities. 

Since January 2008, Safe Harbor has grown from 9 personnel supporting 145 sailors 

and families at 6 locations to serving a case load of more than 1,200 wounded, ill, 

or injured servicemembers at 16 locations. Safe Harbor’s goal is to return sailors 

and coastguardsmen to duty and when not possible, work collaboratively with Federal and nongovernmental agencies, including the Department of Veteran Affairs 

and State and local organizations, to ensure their successful reintegration back into 

their communities. 

Through our Fleet and Family Support Centers we offer a number of personnel 

and family support programs to reduce life stressors including, but not limited to 

physical readiness, life skills education, financial management, health promotion, 

and religious ministries. Furthermore, our family readiness programs promote 

healthy and resilient families, focusing on areas such as the prevention of suicide 

and domestic violence, and providing developmental child care and youth programs 

and services. We make every effort to reach servicemembers and families no matter 

how remote their location through webinars, monthly electronic newsletters and deployment preparedness handbooks. 

The Bureau of Medicine and Surgery implemented Medical Home Port (MHP) 

throughout Navy Medicine in 2010 as a new model of healthcare delivery in primary 

care. Care delivered in the MHP model includes, but is not limited to, readiness, 

prevention, wellness, behavioral health, and disease management. This model enables sailors to be treated in the settings in which they feel most comfortable and 

reduces the stigma associated with the care they receive. MHP increases access to 

care, improves clinical quality and patient outcomes, enhances patient satisfaction, 

promotes a healthier and fit force, and reduces healthcare utilization, resulting in 

a reduction in overall healthcare costs. 

Combat casualty care is provided by Navy medical personnel assigned to and serving with Marine Corps units, in Expeditionary Medical Facilities, aboard casualty 

receiving/treatment ships and hospital ships, and in military and Department of 

Veteran Affairs hospitals. Recent advances in force protection, battlefield medicine, 

combat and operation stress control, medical evacuation, and family support programs have led to improved survival rates, healthier family functioning and enhanced operational effectiveness. 

The Navy continues to provide support to sailors and their families through a variety of programs that increase medical and non-medical assistance to wounded, ill, 

and injured servicemembers utilizing a comprehensive approach designed to optimize their recovery, rehabilitation and reintegration. Navy Case Management is the 

link that connects resources and services which allow injured servicemembers to 

reach their optimum goals in healthcare. Case Management provides the critical 

support servicemembers need during this challenging time in their lives. Case Management will continue to be at the forefront of providing optimal care to our 

servicemembers with war-related injuries. Navy Medicine has 192 Medical Case 

Managers providing service to our wounded, ill, and injured sailors in Military 

Treatment Facilities and ambulatory care clinics. 

SUICIDE AND SEXUAL ASSAULT PREVENTION

We continue our suicide prevention efforts through a multi-faceted system of communication, training and command support designed to foster resilience and promote psychological health among sailors. In calendar year 2010, the Navy had 38 

sailor suicides compared to 46 in 2009. 

The Navy continues to develop and enhance programs designed to mitigate suicide 

risk factors and improve the resilience of the force. These programs focus on substance abuse prevention, financial management, positive family relationships, physical readiness, and family support with the goal of reducing individual stress. We 

continue to work toward a greater understanding of the issues surrounding suicide 

to ensure that our policies, training programs, interventions, and communication efforts are meeting their intended objectives. 

More and more shipmates, leaders, and family members are noting signs of concern and are reaching out to get sailors the help they need. We recognize that long 

before thoughts of suicide occur, we have opportunities to build resilience, intervene 

31 

early when risk factors are present, and create the connections that help sustain 

us in times of challenge. Most of these efforts fall within our broader family readiness and health promotion activities. 

The Navy has expanded the surveillance and analysis system for Navy active and 

Reserve suicide deaths and attempts; supported command prevention and stress 

control programs with printed resource and interactive training materials; provided 

training world-wide to suicide prevention coordinators and first responders; and provided Navy representation in DOD, VA, and other cooperative efforts. 

For most sailors, suicide prevention is more than just a training topic. About half 

have personally known someone in their lives who was lost to suicide. Sailors and 

leaders genuinely care and have shown it in the way they have engaged vigorously 

in focus groups, put forth tremendous creativity in developing suicide prevention 

posters and materials, and enthusiastically embraced new hands-on training materials. Their caring shows in the dozens of times each month someone assists a struggling shipmate to get some help. This past year, we implemented programs such as 

the Coalition of Sailors Against Destructive Decisions (CSADD) which is gaining 

momentum with our younger sailors. 

CSADD’s mission is to provide military members of all branches with the best 

prevention and intervention tools possible to deal with the issues of drinking, reckless driving, and other destructive decisions while maintaining good order and discipline, to assist sailors in making life decisions that will maintain positive lifestyles 

in keeping with the Navy’s core values, to guide sailors away from making poor and 

destructive decisions by providing them with positive and dynamic training and to 

show sailors how to make quick positive decisions and put their training to use in 

moments of high stress and peer pressure. 

The Navy has a ‘zero’ tolerance policy for sexual assault; it is a criminal act. The 

majority of sexual assaults are servicemember-on-servicemember and it is incomprehensible that a sailor would commit such a horrible crime against another shipmate. 

It undermines teamwork, morale, unit cohesion, and operational readiness. 

At the close of calendar year 2010, reports of sexual assault increased from 2009. 

This increase could be attributed to victims’ increased willingness to report the 

crime. This demonstrates that our education and prevention efforts are showing 

progress, but we acknowledge sexual assaults are still occurring in our Navy. The 

highest risk group for victims over the past several years remains E–1 to E–4, ages 

20 to 24, with most incidents occurring during the weekends. In most sexual assault 

incidents, alcohol was a major factor impairing the judgment of offenders, victims, 

and bystanders. 

In order to remove sexual assault from our Navy, we are ensuring commands 

have a strong partnership with Sexual Assault Response Coordinators (SARCs) and 

a robust Sexual Assault Prevention and Response (SAPR) Program which fosters an 

environment where ‘shipmates help shipmates’ by not allowing destructive behavior 

to occur. 

The SAPR program, established in 2004, promotes training, builds awareness and 

provides advocacy and supportive services for victims of sexual assault. It is a victim-focused program that focuses on response and offender accountability. The 

SAPR program is conducting a comprehensive review of training curriculum for 

those entering the Service ranks and attending professional military schools. The 

Navy embraces bystander intervention as the core of our strategy to protect sailors 

from sexual assault. Bystander intervention is key to preventing sexual assaults before they occur. Our goals include reducing the incidents of sexual assault, improving support for victims of sexual assault, and building prevention based upon insights from data-driven critical assessments. We will continue to revise and improve 

the SAPR program to create an environment free of sexual assault for all Navy personnel. 

CHILD CARE

In today’s military, many of our sailors have working spouses or have the responsibility of being single parents who depend heavily on our military child and youth 

system of care, which includes Child Development Centers (CDC), to provide quality 

child care. Due to frequent relocations and the length of deployments, many of our 

sailors do not have the option, like civilian families, to rely on family members and 

friends to assist with taking care of their children when they are away. 

An important facet that stands out in the quality of our child care programs is 

the continuity of service from location to location as we operate a standardized 

worldwide program. Sailors and their children can count on the same quality of care 

whether they are stationed in Chinhae, Korea, or San Diego, CA. Additionally, our 

programs are among the most affordable. Commercial programs charge parent fees 

32 

based on the age of the child while our programs base fees on total family income. 

This model is critical to the economic viability of our families. Children under the 

age of three are the most costly to care for due to the lower child-to-staff ratios, and 

typically our most junior enlisted families have children in this age group. 

This fiscal year, we will complete an expansion of approximately 7,000 new child 

care spaces meeting the Office of the Secretary of Defense guidance to provide 80 

percent of potential need for child care spaces (54,000 total spaces for children ages 

infant to 12th grade, including 19,000 CDC spaces). With the construction of these 

spaces, we will reduce the waiting time for child care to 3 months or less Navy-wide 

with first priority given to single parents. 

Our continuing expansion initiatives are not only meeting the needs of our families living on or near our installations, but also those living and working throughout 

the United States, including Reserve members. Our contract programs ‘‘Military 

Child Care in Your Neighborhood’’ and ‘‘Mission Youth Outreach’’ provide subsidized 

child and youth services from commercial programs that meet community quality 

standards. We continue to work with communities, assisting them with raising the 

quality of their standards. 

HOMEPORT ASHORE, BACHELOR AND NAVY FAMILY HOUSING

Thanks to the support of Congress, through military construction and housing privatization, we have made significant strides in improving the living conditions of 

our sailors and their families. Our Homeport Ashore program continues to provide 

adequate off-ship quarters to junior sailors who are not entitled to a Basic Allowance for Housing and would normally live aboard ships. This effort marks the most 

dramatic quality of life improvement initiative for our single sailors that I have seen 

over the course of my career. 

Still, one of my biggest quality of life concerns is that we have approximately 

5,400 single sailors, E–1 to E–4 with less than 4 years of service living aboard ship 

while in their homeport. The Navy has made considerable progress toward achieving the Homeport Ashore goal through military construction, privatization, and intensified use of existing barracks capacity (based on an interim assignment policy 

standard 55 square feet of space per person). Moving our single sailors off ships remains a priority and requires us to assign two or more sailors per room. Although 

housing these sailors does not meet the DOD requirement of 90 square feet per person, our sailors are very thankful for this initiative and know that we will continue 

to work to meet this requirement. 

Our Bachelor Housing provides permanent party personnel, students, and mobilized Sailors with suitable, affordable, and safe environments in community, 

privatized, or Navy-owned housing. It supports unaccompanied permanent party 

personnel, students, and mobilized units worldwide. The fiscal year 2012 Bachelor 

Housing program is focused on completing Homeport Ashore by 2016 and eliminating substandard Bachelor Housing conditions. With respect to addressing the 

condition, the Navy has increased its investment in the restoration and modernization of bachelor housing across the Future Years Defense Program to bring 90 percent of the inventory to Q1/Q2 (or adequate) standards by 2022. 

In fiscal year 2011, the Navy would begin this initiative through the renovation 

of barracks in Milton, FL; Atsugi, Japan; Ventura, Lemoore, and San Diego, CA; 

Whidbey Island and Bremerton, WA; and Pearl Harbor, HI. 

The Navy owns approximately 10,000 family housing units worldwide. Based on 

revised Office of the Secretary of Defense criteria directing the use of Q-ratings, the 

Navy has identified approximately 3,700 Navy-owned homes as inadequate. The revised definition is based on the physical condition of the home as a function of its 

replacement value. The previous inadequate definition was identified as a building 

in need of more than $50,000 of repairs. We have privatized approximately 40,000 

homes in the CONUS and Hawaii inventory. The privatization of the remaining 870 

homes in the northwest is scheduled for the end of 2013. The privatization of the 

remaining 226 homes in the southwest is under review. When the Public Private 

Venture (PPV) transition is complete, the Navy will own less than 100 homes in 

CONUS and Hawaii, but will retain ownership and management of all foreign assets. 

Thanks to the support of this committee and Members of Congress, we have improved the housing available to our sailors through PPV. Sailors cite the PPV initiative as one of the most effective quality of life improvements in recent years. 

Quality of life does affect retention and recruiting. PPV and Homeport Ashore are 

examples of initiatives that have had a direct impact on the retention, morale and 

the quality of life of our men and women. They are shining examples of our covVerDate Aug 31 2005 09:55 Jan 25, 2012 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00038 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 Y:\BORAWSKI\DOCS\68089.TXT JUNE PsN: JUNEB
33 

enant with sailors to recognize their service through tangible improvements to their 

welfare, and represent ideal opportunities for expanded utilization. 

CONCLUSION

America’s Navy is very much a global force for good on station around the world 

and around the clock, deterring aggression, keeping the sea lanes open for free 

trade, projecting power and maritime security, and delivering humanitarian assistance and disaster response where needed. Sailors are the key element in our Navy’s 

future force. 

Our Navy family members share our sacrifices while providing support. They 

have courage, strength and deep devotion to our country. Our Navy families endure 

the challenges of multiple deployments and moves, spend holidays and life milestones apart, juggle everyday tasks while a spouse, parent, son, or daughter is in 

harm’s way, and honor the service of their loved ones and memories of those lost. 

We must continue to ask hard questions and make hard decisions that will enable 

us to provide a quality of life commensurate to the sacrifices our sailors and their 

families make. The Continuing Resolution (CR) for 2011 has affected us in several 

areas including various military construction projects that have been delayed and 

may not be executed. But most of all, it has had a negative effect on our ability 

to properly support quality of life for sailors and their families. 

Due to the way resources are phased and allocated under the CR, the Navy does 

not have sufficient manpower funding to allow for normal lead times for sailors to 

receive Permanent Change of Station (PCS) orders as funds must be allotted to 

cover pay and benefits. Average lead times have been reduced from 4 to 6 months 

to approximately 2 months or less. This places great emotional and economic stress 

on sailors and their families. In today’s economy, there is a great possibility that 

if they own a house, they will not be able to sell it or have enough time for the 

spouse to be able to find a job in the new location. Our Navy families affected by 

these constraints are often forced to live apart. The impact of Navy’s PCS funding 

level is being felt across the force, and will continue until funding is resolved. 

On behalf of our sailors who sacrifice daily and their families who faithfully support them, I want to extend my sincere appreciation for your unwavering support 

for our U.S. Navy. Thank you. 

Senator WEBB. Thank you, Master Chief. 

Chief Master Sergeant of the Air Force, James Roy, welcome. 

STATEMENT OF CMSAF JAMES A. ROY, CHIEF MASTER 

SERGEANT OF THE AIR FORCE, USAF 

Chief Master Sergeant ROY. Chairman Webb, members of the 

subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to tell you about 

America’s Air Force and our families. 

It’s an honor and a distinct privilege to join my fellow senior enlisted advisors here today to represent one of the finest air forces 

in the world and, of course, those young men and women that 

make up our U.S. Air Force. 

There are more than 702,000 who make up the total force team: 

Active Duty, Guard, Reserve, and civilians. Two members of the 

total force team join me today: Chief Master Sergeant Denise 

Jalinski-Hall, a senior enlisted leader for the National Guard Bureau, and Chief Master Sergeant Chris Muncey, the command 

Chief Master Sergeant for the Air National Guard. 

We appreciate the unwavering support of the members here and 

from the entire Senate, which is a vital part of our success. We are 

greatly appreciative of your efforts, actions, and legislation that 

have led to the expansion of servicemembers’ and veterans’ pay and 

benefits. We also appreciate the visits by the Senators to our 

servicemembers in the field and to the wounded warriors in 

healthcare facilities. 

To represent all the Air Force wounded warriors, I am joined 

here today by Technical Sergeant Chris Frost, an explosives ordiVerDate Aug 31 2005 09:55 Jan 25, 2012 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00039 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 Y:\BORAWSKI\DOCS\68089.TXT JUNE PsN: JUNEB
34 

nance disposal technician who lost both legs below the knee when 

his vehicle struck a 700-pound improvised explosive device in Iraq 

in 2008. The blast killed one soldier and injured two others in his 

vehicle. Sergeant Frost has since returned to duty, mentored other 

wounded warriors and cycled 3,500 miles across America. Sergeant 

Frost inspires all of us. It is an absolute pleasure serving with him, 

and I salute his resiliency. 

Senator WEBB. Sergeant, where are you? Thanks for what you’ve 

been doing, and we are really proud of how you’ve come back from 

your wounds. You bounced right out of that chair. That’s very impressive. 

Chief Master Sergeant ROY. Our airmen are on our front lines 

in a variety of theaters of operation, including America’s recent 

missions over Libya and on the ground for humanitarian missions 

in Operation Tomodachi. They are also providing airmanship skills 

to combatant commanders around the world, and they are constantly deployed, leaving behind families and friends. 

We must ensure our airmen and their families are safe, healthy, 

and resilient. Building resiliency among airmen and their families 

is a key focus area. Our warriors have been in Iraq and Afghanistan for nearly 10 years, and in the Middle East for over 20 years. 

We are deliberately increasing the focus on building stronger, resilient families because of our continued high operational tempo at 

home and abroad, as well as the unique role of airmen, such as remotely piloted aircraft operators, who affect the battlespace each 

and every day. Resilient airmen are better equipped to withstand, 

recover, and continue to grow in the face of stressors and the 

changing demands, while continuously getting the job done. 

It is my distinct honor to be with you here today and tell you 

about America’s Air Force and what we do on a daily basis. 

Thank you again. I look forward to any questions. 

[The prepared statement of Chief Master Sergeant Roy follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT BY CMSAF JAMES A. ROY, USAF 

INTRODUCTION

Chairman Webb, Senator Graham, members of the subcommittee, thank you for 

this opportunity to share with you information important to America’s airmen, their 

families, and our U.S. Air Force. It is an honor and distinct privilege for me to join 

my fellow Service Senior Enlisted Advisors and represent our Nation’s finest men 

and women. 

This fiscal year, we have a programmed Total Force end strength of 702,367 

which includes 332,200 active duty, 192,267 civilians, 71,200 Reserve, and 106,700 

Air National Guard personnel. In the fiscal year 2012 budget, we have requested 

a Total Force end strength that will decrease to 693,099. While active duty end 

strength will only increase by 600 airmen to 332,800, our civilian end strength will 

decrease by just over 10,000 to 182,199 civilians. We will also increase the Reserve 

end strength by 200 to 71,400 while the Air National Guard remains unchanged at 

106,700. 

FORCE MANAGEMENT

Fiscal constraints and 16-year record high retention rates compel the Air Force 

to develop voluntary and involuntary programs to manage our end strength levels. 

We must operate within our budget and we are committed to meeting our end 

strength. To do so, we have made tough decisions that will impact airmen across 

the 30-year continuum of service. For new airmen who fail to complete their initial 

skills training, we established a Limited Initial Skills Training process that considers these airmen for either retention or separation based on the needs of the Air 

Force. We encourage voluntary separations and retirements for more seasoned airVerDate Aug 31 2005 09:55 Jan 25, 2012 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00040 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 Y:\BORAWSKI\DOCS\68089.TXT JUNE PsN: JUNEB
35 

men by offering both limited active duty service commitment waivers and time-ingrade waivers. They may also voluntarily apply to complete their service commitment in the Air Reserve component through our Palace CHASE Program or continue service in the Army through the Blue-to-Green Program. 

In an effort to manage the enlisted force within authorized end strength, we are 

continuing the Date of Separation (DOS) Rollback Program. This initiative separates airmen early who have already chosen to transition from the Air Force. It also 

provides an avenue to accelerate the removal of airmen who possess negative quality force indicators. 

Our force management strategy is not a quick fix, but a tailored, multi-year effect 

designed to manage the force along a 30-year continuum of service. 

ACCESSIONS

We must protect accessions while taking care of our people as the impact of 

under-accessing airmen is felt for the next 20 years. As previously mentioned, our 

force management efforts include reducing accessions. Although below desired 

sustainment levels, reductions are manageable within the short- and long-term 

health of the force. For fiscal year 2011, this included 2,135 enlisted accession reductions and 439 officer reductions. In fiscal year 2012, our reductions are deeper. 

Enlisted accession reductions are set at 2,407 while officer reductions are set at 639. 

RECRUITING, RETENTION, BONUSES, AND INCENTIVE PAYS

America deserves the very best Air Force in the world, and it takes recruiting, 

developing, and retaining the highest quality airmen to maintain that status. To do 

so, our fiscal year 2012 budget request includes $30.5 billion in military personnel 

funding, to include a 1.6 percent pay increase. Although our recruiting quality and 

retention levels are at the highest in 16 years, we are obligating $630 million for 

bonuses to recruit the right skill sets and retain experienced airmen for today’s fight 

and the emerging missions of tomorrow. Without these funds we will handicap our 

commanders in their ability to efficiently and effectively carry out the full range of 

missions America demands of its Air Force. 

Air Force recruiting continues to need high quality recruits, even during periods 

of high retention. Higher quality recruits increase the probability of success during 

their initial training. Basic Military Training attrition went from a high of 10.7 percent in fiscal year 2007 down to 6.8 percent in fiscal year 2010 due to higher caliber 

recruits. Additionally, as a Service, we need a continuing flow of high quality recruits to fill entry-level positions as current airmen progress into advanced positions 

and eventually separate or retire. Continued support for maintaining high quality 

now will allow the Air Force to compete for the best and brightest along a broad 

spectrum, especially when unemployment improves and current retention returns to 

normal levels. 

The Air National Guard (ANG) is focusing its recruiting efforts on precision recruiting to existing vacancies. The ANG is currently projecting to be at or near its 

authorized end strength of 106,700 at the end of fiscal year 2011. 

The Air Force Reserve uses its bonus program to meet the demand for critical 

skills deemed vital to Air Force Reserve mission. Its bonus program has been pivotal 

to recruiting and retaining the right people to meet combatant commander requirements. Development of these skills usually requires long training courses. Members 

with these skills are normally in high demand within the private sector. With continued funding, the Reserve will be able to offer the appropriate combination of bonuses for enlistment, reenlistment, affiliation and health professionals. Current indications illustrate the bonus program is positively benefitting recruiting and retention. 

The Air Force has a relatively small budget for recruiting special skills into the 

Service. On the enlisted side, these skills range from ground and airborne 

cryptologic language analyst; combat control; tactical air control party; survival, evasion, resistance, and escape; pararescue; special operations weather; and explosive 

ordnance disposal. 

A 16-year high in active duty enlisted retention has necessitated moderate reductions in accessions and additional force management actions including rollbacks of 

Dates of Separation (DOS), separations for initial skills training failures, waivers 

for active duty service commitments, time-in-grade requirements and enlistment 

contracts which will continue through fiscal year 2012. Without these actions in fiscal year 2010, our overall retention would have exceeded the goal by more than 4 

percent. The Air Force finished fiscal year 2010 at 100 percent of its retention goal 

in Zone A, 17 months through 6 years of service (YOS), exceeded the goal in Zone 

B, 6 YOS through 10 YOS at 109 percent, and was under its retention goal in Zone 

36 

C, 10 YOS through 14 YOS at 93 percent. Based on current economic forecasting, 

the Air Force is expected to experience consistent retention rates over the next few 

years. 

Selective Reenlistment Bonuses (SRB) are our most effective, responsive and 

measurable tool for targeted retention. The fiscal year 2012 budget for new SRB 

contracts does change from fiscal year 2011’s budget of $145.9 million as we expect 

to offer SRBs to fewer than 90 enlisted specialties in fiscal year 2012. 

The Air Force uses Cumulative Continuation Rates (CCR) to track retention by 

AFSC and by reenlistment zones. The CCR shows the expected rate an airman is 

likely to remain in the Service from year-to-year or zone-to-zone. SRBs are also an 

effective tool for addressing targeted retention by AFSC and by zone. In fiscal year 

2009, SRB costs were $227.6 million of the total Air Force budget of which $70.4 

million were comprised of anniversary payments, $156 million in new bonuses, and 

$1.2 million in accelerated payments. Conversely, in fiscal year 2010 funding for 

new bonuses fell from $156 million to $141 million and fell even further in fiscal 

year 2011 and is now down to $129.9 million. Currently, 89 AFSCs are receiving 

SRBs in fiscal year 2011. 

Our Service will continue to experience high retention through fiscal year 2012 

and likely into fiscal year 2013. However, we must still overcome several skill imbalances as a result of previous actions to reduce end strength by deliberately 

under-accessing in fiscal year 2005 and building larger AFSCs for new and emerging mission sets. Additionally, the Air Force will continue using CSRBs and SRBs 

to manage retention and address shortfalls in critical skills and levels of skill in various AFSCs while also implementing force management tools to target losses in 

overage skill sets as we appropriately shape the force. 

DIVERSITY

In a Nation where only 25 percent of our youth are eligible to serve in an AllVolunteer Military, it is necessary to maintain a diverse Air Force to overcome today’s increasingly complex challenges. 

In the fall of 2010, we published strategic guidance to include a diversity policy 

directive and Diversity Roadmap, which provides priorities, goals and specific actions for implementation of diversity initiatives. Formalizing the Diversity Roadmap 

into an Air Force Instruction will provide the Total Force its final piece of strategic 

guidance. Woven into the instruction will be vetted recommendations of the Military 

Leadership Diversity Commission. We anticipate completion of the instruction by 

the end of September 2011. 

We furthered the institutionalization of diversity by holding the inaugural Diversity Senior Working Group in October 2010. Showcasing senior leader commitment, 

the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, Secretary and Chief of Staff of the Air Force, in 

addition to 60 senior leaders from the major commands and the Pentagon participated. Participants were challenged to promote diversity within their sphere of influence. For example, leaders can make diversity a personal commitment by participating in two outreach events per year, adding a diversity message in speeches, 

identifying key positions and implementing hiring practices with a diversity lens, 

analyzing mentoring programs and determining how to resource diversity within the 

major commands and wings. 

HUMAN CAPITAL STRATEGY

Deliberately developing airmen is a key focus area. Our airmen must have the 

right mix of skills so the Air Force can continue providing combat-ready, expeditionary forces to combatant commanders now and in the future. 

The Air Force is focused on providing the right expeditionary combat skills needed 

for our airmen to fly, fight, and win. It is critical that our airmen have the experience, education, and training to think with a global perspective and operate in an 

expeditionary environment. 

Airmen must be specifically trained, educated, and experienced through professional development initiatives designed to create the capabilities and capture current and future mission demands. We implemented several new initiatives to enhance the development of our airmen focusing on their experience, education and 

training to ensure they are prepared to fill current and future leadership positions. 

Central to our efforts is the shift to assigning the most ‘‘qualified’’ airman versus 

the most ‘‘eligible’’ airman for our key billets. 

Our new approach to managing enlisted talent gives us the capability to evaluate 

Senior Noncommissioned Officers (SNCOs) and select the right airmen for critical 

jobs, while also ensuring they are vectored in the proper career sequence and that 

we are preparing them for future leadership roles. This new approach, coupled with 

37 

our new special experience identifier tracking codes, give our assignment teams the 

tools to identify airmen with the requisite training and experience for key positions. 

We start by focusing our attention on the Air Force’s No. 1 priority—Nuclear Enterprise. Our 2W2 (Nuclear Weapons Maintenance) and 21M (Munitions, Missile 

Maintenance) career fields have developed prioritization lists to ensure we assign 

the most qualified airmen to positions by order of importance within the Nuclear 

Enterprise. 

CONTINUE TO STRENGTHEN THE NUCLEAR ENTERPRISE

The Air Force continues to strengthen the nuclear enterprise, placing increased 

focus on ensuring the nuclear deterrence mission is executed with precision and reliability every single day. Secretary of the Air Force Michael B. Donley, Air Force 

Chief of Staff General Norton A. Schwartz, and I have all visited the nuclear missile 

fields. We had the opportunity to speak with the amazing airmen who provide the 

same round-the-clock nuclear deterrence as their predecessors have for over 50 

years. These airmen are working diligently to achieve the standard of perfection the 

nuclear mission demands and the American public expects. 

I’m happy to report that Air Force Global Strike Command reached Full Operational Capable status in September 2010. This change provides the needed oversight and advocacy of the Air Force’s Intercontinental Ballistic Missile (ICBM) and 

nuclear-capable bomber forces. 

The demand of the nuclear mission requires discipline and compliance with the 

highest standards. It is imperative that airmen at every level are focused on upholding our core values of Integrity First, Service Before Self and Excellence in All We 

Do. 

AIRMEN IN THE JOINT AND COALITION FIGHT

More than 94,400 Total Force airmen are currently forward stationed or deployed 

worldwide supporting combatant commanders. Another 133,000 provide daily strategic mobility, space and missile capabilities, command and control, and intelligence, 

surveillance, and reconnaissance to joint warfighters. In all, 42 percent of the Total 

Force directly supports combatant commander requirements every day. 

Almost 29,000 airmen are deployed to the U.S. Central Command area of operations, with more than 3,700 filling joint expeditionary taskings. Airmen are on the 

frontlines with their fellow soldiers, sailors, and marines in roles such as detainee 

operations, convoy employment and protection, explosive ordnance disposal, police 

training teams, military transition teams, civil engineering, security, communications, fuels, medical services, logistics, intelligence, and base operating support. 

They are part of the joint team, serving in whatever capacity needed by the combatant commander. Together with our sister services, we are training and augmenting 

both Iraqi and Afghan security forces, rebuilding critical infrastructure, and providing medical services to these war-torn countries. 

Our remotely piloted aircraft (RPA) platforms continue to increase the support to 

joint and coalition warfighters on the ground. Airmen are finding, tracking, and attacking our enemies using Air Force Predators, Reapers and Global Hawk RPA aircraft. Our Predator operations alone have increased from 12 combat air patrols in 

2007 to 48 today to support combatant commanders and warfighters. By growing 

the number of RPA operators and increasing the number of combat air patrols to 

58 by the end of fiscal year 2012, we are protecting joint and coalition interests 

around the globe from bases within the United States. 

DEPLOYMENTS

As of 1 March 2011, we have more than 38,000 deployed personnel, approximately 

5,000 of which are fulfilling Joint Expeditionary Taskings working with our sister 

Services. In order to meet the growing demands of combatant commanders, Air 

Force 179-day tours increased from 12 percent of all deployments in calendar year 

2004 to 60 percent today. In October 2010, the Chief of Staff of the Air Force established the Air Force’s baseline deployment tour length to be 179-days, normalizing 

this for all airmen by October 2012. Still, approximately 1,800 of our deployment 

requirements, or 7 percent of all deployments, call for airmen to be deployed for 365 

days. 

Continuing to fill both the deployed and home-station mission continues to take 

its toll on our units. The end-result of the new 179-day deployment standard will 

keep airmen on typical deployments for an additional 60 days but will also provide 

them and their families more time at home between deployments. Additionally, the 

longer standard deployment will reduce the amount of pre-deployment training required over a career. 

38 

In total, more than 216,000 Total Force airmen support daily combatant commander operations. 

AIRMAN AND FAMILY RESILIENCE

Building resiliency among airmen and their families is another key focus area. 

Our warriors have been in Iraq and Afghanistan for nearly 10 years and in the Middle East for over 20 years. Continued high operations tempo at home and abroad 

stress to us the need to deliberately increase the focus on building strong, resilient 

families. Resilient airmen are better equipped to withstand, recover and/or grow in 

the face of stressors and changing demands, and continuously get the job done. 

Many of our programs are designed to continue to build resilient airmen and families. 

We are committed to strengthening the resilience of our airmen and their families. Our goal is to improve leadership commitment toward building resilient airmen 

who have the ability to withstand, recover, and grow in the face of stressors and 

changing demands—regardless of time, challenge, or location. 

EXCEPTIONAL FAMILY MEMBER PROGRAM

The Exceptional Family Member Program (EFMP) is how we assist airmen and 

their families who have special needs, balancing mission requirements with family 

care responsibilities. We continue to focus attention this year on supporting our 

17,000 airmen with exceptional family members. 

Two facets of EFMP are assignments, managed through the Air Force Personnel 

Center and Special Needs Identification and Assignment Coordination, administered 

by the Air Force Medical Service. We recently added a third element, EFMP-Family 

Support, which provides information and referral services available in the base and 

local community. 

These airmen and their families require more comprehensive support beyond the 

identification and assignment process. To address this gap, we have designated a 

staff member from the Airman and Family Readiness Center at each installation 

to provide information, referral and assistance to families with special needs. We 

have hired additional staff at 35 installations with 175 or more special needs families to provide targeted focus on family member support. Additionally, to improve 

on the coordination of care for high-risk families, the Air Force will add 36 active 

duty social work billets beginning in fiscal year 2012. Furthermore, we have increased our communication and marketing efforts at our Airman and Family Readiness Centers and Medical Treatment Facilities to ensure airmen and families are 

aware of the enhanced resources available to them. 

QUALITY OF LIFE

We thank Congress for its steadfast funding for quality of life initiatives. We look 

forward to continued support to enable us to retain skilled airmen and develop them 

into the leaders we need for the future. 

The quality of life airmen and their families receive is an overwhelming factor in 

how long they will serve. During the Year of the Air Force Family (YoAFF), we focused on four main pillars: health and wellness; airmen and family support; education, development and employment; and airmen and family housing. Among the 

many initiatives resulting from the YoAFF, we implemented the Family Health Initiative at 32 Medical Treatment Facilities, convened a Single Airman Summit in 

April 2010, provided each installation funding to support spouse employment programs, and developed the Building Thriving Housing Communities Strategy. 

Whether working on the installation or deployed fighting the Nation’s wars, our 

airmen deserve buildings and facilities of a high standard commensurate with the 

outstanding service they provide their country. Since 2000, and with the very generous support of Congress, the Air Force funded many military construction projects 

for child development centers, youth centers and fitness centers. While this represents a significant investment by the Air Force, many requirements remain. 

Our fitness centers continue to be an important on-base facility where airmen and 

their families gather to participate in numerous activities that help to improve their 

overall heath and build strong, resilient families. The Air Force has funded dozens 

of fitness center projects over the last 10 years. These projects have included addons to existing centers and replacing old and undersized facilities. With your continued funding support, we hope to construct and expand our facilities to meet the 

needs of our airmen and their families. 

Last year, we transformed the way the Air Force delivers food service. We focused 

on a campus-style food service for airmen and their families while improving efficiency and providing significant savings. Our food transformation initiative addressVerDate Aug 31 2005 09:55 Jan 25, 2012 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00044 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 Y:\BORAWSKI\DOCS\68089.TXT JUNE PsN: JUNEB
39 

es changing lifestyles, needs and preferences while improving program and facility 

standards. This initiative offers a variety of healthy options while keeping our 

warfighting capabilities at the forefront. The transformation was implemented at six 

bases, where operating hours increased while costs decreased an estimated 27 percent. Since the initiative began, the customer count is up 22 percent and satisfaction 

has increased 8 percent. 

WOUNDED WARRIOR AND SURVIVOR CARE

We remain fully committed to caring for our brave airmen who are wounded in 

battle, who contract serious illnesses or are injured while defending the Nation’s 

freedoms. We also recognize the importance of family to the healing process and 

continue to embrace the families of our brave men and women in uniform. The Air 

Force continues to provide non-medical case management, support, and assistance 

through the Air Force Survivor Assistance Program, the Recovery Care Program, 

and the Air Force Wounded Warrior Program—and will do so for as long as needed 

in partnership with our medical community. With your support, our Warrior and 

Survivor Care programs continue to prosper. As of March 31, 2011, we have 1,008 

Air Force members enrolled in the Air Force Wounded Warrior Program. In keeping 

pace with our growing Wounded Warrior population, the Air Force has hired 33 Recovery Care Coordinators to support 31 locations across the Air Force. We have also 

increased our Air Force Wounded Warrior Program consultants from 12 to 21 positions. 

Our Family Liaison Officers, Recovery Care Coordinators, Air Force Wounded 

Warrior Program consultants, and Community Readiness Consultants provide immediate and direct care for our airmen and their families through recovery, rehabilitation and reintegration. Our partnerships with the Department of Defense and the 

Veteran Affairs are improving opportunities for our airmen to continue as active 

duty airmen or as civilians within the Air Force and Department of Defense. These 

partnerships support education and employment opportunities geared toward successful reintegration within the civilian communities. 

Once again, we will celebrate the achievements of our Wounded Warriors during 

the 2011 Warrior Games scheduled for May 17–21, 2011 at the Olympic Training 

Center and U.S. Air Force Academy in Colorado Springs, CO. The Warrior Games 

provide a focal point for our recovering airmen to incorporate athletics back into 

their day-to-day lives by preparing them mentally and physically to get back to their 

military service. 

POST-TRAUMATIC STRESS AND TRAUMATIC BRAIN INJURY

The Air Force has engaged an aggressive and proactive approach to track airmen 

who may have post-traumatic stress (PTS) symptoms or a traumatic brain injury 

(TBI). Airmen learn about PTS, TBI, and other deployment-related health issues 

through education programs both before and after they deploy. 

In addition to training, airmen are also screened for TBI before and after deployment. Airmen receive a computerized assessment that measures cognitive abilities 

including reaction time and memory. The member is reassessed in theater if they 

sustain a head injury. Scores are compared with baseline in order to aid with return-to-duty determinations, in conjunction with a clinical assessment. 

Airmen who receive help for deployment-related stress also have the option to receive treatment through primary care channels as the Air Force increases the mental health presence within the primary care setting. At this time, 57 percent of Air 

Force medical treatment facilities have integrated behavioral health services into 

primary care clinics. This program enables airmen to feel more comfortable seeking 

behavioral health assistance. 

Airmen with common symptoms including sleep, energy, mood, or concentration 

difficulties simply see their primary care manager, just as they would for any other 

treatment. The primary care manager then refers the servicemember to the behavioral health consultant who can provide screening, education and focused intervention in the primary care clinic. This process helps to normalize minor behavioral 

health treatment alongside other, more routine care. The goal is to reduce the stigma behind seeing a provider for stress, helping airmen feel less isolated and more 

willing to ask for help. 

KEY SPOUSE PROGRAM

The Key Spouse Program is an effective way to communicate with family members and is akin to the Navy Ombudsman Program and the Army Family Readiness 

Group. We aim to bridge the gap between the military spouse and the military 

40 

chain of command to help build a greater sense of community within units, especially where families are separated or deployed. 

Currently, 97 percent of units have trained key spouses, and we have more than 

4,121 trained volunteers. We hope increased emphasis and continued standardization will make this program become even more helpful. 

SPOUSE EMPLOYMENT

Spouse employment in the military is a constant challenge for our military families. Overall, 48 percent of Air Force spouses seek employment with each military 

move. For our junior airmen, the added income is often a large part of the quality 

of life their family enjoys. Military spouses report that their work income constitutes 

about 48 percent of total family income. 

We appreciate your support and the administration’s effort to strengthen our military families by removing barriers that currently prevent military spouses from 

maintaining a career or employment because of relocation. 

This support helps ensure our family members have access to careers and are not 

adversely affected when our service calls upon us to relocate. 

UNEMPLOYMENT COMPENSATION

When States support unemployment compensation, this also allows spouses to 

take reasonable time to find suitable employment at the new location as well as resources necessary to obtain any new licensing or credential requirements. Currently, 

38 States plus the District of Columbia provide unemployment compensation to 

spouses who leave because of a military move, nearly triple the number since 2004. 

We remain hopeful the remaining States, despite the current challenging fiscal environment, can provide similar compensation benefits to improve the employment outlook of military spouses. 

One of the greatest challenges facing our Nation right now is unemployment and 

underemployment, and we remain especially concerned about the challenges facing 

those in the Guard and Reserve or those leaving active military service as they look 

for work. 

Although the national unemployment rate was 8.9 percent in February 2011, the 

unemployment rate for the younger segments of the workforce, which includes those 

veterans who joined the military after September 11, 2001, remains elevated. As a 

result, we are committed to assisting our separating members in making a successful transition to employment in the civilian workforce and in encouraging their continuing education through the use of the post-9/11 GI Bill. 

CHILD CARE

Child care continues to be an important quality of life factor for our airmen and 

their families. Quality child care facilities are a key component in assuring airmen 

that their family is being cared for while they defend our country. With your continued support, we are striving to eliminate our shortfall in child development center 

spaces by the end of fiscal year 2012. While we have addressed the facilities and 

personnel needed, we are still trying to fund supplies and equipment. 

Our child care programs also include reservists and Air National Guardsmen by 

providing child care during scheduled drill weekends and a child care subsidy when 

activated. While we face funding challenges in meeting every child care requirement, we are striving to provide quality child care options to all our airmen. 

EDUCATION FOR MILITARY CHILDREN

Military life, frequent moves and extended separation during deployments present 

a host of challenges for our families. Nearly half of all servicemembers are married 

and have children. Consequently, military families often weigh assignment decisions 

based on the quality of education from the local school systems for their children. 

Thirty-five States have passed legislation to establish an Interstate Compact On 

Educational Opportunity For Military Children to address educational solutions at 

the State, local, and school district levels. These compact States are working to solve 

issues dealing with class placement, records transfer, graduation requirements, immunizations, exit testing and allowing late entry to extra-curricular activities and 

sports teams. Another eight States (Montana, Wyoming, Nebraska, Maryland, 

Vermont, Pennsylvania, New York, and West Virginia) have proposed their respective bills, and the final six States and the District of Columbia (Oregon, Arkansas, 

Wisconsin, Georgia, New Hampshire, Maine, and the District of Columbiar) have indicated this issue is a ‘‘priority.’’ The Interstate Compact ensures children in military families are not penalized in school for their families’ service to the Nation. 

41 

We are making great strides in support for Air Force-connected students attending public, private, DOD Dependent Schools, home and virtual schools. Currently 

84 Air Force bases have civilian school liaison officer positions. In addition, staff in 

the Airman and Family Readiness Centers provide school liaison support to leadership and families. Major commands and installations continue to work creative initiatives such as providing webcasts of graduations so parents can share these occasions while deployed. Additionally, a senior military officer or DOD civilian has been 

designated at each installation to advocate with local and State school administration and school boards for the interest of Air Force families. 

AIRMEN EDUCATION OPPORTUNITIES

The U.S. Air Force enlisted force is highly educated. Since April 25, 1977, more 

than 303,500 airmen have earned a fully accredited associate degree, corresponding 

to their career field, through the Community College of the Air Force (CCAF). In 

fact, about 153,000 of our enlisted airmen have at least 12 college credits; of that 

more than 51,500 have associates degrees, almost 18,000 have bachelor’s degrees or 

higher and 18 have earned their doctorate degrees. 

The General Education Mobile program is making education more accessible for 

our airmen. This program offers general education courses required for a CCAF degree through distance learning courses. This program is intended to attract those 

students who are struggling to get their general education credits filled because of 

numerous reasons, primarily the Air Force’s high operations tempo. There are 26 

participating schools offering 511 courses of which over 700 airmen are enrolled. 

Our Associate-to-Baccalaureate Cooperative program is helping CCAF graduates 

apply credits toward a bachelor’s degree at military-friendly schools. This program 

has grown to 44 civilian higher-education institutions and offers 219 bachelor’s degree programs. These institutions take an airman’s CCAF credits and apply them 

toward a bachelor’s degree. More than 17,000 airmen are participating in the program, and since its inception in June 2007, 464 bachelor’s degrees have been awarded. 

We’ve also had an overwhelming number of airmen who have transferred their 

G.I. Bill benefits to their dependents. This benefit helps families, and it also helps 

the Air Force retain our airmen through the associated service commitment. We 

continue to recruit and retain airmen who value educational opportunities for themselves and their families. 

CCAF also offers a Professional Manager Certification, a credential award that 

formally recognizes an individual’s advanced level of education and experience in 

leadership and management, as well as professional accomplishments. The program 

provides a structured professional development track that supplements Enlisted 

Professional Military Education and the Career Field Education and Training Plan. 

SEXUAL ASSAULT, PREVENTION AND RESPONSE

Sexual Assault Prevention and Response remains a top priority as we work toward providing safe environments for our airmen and families to work and live. We 

are focused on instilling a prevention-based program so these sexual offenses cannot 

and do not occur. 

As part of our approach, consistent top-down messaging is critical. These messages continue to emphasize Air Force Core Values and the need for active wingmen 

watching out for one another. Likewise, we have spent the last year building community empowerment through bystander intervention education. We provide training that ensures airmen understand when to act if they observe behaviors or actions 

that may lead to sexual assault. An additional prevention effort includes the development of a risk reduction guide which will be provided to senior commanders by 

fall of this year to assist them in providing safe environments. 

As a Service, from our most senior leaders to our newest airmen, we remain committed to a zero-tolerance standard of sexual assault. 

CONCLUSION

Our airmen are doing incredible work, ranging from providing humanitarian aid 

to the Japan earthquake and tsunami victims for Operation Tomodachi to supporting recent NATO operations in Libya and daily U.S. Central Command missions 

in Iraq and Afghanistan. More than two-thirds of airmen entered the Air Force after 

September 11, 2001, which means the majority of our force has been at war their 

entire careers. They deploy longer than ever before and some need a second hand 

to count the number of combat tours they have been on. Despite this pace, our airmen have shown amazing resiliency. 

42 

Finally, this is a team effort and the contributions of Air Force families continue 

to be amazing. Our families are the ones who deal with an empty seat at the dinner 

table when our warfighting mission takes us away. They stand tall when extraordinary challenges attempt to knock them down. They keep the faith and their support is critical to airmen fulfilling their mission requirements. 

Thank you again for your continued support of our brave airmen and their supportive families. 

Senator WEBB. I thank all of you for your testimony. As I said, 

your full statements will be entered into the record as if read. 

Let me make a comment and ask one question, then I know Senator Blumenthal has another meeting he has to go to, and I’d like 

to give Senator Blumenthal an opportunity to jump in, here. 

First, let me say, Sergeant Major Chandler, how comforting it 

was to hear you talk about dwell time the way that you did. When 

I got here to the Senate, in 2007, the dwell time was 0.75. When 

I was called, by the Chief of Staff of the Army, when he told me 

that they were going to 15 month deployments and 12 months at 

home, I could not believe what I was hearing, as someone who’s 

been around the military my entire life and as someone who also 

worked on veterans programs in the House, as a young committee 

counsel, after I finished law school, when I left the Marine Corps. 

The downstream emotional price that a lot of people have to pay 

for those types of deployments were predictable. 

I introduced legislation that would have required a minimum 

one-to-one dwell time. Some people thought it was political at the 

time. I said, basically, this is just a safety net. This is something 

that Congress, as the stewards of the people who go into the military, should be able to put into law. We had a big debate up here. 

You may have seen something about it, because people were saying 

that Congress wanted to get in the way of the Commander in 

Chief’s prerogative. But, there are many different situations like 

this in history, where Congress has weighed in, and we lost. We 

got 56 votes twice, but we did get 60 to break the filibuster on this. 

But, I think we successfully caused people to really start thinking seriously about the need to put a safety net under our people. 

You step forward, you say you’re going to serve your country, and 

you’re at the mercy of your leadership, quite frankly. 

The fact that we have gotten this thing to a point where we’re 

back to historical standards of two-to-one, really gratifies me to 

hear you say that. 

I would like to ask a question to all of you to give me your 

thoughts on, and then I’m going to yield to Senator Blumenthal. 

One of the areas that I was not hearing very much about when 

I first came to the Armed Services Committee this time was our 

responsibility for non-career military members. We had lots of testimony about, you recruit the individual, retain the family, the retention issues, we got a career—we have an all volunteer system. 

It took me a year of asking questions before I got the data on this, 

but there are a lot of people who think that, because we have an 

All-Volunteer Force, we have an all career force. We don’t. 

The numbers that I got back after asking the questions were: 75 

percent of the Army, 70 percent of the Marine Corps, and about 

half of the Navy and the Air Force were leaving the military on or 

before the end of their first enlistment. Which is healthy for the 

country; we’re a citizen soldiery. But, those people weren’t getting 

43 

the right kind of focus up here, in terms of what happens when 

ones leave. I introduced the GI Bill to try to give a first-class readjustment opportunity for the people who were leaving at the end 

of their first enlistment; come in, serve your country, go home. 

But, I’m curious as to what other kind of transitional programs 

you’re working on, Service-by-Service, to make sure that these people who step forward, they’re not going to be career military—but, 

the people who step forward have the assistance they need to get 

back into their civilian environment. 

Sergeant Major CHANDLER. Senator, from the Army’s perspective, 

we have the Army Career and Alumni Program, which you may be 

familiar with. That program helps to transition soldiers out of the 

Service as they continue to look for other opportunities in life. That 

program provides some resume-building experience, some job interview experience. It introduces them to some different Web sites 

that are out there, whether you want to continue service in the 

government or if you’re going into the private sector. 

General Chiarelli, the Vice Chief of Staff of the Army, directed 

the Army to take a comprehensive review of that program to ensure that we are, in fact, meeting the needs of transitioning soldiers. Not to say that we have a problem, but, can we do better 

than we already are? That’s our Army program, sir. 

Senator WEBB. Thank you. 

Sergeant Major? 

Sergeant Major KENT. Sir. First of all, thank you for the GI Bill, 

because we get a lot of positive feedback from the marines that 

have transitioned out, and it is working, sir. So, truly, thank you 

for that. 

Our Commandant has tasked manpower to figure out how we 

can have a one-stop shop, as far as marine transitioning. Sometimes we can wait until the last few months and we’ll send these 

marines through a week of transitioning class, which don’t mean 

anything really, sir. They sit there and we lecture them, instead of 

having a one-stop shop. We want to do it early, like a year out. So, 

the Commandant said, ‘‘This is what I want. I want a one-stop 

shop where a marine can come to do this transition course, and you 

can say, ‘‘Door number one, would you like to go to college? Door 

number two, what type of job? Door number two, if you like that 

job, this is where we would transition you to that job.’’ 

So, he is revamping the whole transition program right now, sir. 

It will work because the Commandant says it will work. So, 

everybody’s getting on board. [Laughter.] 

Senator WEBB. Master Chief? 

Master Chief Petty Officer WEST. Sir, from the Navy perspective, 

as well, I would like to say thank you very much for that GI Bill. 

It is very well received, not only in the fleet, but with many of the 

family members that are able to take advantage of that. 

Sir, also we have taken a look at many of our transition programs—in particular, the Transition Assistance Program (TAP), 

those type of programs for our sailors that are exiting the Navy. 

Also, with that said, sir, our Fleet and Family Support Centers 

have geared—similar to the—some of the same things you’ve heard 

from my counterparts, to my right, regarding the resumes and 

those type things. It’s something we keep an eye on. We have to 

44 

continue to keep that at the forefront, especially as all of the Services start about some of the downsizing that we are going to be 

doing. The Navy, sir, we’ve downsized, now, for the past approximately 5 to 6 years. So, we had to have that at the front. 

That’s where we are, sir. I take a good hard look at that. Matter 

of fact, my EA had just went through the transition piece, as well, 

and he was very pleased with the process that we have. 

Chief Master Sergeant ROY. Again, Senator, I want to, just like 

my peers, say how important the Post-9/11 GI Bill was; and that 

transferability piece to it, as well, certainly has helped both our 

airmen and their families. 

One of the other items of note on the same theme is that of education. One of the things that the U.S. Air Force has is a Community College of the Air Force. As you said, we will retain about 55 

percent of first-term airmen. Which means that others will transition out of the Air Force. I believe the educational aspect and the 

push that we put behind education, really helps these airmen in 

their transition, because there’s an awful lot of them that transition out of the Air Force with at least an associate degree and then 

go on to bachelors and others. 

Like others, we have an Airmen Family Readiness Center—it’s 

mandatory for our airmen to go to TAPs. Just like other programs, 

resume-building, interviewing, along with other areas, leads to different jobs, if you will. So, it really helps. It’s kind of an area of 

resources that our airmen and their families can continue to use. 

It’s one that I believe has paid us very well. 

Master Chief Petty Officer WEST. Sir, can I have a re-attack? 

Senator WEBB. Yes, sure. 

Master Chief Petty Officer WEST. Sir, just one thing I would like 

to highlight, it wasn’t brought up. Our Safe Harbor Program—and 

I know many of the Wounded Warrior Programs are geared and 

have put a big emphasis on this transition piece, as well, for our 

folks. In particular, we partner with the Coast Guard, as far as the 

Safe Harbor. We receive a lot of good feedback from that, sir. 

Senator WEBB. Well, thank you for those observations. 

You know that there are two great reasons for doing this. One 

is, stewardship lasts a lifetime, when people step forward and 

serve. The other is there’s no better recruiter than a veteran who 

goes back to his or her home community, and is proud of what they 

did. 

Senator Blumenthal. 

Senator BLUMENTHAL. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

I would like to join in, as Senator Nelson did, thanking you for 

your service here and in the U.S. Marine Corps, and also for your 

role on the GI Bill that’s been mentioned. 

I want to thank the leaders of our enlisted men and women who 

are here today, for your service and for the extraordinary sacrifice 

and service of the enlisted men and women around the globe who 

serve in our U.S. military. I don’t need to tell anyone in this room, 

but I think the Nation needs reminding that never in our history 

have so few borne so much of the burden of war for so long. I think 

that’s reflected in the numbers that you’ve given us about dwell 

time, about the men and women who have given so much so that 

45 

we would be free and safe and strong. So, thank you for your service, and thank you for your testimony here today. 

I want to say a particular thank you to Sergeant Major Kent, 

and, regretfully, on the occasion of your last testimony as an Active 

Duty Marine. But, I am hopeful that we’ll see you here in these 

halls in the future. 

Sergeant Major KENT. Yes, sir, thank you. 

Senator BLUMENTHAL. Because, as you say, ‘‘once a marine, always a marine.’’ We will really welcome your advice and counsel 

as we go forward on this committee and in the U.S. Congress. 

I want to drill down a little bit on the excellent question that the 

Chairman asked, and talk about this transition; in particular, an 

area of injury that I think is extraordinarily important, often 

undiagnosed or misdiagnosed: traumatic brain injury (TBI) and 

post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and mental health problems 

that may be even less visible. I know that the statistics are that 

as much as 30 percent of all TBI or PTSD may be completely 

missed or undiagnosed. If you could tell us, because I know you 

care so much about the people who serve with you, perhaps what 

is being done to improve the diagnosis and treatment, and what 

you would recommend we do, if you have those kinds of recommendations for us today. 

Sergeant Major CHANDLER. Well, Senator, I’ll start off. 

I’ll tell you, first of all, I sit before you as a person who has participated in the Army’s Behavioral Health Program. For the last 2 

years, I personally have been treated by counselors, because of 

some behavioral health issues related to my deployment. What you 

have done, by providing us the support, has made a difference in 

the Army. 

My job as a senior leader of the Army is to continue to talk about 

it and reduce the stigma of coming forward and saying, ‘‘I need 

some help.’’ It’s made me a better man, a better husband, a better 

father, and, at the end of the day, a better soldier. 

Within our force, we have soldiers, over 100,000, who have been 

diagnosed with some TBI, and over 40,000 that have been diagnosed with some PTSD. We know, based off of studies that we’ve 

commissioned, that a soldier, in the first 6 years of his career, will 

experience a lifetime of stress. We don’t completely know what that 

means. But, we do know that we have to do a better job in diagnosis and treatment. 

It first starts with saying and being observant, as a leader and 

as your fellow soldier or battle buddy, that something may not be 

right with Johnny or Jill. Then, as a leader, what do you do about 

it? You act. 

Now, for all of us, we are action-oriented people. So by saying 

something about it and then getting that soldier to help will make 

a difference for the Army. 

Sergeant Major KENT. I’m on the same lines, sir. But, I’d just 

like to add, no marine ever wants to get pulled out of combat. They 

can get hit and they’ll say, ‘‘Nothing’s wrong with me,’’ although 

the possibility that they were knocked out. So, leadership is engaging, now, telling marines, ‘‘Hey, it’s okay. We’re going to take you 

out of the fight for about 24 hours, and we’re just going to observe 

you. If you’re okay, we’re going to put you back in the fight.’’ But, 

46 

we have to let them know that we have to take care of them, also. 

So, if they’re hit and they’re knocked out, it’s our job, as leaders, 

to pull them out of the fight, sir. We’re doing a lot better in that. 

The Sergeant Major touched on it, sir. The stigma is where we 

need to really push that down and say, ‘‘It’s okay to come forward. 

We just need to get you fixed and get you in the fight.’’ I mean, 

any one of us up here that have been to combat, we can have the 

same issues, sir. So, we need to tell marines, ‘‘Hey, even we can 

have issues, as senior leaders.’’ I think, as long as we tell them 

that, it will be okay. 

Master Chief Petty Officer WEST. Sir, thank you very much for 

the question and opportunity to comment on that. 

I just got back recently from a trip with our Chief of Naval Operations to Afghanistan. I have to tell you, you’ve been at this a long 

time and from where we started to where we are now, we have 

made absolutely huge gains. If I were to ask anything of this panel 

it would be, we have to keep that momentum. It’s something that 

we haven’t figured out yet, completely, what we need to figure out, 

but we’re getting there every single day. 

Not only have I walked it back, I went from the ‘‘Role-3’’ hospitals. What Sergeant Major Kent talks about, about taking them 

offline; that is one of the things that we’ve been able to do, out with 

our young corpsmen out in the field, and marines, soldiers, and airmen. But, I walked it back through Landstuhl and then over here 

to Bethesda. Some of the new facilities that we’ve opened up, for 

example the TBI Clinics are absolutely what we need to continue 

to do. We owe that to our men and women that are out there. 

We are aggressive in our training. Like everyone up here, it’s 

something that leadership not only has to take on, but those young 

folks, as well. Those who are standing beside those young sailors, 

who are out there, they need to be able to recognize the signs and 

the symptoms of some of these things so they can say, ‘‘Hey, it’s 

time out. It’s okay.’’ As leaders come forward, and the more we talk 

about it the more it really pushes out to those young sailors or 

those young people out there, that are doing their country’s work, 

that it’s okay to come forward. That is a huge step. 

In my eyes, I think that, again, sir, we’re making headway. Are 

we where we need to be? No, sir. But, we sure do need you in that 

area. 

Chief Master Sergeant ROY. I’d just like to add just a few other 

things. A couple of other things that I believe we’re all doing is preand post-assessments on all of our service men and women, before 

they go and then after they come back. Another thing you did, 

through the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) last year, 

was to bump up our mental health technicians and our doctors 

within our forces. The Air Force, the Army, and the Navy, we’ve 

bumped that up. That has helped tremendously. 

Though, there’s a national shortage of that skill-set, and we need 

to continue. We all have similar problems trying to recruit those 

individuals with that skill-set, so it’s a challenge for us. 

The other thing I would just add to that is, as we talked about 

stigma, a couple of other things that it has helped us do through 

the last NDAA is this idea of placing the mental health doctors 

47 

within the family practices, so it’s not a separate ward, it’s within 

the family practice. That has helped us tremendously. 

Then one other thing that we have done, internally to the Air 

Force, just like we’ve done with chaplains for years, is placing a 

chaplain representative within each individual unit. We’ve done 

similar to that with our mental health technicians and our doctors 

inside our units so that it’s easy for a servicemember to access that 

particular skill, if you will, when needed; so that they don’t have 

to go to the clinic. 

Senator BLUMENTHAL. I want to thank each of the Services for 

the great work you’re doing on these issues and, Sergeant Major 

Chandler, your frankness and candor in talking about your own situation, because I think it takes a kind of courage that will lead 

others to avoid the stigma, and eventually ease it or remove it, 

which I think, as each of you have said, is absolutely critical to addressing this problem effectively. 

I apologize that I have another hearing that I have to attend. I’m 

a little bit late getting to it. But, in terms of continuing the momentum, as you put it, anything that I can do, and that I can ask 

my colleagues to do, and any other observations, I would be really 

honored to continue on this work. I’m honored to be here today 

with you. I’m going to try to get back after the next hearing. But, 

again, I really very much thank you for this excellent testimony 

today. 

Thank you, Senator. 

Senator WEBB. Thank you, Senator Blumenthal. 

Thank all of you for the service that you’re giving and for the 

candid nature of your responses to this committee. It’s very, very 

valuable for people up here to hear the perspectives that you have, 

and particularly the journeys that all of you have had, literally, 

from the bottom up inside our military system. So, we appreciate 

very much you coming and testifying today. 

Sergeant Major Kent, best of luck to you as you step forward toward retirement. 

Sergeant Major KENT. Thank you, sir. 

Senator WEBB. Thank you. 

Our second panel, we have members of The Military Coalition 

(TMC), a consortium of nationally prominent uniformed service and 

veteran’s organizations: Retired Master Chief Joseph Barnes, the 

National Executive Director of the Fleet Reserve Association (FRA); 

Ms. Kathleen Moakler, the Government Relations Director for the 

NMFA; Retired Colonel Steven P. Strobridge, the Director of Government Relations for the Military Officers Association of America 

(MOAA); Retired Captain Ike Puzon, the Director of Government 

Affairs and Legislation of the Association of the U.S. Navy; and Ms. 

Kathy Roth-Douquet, the Chairman of Blue Star Families. 

We’d like to welcome all of you. 

Before our panel begins its testimony, at this time, without objection, I will enter into the record the witness statement of Senator 

Graham, who, unfortunately, can’t be here today. We have also received statements for the record from the Reserve Officers Association, the Gold Star Wives of America, and the National Guard Association of the United States. Without objection, they will be included in the record, as well. 

48 

[The prepared statement of Senator Graham follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT BY SENATOR LINDSEY GRAHAM

Thank you, Senator Webb. I join you in welcoming Senator Ayotte and Senator 

Blumenthal to the subcommittee. I look forward to working with you in the 112th 

Congress and continuing the bipartisan approach that this subcommittee has always employed on behalf of the men and women of the Armed Forces. It’s all about 

the men and women in uniform and their families, and it’s a privilege to serve with 

you on this subcommittee. 

To the Senior Enlisted Advisors on the first panel, welcome, and thank you for 

your service in these key leadership positions. Sergeant Major Kent, I understand 

your relief has been named and you are nearing the end of your active-duty service. 

All the best to you and your family as you approach retirement. 

The threat of a government shutdown last week and the effect it would have had 

on military personnel was very unfortunate, but it’s a reflection of the difficult financial situation we are in right now as a Nation. 

I hope we will be able this week to wrap up funding the government for the rest 

of fiscal year 2011 , and get on with legislation for fiscal year 2012. It’s pretty clear, 

however, that we have some difficult issues to work through. I’m all for efficiencies 

when it comes to saving taxpayer dollars and reducing the cost of government—including the Department of Defense (DOD). 

For example, according to the Congressional Budget Office, medical care will consume nearly 16.5 percent of DOD’s topline by the year 2028 based on recent trends. 

What that tells me is that unless we take steps now to control the rate of growth, 

medical care costs will nearly double as a percentage of the DOD top line in less 

than 20 years, and that is not sustainable. 

While we have troops deployed in harm’s way, however, it has to be our priority 

to make sure that military personnel and their families get the support they need— 

including their pay on time. 

I think we are all in agreement with respect to the goal of keeping the National 

Guard and the Reserves as an Operational Reserve in the future. Even before September 11, we were relying heavily on the dedicated service of national guardsmen 

and reservists, but 10 years of combat operations and the continuing need for strong 

Homeland Defense have demonstrated both the essential capabilities or the Reserve 

components and the imperative to provide the services, programs, equipment, and 

training opportunities they require. I endorse the Department’s attention to enhancing the continuum of service—and I look forward to hearing your ideas about how 

to make the best use of our Reserve and Guard forces. 

Again, I thank all our witnesses for their ideas and recommendations, and I look 

forward to their testimony. 

[The information referred to follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT BY THE RESERVE OFFICERS ASSOCIATION OF THE UNITED

STATES AND RESERVE ENLISTED ASSOCIATION

INTRODUCTION

On behalf of our members, the Reserve Officers Association (ROA) and the Reserve Enlisted Association (REA) thank the committee for the opportunity to submit 

testimony on military personnel issues. ROA and REA applaud the ongoing efforts 

by Congress to address readiness, recruiting and retention issues. 

The amount of dollars being authorized to the Department of Defense (DOD) has 

peaked. Included in the Budget release is a statement that the president has moved 

$73 billion from the Overseas Contingency Operations (OCO) to the base budget (pg. 

61). While the budget at $553 billion appears as a gross increase of $22 billion above 

fiscal year 2010, this shift from OCO to the base budget is a de facto cut of $51 

billion with spending on certain items being trimmed down below the fiscal year 

2010 base budget. 

The Hon. Christine Fox, DOD Director of Cost Assessment and Program Evaluation Office briefed that to sustain the current force structure and need modernization requires a two to three percent real growth in the Defense budget. Secretary 

of Defense Robert Gates department-wide review was intended to provide a series 

of assessment initiatives to improve efficiency and reduce costs. 

Unfortunately, a lot of the needs and requirements of serving members and their 

families were not included in these studies. Too often, personnel costs are viewed 

as competing for resources for other DOD programs. 

The ROA and the REA will be doing a separate paper on additional efficiencies. 

49 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The Reserve Officers Association Calendar Year 2011 Legislative Priorities are: 

• Recapitalize the Total force to include fully funding equipment and training 

for the National Guard and Reserves. 

• Assure that the Reserve and National Guard continue in a key national defense role, both at home and abroad. 

• Provide adequate resources and authorities to support the current recruiting 

and retention requirements of the Reserves and National Guard. 

• Support warriors, families, and survivors 

Issues supported by the Reserve Officers and Reserve Enlisted Associations are 

to: 

Changes to retention policies: 

• Permit service beyond the current Reserve Officers Personnel Management 

Act (ROPMA) limitations. 

• Support incentives for affiliation, reenlistment, retention and continuation in 

the Reserve component. 

• Advocate against cuts in Reserve component; support Reserve commissioning 

programs 

• Reauthorize yellow ribbon program to support demobilized Guard and Reserve members. 

Health Care: 

See end of Executive Summary 

Pay and Compensation: 

• Reimburse a Reserve component member for expenses incurred in connection 

with round-trip travel in excess of 50 miles to an inactive training location, including mileage traveled, lodging and subsistence. 

• Obtain professional pay for Reserve component medical professionals, consistent with the Active component. 

• Eliminate the 1/30th rule for Aviation Career Incentive Pay, Career Enlisted 

Flyers Incentive Pay, Diving Special Duty Pay, and Hazardous Duty Incentive 

Pay. 

• Simplify the Reserve duty order system without compromising drill compensation. 

• Reauthorize the Reserve Income Replacement Program for mobilized Reserve 

components that expired in 2010. 

Education: 

• Include Title 14 Coast Guard Reserve duty in eligibility for the Post-9/11 GI 

Bill. 

• Exempt earned benefit from GI Bill from being considered income in need 

based aid calculations. 

• Develop a standard nation-wide payment system for private schools. 

• Re-examine qualification basis for yellow ribbon program, rather than first 

come first serve. 

• Increase MGIB-Selected Reserve (MGIB–SR) to 47 percent of MGIB-Active. 

• Include 4-year reenlistment contracts to qualify for MGIB–SR. 

Employee Support: 

• Permit delays or exemptions while mobilized of regularly scheduled mandatory continuing education and licensing/certification/promotion exams. 

• Continue to support a law center dedicated to USERRA/SCRA problems of deployed Active and Reserve servicemembers. 

Mobilization: 

• Oversee service sections’ policies to reimburse mobilized reservists on Temporary Duty Orders orders with lengths over 179 days. 

• Provide differential pay for deployed Federal employees permanently. 

Spouse Support: 

• Expand eligibility of surviving spouses to receive Survivor Benefit Plan-Dependency Indemnity Clause payments with no offset. 

• Provide employment protection and provide family leave for spouses and family care-givers of mobilized Guard and Reserve for a period of time prior to or 

following the deployment of the military member. 

50 

Deferred Benefits and Retirement: 

• Extend current early retirement legislation retroactively to September 11, 

2001. 

• Promote improved legislation on reducing the Reserve component retirement 

age. 

• Permit mobilized retirees to earn additional retirement points with less than 

2 years of activated service, and codify retirement credit for serving members 

over age 60. 

• Modify U.S. Code that requires repayment of separation bonuses if an individual receives a Uniformed Service retirement annuity. 

• Change U.S. Code to eliminate the fiscal year barrier toward full credit toward early retirement. 

• Continue to protect and sustain existing retirement benefits for currently retired. 

Voting: 

• Ensure that every deployed servicemember has an opportunity to vote by: 

• Working with the Federal Voting Assistance Program. • Supporting electronic voting. 

• Ensure that every military absentee ballot is counted. 

Health Care: 

ROA and REA positions include that: 

TRICARE Prime: 

• The proposed $30 increase for individuals and $60 for families is a modest 

proposal. 

• If indexed, adjustments to the enrollment fee should be population based 

rather than industry-based. 

• It is important to independently verify the current total cost of DOD health 

care benefits. Such an audit will permit Congress to validate proposals based 

on cost-sharing percentages. 

• Annual increases should not be tied to the market-driven Federal Employee 

Health Benefits Plan or a commercial plan. 

On Pharmacy Co-payments: 

• ROA and REA believe higher retail pharmacy co-payment should not apply 

on initial prescriptions, but on maintenance refills only. 

• ROA and REA support DOD efforts to enhance the mail-order prescription 

benefit. 

Sole Community Hospitals: 

• Fee adjustments must be approached with caution because of inconvenience 

to beneficiaries. 

U.S. Family Health Plan—Medicare coverage: 

• ROA and REA support continuation of the Medicare coverage as part of the 

U.S. Family Health Plan. 

• To maintain the program, a mandatory Part ‘‘B’’ payment might be considered. 

Reserve Health Care Initiatives: 

• Improve continuity of health care for all drilling reservists and their families 

by: 

• GR members should qualify for Transitional Assistance Management Program (TAMP) coverage when separated from Active Duty. 

• Having Government Accountability Office (GAO) Audit the assumptions 

used for TRICARE Retired Reserve (TRR) premiums. 

• Creating a self plus one premium for TRR. • Providing Continuing Health Benefit Plan to traditional Drilling reservists who are beneficiaries of TRICARE Reserve Select (TRS) but are separated from the Selected Reserve to provide Consolidated Omnibus Budget 

Reconciliation Act (COBRA) protections. 

• Permitting active members in the Individual Ready Reserve (IRR) to buyinto TRS. 

• Allowing demobilized retirees and reservists involuntarily returning to 

IRR to qualify for subsidized TRS coverage. 

• Providing TRS coverage to mobilization ready IRR members; levels of 

subsidy would vary for different levels of readiness. 

51 

• Improving post deployment medical and mental health evaluations and 

access to care for returning Reserve component members. 

• Providing an option for reservists where DOD pays a stipend to employers. 

• Extend military coverage for restorative dental care following deployment to 

90 days. 

• Permit beneficiaries of Federal Employee Health Benefit plan the option of 

subscribing to TRS. 

READINESS DISCUSSION

Operational versus strategic missions for the Reserve component 

The Reserve Forces are no longer a part-time strategic force but are an integral 

contributor to our Nation’s operational ability to defend our soil, assist other countries in maintaining global peace, and fight in OCO. 

National security demands both a strategic and an Operational Reserve. The 

Operational Reserve requires a more significant investment of training and equipment resources, and places greater demands on its personnel as compared to the 

Strategic Reserve. Those serving in Operational Reserve units must be fully aware 

of the commitment required to maintain the expected level of readiness. A similar 

awareness and commitment is necessary for those responsible for providing resources to the Operational Reserve. 

Planners also must recognize that few individuals can remain in the Operational 

Reserve for an entire career. There will be times when family, education, civilian 

career, and the other demands competing for their time and talents take priority. 

Such an approach requires the ability to move freely and without penalty between 

the operational and strategic elements of the Reserve component as a continuum of 

service. 

Each Service has its own force generation models and the Services organize, train, 

and equip their Reserve components to a prescribed level of readiness prior to mobilization to limit post-mobilization training and to maximize operational deployment 

time. ROA and REA urge Congress to continue to support and fund each Service’s 

authority to manage the readiness of its own Reserve Forces as one model does not 

fit all. 

In an era of constrained budgets, a capable and sustainable Reserve and National 

Guard is a cost-effective element of national security. 

Junior Officer and Enlisted Drain 

As an initial obligated period draws to the end, many junior officers and enlisted 

choose to leave, creating a critical shortage of experienced young people in the leadership conduit. 

Yet, as the Services face pending end strength reduction, they approach this challenge with an inverse solution, by riffing out junior people, as the Air Force and 

Marine Corps are doing. Cutting the most junior people does not provide the same 

amount of savings in that it creates an older top heavy organization and does not 

make room for the newest generation of combat veterans. These cuts also reduce 

a fresh prospective brought by younger members. 

Another DOD solution to reduce the end strength is to slow down the input into 

the system. Both ROA and REA are concerned that Reserve Officers’ Training Corps 

(ROTC) scholarships and commissioning are being reduced. Last year, the Chief of 

Naval Operations announced a 30 percent reduction in Navy ROTC scholarships. 

The U.S. Air Force will be screening this year’s sophomore class, only allowing 60 

percent of the class to advance as juniors; next year only 45 percent will be allowed 

to advance. 

End Strength and Preparedness 

Part of the President’s budget includes planned reductions for both the Army and 

Marine Corps, by 27,000 and 15,000, respectively. It should be remembered that individuals cannot be brought quickly on to active duty on a temporary basis, but it 

is an accumulation of experience and training that is acquired over years that becomes an asset for the military. Reducing the force will also foreshorten dwell time. 

Before cuts to the U.S. Army and U.S. Marine Corps are made, ROA and REA 

hope that Congress requests a report from Services and DOD on the effect in the 

short and long term. These cuts need to be carefully evaluated to ensure that it is 

not based on budgetary concerns, but on capability. 

Without external threats, the U.S. Army has traditionally reduced the size of its 

Armed Forces. Since the 1990s, the Pentagon has recommended proportional cuts 

be taken in the Reserve component when taken in the Active Force. This reasoning 

52 

fails in many ways. It results in a hollowing out of the force and preparedness, undermines morale, and undercuts retention. National security is put at risk. 

Yet, it has been the Reserve component that has provided the temporary surge 

to fill-in the active duty numbers. The end strengths included in the President’s 

budget appear to maintain current numbers. As end strengths are cut, ROA and 

REA support transferring both manpower and equipment into the National Guard 

and Reserve to provide operational flexibility in the future. 

ROA and REA are concerned that the ongoing cuts to the Navy’s Reserve will continue and this is a trend that needs to be reversed. The reported end strength of 

the Navy Reserve is just above 64,000 members. A new manpower study needs to 

be done and published by the Navy Reserve to calculate the actual manning level 

requirements: this study should be driven by readiness and not budgetary requirements. In the President’s budget, the Navy Reserve will face another 2,900 cut. 

PROPOSED LEGISLATION

Retirement 

Fixing early retirement—the concept whereby reservists and guardsmen can subtract time from age 60 when they would otherwise begin drawing their Reserve retirement—has been at the front of ROA’s and REA’s advocacy agenda for a number 

of years. 

The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008 established an early 

retirement reduction of 90 days for every consecutive 90 day period of active duty. 

However, the one major flaw in the law neglects the operational reservists who mobilized prior to that date. 

Newly acquired data supports backdating early retirement to 2001. Those who 

served prior to 2008, when the law was established, faced higher risks and took 

more casualties. Between 2001 and the date the law took effect, 82 percent (926 

deaths) of National Guard and Reserve deaths had already occurred. Unfortunately, 

Congress overlooked this early sacrifice by not yet correcting the early retirement 

statute to include those who served between 2001 and 2008. 

1. ROA and REA endorse a corrective measure to Section 12731(t)(2)(A) of title 

10, U.S.C. Over 600,000 members were unfairly excluded. We realize the expense of this corrective measure scored by CBO is $1.3 billion over 10 years, 

but hope that offset dollars can be found or the correction can be phased-in. 

2. ROA and REA don’t view this congressional solution as the final retirement 

plan. The Commission on the National Guard and Reserve recommends that 

Congress should amend laws to place the active and Reserve components into 

the same retirement system. Secretary of Defense Robert Gates refers to the 

Tenth Quadrennial Review of Military Compensation’s comprehensive review 

of the military retirement systems for suggested reform. The latter report suggests a retirement pay equal to 2.5 percent of basic pay multiplied by the number of years of service. 

ROA and REA agree that a retirement plan, at least for the Reserve component, should be based on accruement of active and inactive duty. Early retirement should not be based on the type of service, but on the aggregation of duty. 

It shouldn’t matter if a member’s contributions were paid or non-paid; inactive 

duty, active duty for training, special works or for mobilization. Under a continuum of service, this approach would provide both the Active or Reserve component members with an element of personal control to determine when they 

retire and will encourage increased frequency of service beyond 20 years within 

the Reserve. 

3. Despite efforts by Congress, it appears that DOD will not be altering how it 

credits days toward early retirement that overlap the beginning of the new fiscal year. ROA and REA endorse no-cost legislation introduced by Sen. Mark 

Pryor (D-Ark.), S.491, to correct existing Section 12731(f)(2)(A) of title 10, 

U.S.C. 

4. With an ongoing need for mid-grade officers Congress should reexamine the 

DOPMA and ROPMA laws to: 

a. Permit 0–3s without prior enlisted service to be able to retire at 20 years 

of service. Many of badly needed skills that the Services would like to retain, yet must be discharged if passed over for promotion to often. 

b. Allow 0–4 officers who, after a break in service from active duty, return to 

the Reserve component to retire. After being encouraged to return a number 

of officers find they are not eligible for non-regular retirement. When reaching 20 years of commissioned service they find they may have only 15 good 

Federal years. 

53 

Education 

1. Montgomery ‘‘GI’’ Bill-Selected Reserve (MGIB–SR): To assist in recruiting efforts for the Marine Corps Reserve and the other uniformed services, ROA and 

REA urge Congress to reduce the obligation period to qualify for MGID–SR 

(section 1606) from 6 years in the Selected Reserve to 4 years in the Selected 

Reserve plus 4 years in the IRR, thereby remaining a mobilization asset for 

8 years. 

2. Extending MGIB–SR eligibility beyond Selected Reserve Status: Because of 

funding constraints, no Reserve component member will be guaranteed a full 

career without some period in a non-pay status. Whether attached to a volunteer unit or as an individual mobilization augmentee (IMA), this status represents periods of drilling without pay. MGIB–SR eligibility should extend for 

10 years beyond separation or transfer from a paid billet. 

Leadership 

ROA and REA urges Congress to change sections 5143 and 5144 of U.S. Code 

Title 10 to only permit appointments from the Navy or Marine Corps’ Reserve component. 

Both the Army and Air Force Reserve Chiefs may only be selected from general 

officers from that component’s reserve, yet the Navy and the Marine Corps can select its Reserve leadership from either Active or Reserve flag officers. The Reserve 

Chief of a Service’s Reserve needs to have an understanding of both the citizen warriors who are reporting to him or her, and the system through which they report. 

Draft legislation can be found at www.roa.orgldraftleg. 

Military Voting 

ROA and REA thank Congress for the improvements made to absentee voting in 

the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 10. Military personnel, overseas citizens, and their families residing outside their election districts deserve 

every reasonable opportunity to participate in the electoral process. Yet, studies by 

Congressional Research Service show that 25 percent of military member and family 

votes were not counted in the 2008 election. During the 2010 elections there were 

at least a dozen States that had one or more counties that failed to comply with 

the MOVE Act. 

ROA and REA urge Congress to direct the Government Accountability Office to 

report further on the effectiveness of absentee voting assistance to Military and 

Overseas Citizens for the 2010 General Election and determine how Federal Voting 

Assistance Program’s efforts to facilitate absentee voting by military personnel and 

overseas citizens differed between the 2008 and 2010 national elections. 

ROA and REA hope that Congress encourages the Secretary of Defense, in conjunction with States and local jurisdictions, to gather and publish national data 

about the 2010 election by voting jurisdiction on disqualified military and overseas 

absentee ballots and reasons for disqualification. 

HEALTH CARE DISCUSSION

Military Health Care—a shaky foundation 

The global war on terror is a protracted engagement that will not end with the 

withdrawal of troops from Iraq and Afghanistan and will continue, as will military 

response to crisis spots such a Libya. Yet, there are members on both sides of the 

aisle that are saying if cuts are made then Defense should not be exempt. Lawmakers are talking openly about TRlCARE fees not having been increased since 

1995. 

For a number of years, the Pentagon has spoken out about the rising costs of 

health care and the need for reform. This can be noted by statements illustrating 

that military health costs have increased such as ‘‘DOD medical costs have shot up 

from $19 billion in fiscal year 2001 to $52.5 billion in fiscal year 2012,’’ as made 

by Deputy Secretary of Defense William J. Lynn III at a Senate Budget hearing last 

month. 

Health care costs now consume 9 percent of the DOD budget. Yet comparisons of 

health care costs are distorted by beginning with a peacetime starting point followed 

by a decade of war. Many in the Pentagon are attributing the increases in military 

health care to its retirees, especially those working second careers. 

Unfortunately, many retirees are blaming much of this additional health care 

costs on National Guard and Reserve members for being included under TRlCARE. 

The Pentagon’s public campaign for health care reform has undercut its credence 

by serving members, retirees, and beneficiary associations in what has been said, 

what has been budgeted, and what still might be planned. 

54 

HEALTH CARE COST

The Reserve Officers Association and the Reserve Enlisted Association are disappointed in how the DOD Health Affairs has in the past attempted to address such 

an emotionally laden issue unilaterally. While this year, the Pentagon has made efforts to meet with beneficiary associations, these gatherings have been more briefings rather than discussions to seek solutions. ROA and REA applaud the efforts 

by Congress to address the issue of increasing DOD health care costs and its interest to initiate dialogue and work with both the Pentagon and the beneficiary associations to find the best solution. The time has come to examine the cost of 

TRICARE and the level of beneficiary contribution. 

It is important to sustain the DOD health care as a deferred benefit for our serving Active and Reserve component members and their families. While retired, these 

beneficiaries have accepted risks and made sacrifices in their earlier military careers that have not been asked of the remaining 99 percent of the Nation’s population. TRICARE fulfills an ongoing promise by the government for continued health 

care to those who have served or are serving. 

ROA and REA are committed to our membership to sustain this health care benefit. We fear that Congress will be unable to continue prohibitions on health care 

fees. DOD, Congress, and the beneficiary associations need to work together to find 

a fair and equitable solution that protects our beneficiaries and ensures the financial viability of the military health care system for the future. Some associations 

seek to continue a freeze on premium fees permanently; others are joining ROA and 

REA by admitting that some increases are necessary. 

Conversely, DOD and this Nation cannot afford to carry the full burden of health 

care costs. The operational Active and Reserve Force and their families deserve the 

best, both while serving and into retirement. To preserve the top health care program in the Nation as a DOD benefit, ROA and REA are open to discussions on 

cost-sharing. 

Beneficiary medical expense totals have not yet been provided by DOD. Congress 

should ask the Pentagon for a financial breakdown. An independent audit by GAO 

or another agency would allow Congress an opportunity to validate proposals based 

on financial benchmark. 

ROA and REA agree that the proposed $30 increase for individuals and $60 for 

families is a modest proposal, and can accept this as a first step. 

Of concern is a proposal to index future increases. Having some formula in place 

seems appropriate, following a similar approach to what was taken by Congress to 

calculate cost-of-living allowances for social security and military retirement pay. 

But the challenge is, what index to select? 

ROA and REA agree with other beneficiary associations that it should not be a 

Medicare Index, because a Medicare-based index penalizes those retirees under age 

65 who don’t suffer from the same ailments as retirees in the older age group. ROA 

also found that contracted commercial indexes tend to maximize health care growth, 

likely justifying the higher premium increases associated with commercial health insurance and should not be used. Comparisons between commercial and military 

health care plans are not justified. ROA is continuing to explore indices, but the 

challenge is that even government matrixes are based on an industry and not actual 

beneficiary health care costs. 

ROA and REA share the concern that any process used should be a fair and equitable approach where retiree’s won’t be overburdened. Should an index be agreed 

upon, it should be codified. 

HEALTH CARE REFORM

The beneficiary associations were invited to the Pentagon for a meeting with Dr. 

Clifford L. Stanley, Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness, about 

the health reform proposals. At this meeting, it was stated that the fiscal year 2012 

proposal was enough to cover what was needed in the fiscal year 12 budget, and 

if more was needed the next year, DOD would submit additional proposals. During 

the first week of March, the Pentagon also announced that John Baldacci, former 

Governor of Maine, has been hired into in a newly created position to recommend 

to Dr. Stanley ‘‘necessary reforms for the military health care system.’’ 

Statements like these combined with the DOD public relations health care costs 

campaign makes both retirees and beneficiary associations nervous. 

In anticipation of less modest proposals in the future ROA and REA include the 

following: 

TRICARE: 

• Catastrophic Cap of $3,000 should not be changed, nor indexed. 

55 

TRICARE Standard: 

• ROA and REA do not endorse an annual enrollment fee for either DOD 

or VA beneficiaries. 

• Should DOD suggest increasing deductible levels, the total cost of Standard needs to be evaluated, because . . . 

• Standard has large co-payments of 25 percent after the deductible, and 

the cost of TRlCARE standard automatically adjust to changes in medical 

costs. 

• For individuals or families relying on Standard for medical treatment, it 

is a more expensive health plan than TRlCARE Prime. 

TRICARE Reserve Select 

• DOD should stop viewing TRS as a health insurance, but as a health program. 

TRICARE Retired Reserve (TRR) 

• Premiums are too high, and for TRR to be viable, premiums need to be 

reduced. 

TRICARE for Life (TFL) 

• No enrollment or separate premium should be introduced. Retirees over 

65 are already paying more than younger retirees. 

RESERVE COMPONENT HEALTH CARE

The Pentagon views TRlCARE as a health care plan, and Reserve TRICARE as 

a health care insurance. Because words create paradigms, Reserve health care is 

treated by DOD entirely different than active duty health care. The differences are 

easily noted: Active duty members enroll in a benefit with deductibles and co-payments; Guard and Reserve members ‘‘purchase’’ a premium based health plan. The 

following are suggested improvements. 

1. ROA and REA hold concerns over premium rates for TRICARE for gray area retir- ees. 

Because DOD treated Reserve gray area retirees as a separate health care risk 

group, health care premiums proved higher than expected. Because of the expense, 

enrollment is low. It is likely just being used by those with health care problems, 

who can’t afford health care from other sources. If the program is not changed it 

will have a similar success to mobilization insurance. 

ROA and REA hope that the committee will request a Government Accountability 

Office review of the process that determined the published premium levels. 

2. Seamless Transition. 

Servicemembers should not have to navigate through bureaucracy to receive care 

or benefits. Every time a Reserve component member transitions into a new category of health care, he or she is required to reenroll in the new program. Even 

those who are beneficiaries of TRS need to do an administrative transition between 

TRS, TRlCARE once mobilized, into TAMP and back onto TRS. And once retired, 

there is additional transition into TRlCARE Retired Reserve, and the latter 

TRICARE retiree health care. Add to this the additional health care provided by the 

Department of Veteran Affairs, and there are gaps in health care as a Reserve component or family member moves between programs. 

3. Access to TAMP. 

It has come to ROA’s attention that some Guard and Reserve members who have 

returned from deployment may not be provided TAMP coverage. In a number of 

cases, individuals who were placed in a wounded warrior company, after being 

found fit, were told that they would not qualify for transitional health care upon 

discharge because TAMP coverage was started upon the day they returned to the 

United States and they had been in the wounded warrior program for over 180 

days. 

ROA and REA feel that TAMP should only begin upon separation from Active 

duty. 

4. Sustaining Reserve Health Care. 

Continued Health Care Benefit Plan continues to be shown as only allowing members of the Selected Reserve who have had a tour of active duty within the previous 

18 months by DOD. This is denying COBRA protections for TRS beneficiaries who 

haven’t been activated, and doesn’t support the Secretary of Defense’s directive to 

mobilize National Guard and Reserve members 1 year out of 6, which would be a 

56 

dwell time of 60 months. There is little cost as the beneficiary pays a premium of 

102 percent of TRlCARE cost. 

As even discharged active servicemembers have the benefit of the Continuing 

Health Care Benefit Plan, those Guard and Reserve members who have signed up 

for TRlCARE Reserve Select need to have protections when they leave the Selected 

Reserve. 

ROA and REA encourage Congress to work with the Pentagon to open up Reserve 

component member access to the Continued Health Care Benefit Plan to any TRS 

beneficiary separating from the Selected Reserve under conditions that are not punitive in nature. 

5. Employer health care option. 

DOD pays a stipend to employers of deployed Guard and Reserve members to continue employer health care during deployment. G–R family members are eligible for 

TRlCARE if the members’ orders to Active Duty are for more than 30 days; but 

some families would prefer to preserve the continuity of their own health insurance. 

Being dropped from private sector coverage adversely affects family morale and 

military readiness and discourages some from reenlisting. Many G–R families live 

in locations where it is difficult or impossible to find providers who will accept new 

TRlCARE patients. This stipend would be equal to DOD’s contribution to Active 

Duty TRlCARE. 

ROA and REA continue to support an option for individual reservists where DOD 

pays a stipend to employers. 

6. Dental Readiness. 

Currently, dental readiness has one of the largest impacts on mobilization. The 

action by Congress in the NDAA for Fiscal Year 2010 was a good step forward, but 

still more needs to be done. 

The Services require a minimum of Class 2 (where treatment is needed, however 

no dental emergency is likely within 6 months) for deployment. Current policy relies 

on voluntary dental care by the Guard or Reserve member. Once alerted, dental 

treatment can be done by the military, but often there isn’t adequate time for proper 

restorative remedy. Reserve and Guard Dentists could support reducing costs. 

ROA and REA continues to suggest that the services are responsible to restore 

a demobilized Guard or Reserve member to a Class 2 status to ensure the member 

maintains deployment eligibility. 

Because there are inadequate dental assets at Military Treatment Facilities for 

active members, active families, and reservists, ROA and REA further recommend 

that dental restoration be included as part of the 6 month TAMP period following 

demobilization. DOD should cover full costs for restoration, but it could be tied into 

the TRICARE Dental program for cost and quality assurance. 

7. Utilization of TRS. 

ROA and REA support efforts by the Pentagon to encourage enrollment in TRS. 

We share a concern that the numbers being published by the Pentagon understate 

the actual level of participation by Guard and Reserve members who are eligible. 

A survey should be taken of TRICARE contractors to compare their participation 

measures with those of DOD. 

8. IRR Access to TRS. 

Not everyone who drills is eligible for TRS. All Services offer drilling for points 

without pay. These members are in the IRR. The Navy has Voluntary Training 

Units. The Air Force and Army have non-paid IMA. The Army also has a group 

within the IRR body that has agreed to mobilization during their first 2 years. 

The Army, the Marine Corps, and the Navy have mobilized reservists out of the 

IRR. Under current law, unless these RC members are given an opportunity to join 

the Selected Reserve, they are not eligible to purchase TRS following their return. 

ROA and REA feel that IRR members should be eligible for TRS. They could qualify if they sign an agreement of continued service and complete a satisfactory year 

of training and satisfy physical standards. A satisfactory year could be defined either by points or by training requirements, as defined by each Reserve Chief. 

ROA and REA recommend legislation to allow IRR buy-in to TRS. 

CONCLUSION

ROA and REA reiterate our profound gratitude for the progress achieved by this 

committee by providing parity on pay and compensation between the Active and Reserve components, with the subcommittee also understanding the difference in service between the two components. 

57 

ROA and REA look forward to working with the personnel subcommittee where 

we can present solutions to these and other issues, and offers our support in anyway. 

PREPARED STATEMENT BY THE GOLD STAR WIVES OF AMERICA, INC. 

Chairman Webb, Ranking Member Graham, and members of this committee, I am 

pleased to submit testimony on behalf of Gold Star Wives on legislative issues pertinent to our Nation’s military widows and widowers. My name is Vivianne Wersel, 

Chair of the Gold Star Wives’ Government Relations Committee. I am the widow 

of Lt. Col. Richard Wersel, Jr., USMC, who died suddenly on February 4, 2005, 1 

week after returning from his second tour of duty in Iraq. 

Gold Star Wives of America, Incorporated (GSW), founded in 1945, is a congressionally chartered organization of widows and widowers of military members who 

died while serving on active duty or as a result of a service-connected disability. 

GSW is an all-volunteer organization encompassing approximately 10,000 members. 

Our primary mission is to support gold star wives after the death of their loved 

one and a place to connect with other widows. We also provide information about 

military survivor benefits and assist widows experiencing difficulties accessing their 

benefits. We strive to raise the awareness of Congress, the public, the military community and Gold Star Wives to the many inequities existing in our survivor programs and benefits. Many of our members volunteer in Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) hospitals and clinics and also visit servicemembers hospitalized at Department of Defense (DOD) medical treatment facilities. 

GSW’s current members are widows and widowers of military members who 

served during World War II, the Korean War, the Vietnam War, the Gulf War, the 

conflicts in both Iraq and Afghanistan, and every period in between. For this written testimony, we will refer to all of members as widows. 

I am honored to submit testimony for the record today, but am very saddened my 

testimony will show no changes since last year. None of our issues passed the last 

congressional session. GSW’s most important legislative issues that pertain to this 

committee are as follows: 

I. ELIMINATION OF THE DEPENDENCY AND INDEMNITY COMPENSATION (DIC) OFFSET TO

THE SURVIVOR BENEFIT PLAN (SBP)

GSW strongly supports the complete elimination of the SBP/DIC offset. We are 

grateful for the support of many Members of Congress, including most of you here, 

as this issue has been brought before Congress for 11 years. We are also grateful 

to Senator Bill Nelson his sponsorship of S. 260 to remove the SBP/DIC offset. We 

respectfully request Congress eliminate the SBP/DIC offset immediately. 

Two Survivor Programs 

Congress created two programs for survivors of our military members. In 1956, 

Dependency and Indemnity Compensation (DIC) was established by the Servicemen’s and Veteran’s Survivor Benefit Act. The purpose of DIC is an indemnity payable to survivors when a military member dies as a result of a service-connected 

cause. 

In 1972, Congress created the Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP). The purpose of SBP 

is to insure that a portion of the military member’s retirement will be provided to 

the widow after the military member’s death. 

Two different plans, two very different purposes, one paid by retiree premiums 

or an active duty military member’s life and the other paid by the Department of 

Veterans Affairs. 

GSW Membership and SBP/DIC OFFSET 

GSW encompasses approximately 10,000 DIC recipients. Some of our members 

are eligible for and receive SBP. For those surviving spouses who receive SBP, either their retired military servicemember chose to purchase SBP at their retirement 

or their military member died while on active duty. 

When a widow is eligible for both SBP and DIC, the widow becomes subject to 

the ‘‘widow’s tax’’—a dollar-for-dollar reduction in the SBP by the amount of DIC 

received. Military members who died on active duty did not pay premiums. (Prior 

to September 11, a servicemember who died on active duty had to be retirement eligible for his survivor to receive SBP without payment of premiums.) Their widows 

became eligible for SBP on the date of their active duty death. Retired military 

members chose to purchase SBP and pay premiums with hard-earned retirement. 

Until 2005 and the implementation of concurrent receipt, some disabled retirees reVerDate Aug 31 2005 09:55 Jan 25, 2012 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00063 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 Y:\BORAWSKI\DOCS\68089.TXT JUNE PsN: JUNEB
58 

ceived no retirement pay with which to pay premiums. Many were forced to pay 

from disability compensation. The offset, never mentioned to the military member, 

only becomes visible to their widow once the military member has died. Including 

GSW members, approximately 54,000 surviving spouses are eligible for both SBP 

and DIC. 

Widows who are impacted by the offset are quite often shocked to learn they are 

subject to an offset. Completely unaware of the offset and how it would affect them 

financially forces them to make many hard adjustments in their day-to-day lives to 

accommodate the offset’s effects. 

Band-Aid Fixes 

Congress has chosen not to eliminate the offset for eleven years for the small 

group of widows impacted by the offset. Instead, Congress further divided and subdivided this small group with Band-Aid fixes for the offset. Three of the Band-Aid 

fixes, also called options, create even more confusion about benefits and who is eligible and often do little to eliminate the financial distress initially. Even reporting 

these options and their consequences to congressional members is difficult as they 

do not understand the impact, ramifications and end-result these options caused. 

The options are below. 

First, the reassignment of a spouse’s SBP to her children. In 2003, a new law 

passed, P.L. 108–136, authorizing active duty widows to assign the SBP annuity to 

their children, if any, permanently forfeiting any right the widow had to SBP. This 

reassignment allows full receipt of SBP by the child(ren) without offset until they 

reach the age of majority, when the benefit terminates. The widow is forced to make 

this decision very soon after notification of her spouse’s death and her decision then 

becomes irrevocable. Complications from this new law often require that the widow 

be granted guardianship of her own child(ren) by a court of law. A widow whose 

husband died in retirement is not eligible for this option. 

Second, remarriage. In August 2009, the U.S. Court of Appeals in the matter of 

Sharp, et.al. v. The United States, 82 Fed. Cl. 222 (2008), ruled that DIC payments 

may not be deducted from SBP annuities if a person entitled to both benefits has 

remarried after age 57. It does not make sense to have two separate standards in 

the law, one that allows payment of full SBP and DIC for widows who remarry after 

age 57 and another forcing a dollar-for-dollar offset between the SBP and DIC for 

all others. GSW is concerned that the Federal Government now requires a remarriage in order for an annuity to be paid in full. 

Third, Special Survivor Indemnity Allowance (SSIA). The NDAA for Fiscal Year 

2008 established a Special Survivor Indemnity Allowance for widows who are the 

beneficiary of the SBP annuity and their SBP annuity is partially or fully offset by 

the DIC. The SSIA also applies to the widows of members who died on active duty 

whose SBP annuity is partially or fully offset by their DIC. SSIA began at $50 per 

month and increases each fiscal year until 2017, when the SSIA terminates. 

A GSW member inquired recently whether the SBP/DIC offset would be removed 

within her lifetime. She is quite elderly and she stated that the odds of her remarrying are not favorable. She knows there are band-aid fixes, but stated she was from 

the old culture and married once for a lifetime. For her, the thought of dating or 

remarrying at the age of 94 is completely out of the question. The only response 

we could give her is to have faith and hope Congress will eliminate this offset soon. 

Veterans Disability Benefits Commission and Concurrent Receipt 

The Veterans Disability Benefits Commission (VDBC), created by Congress in 

2004 to review the benefits provided to the disabled and their surviving spouses, 

recommended the elimination of the DIC offset to SBP as one of their top priorities 

for Congress—and they referred to this issue as ‘‘survivor concurrent receipt.’’ Six 

years ago, concurrent receipt was applied to military members who are 100 percent 

disabled, enabling them to receive both VA compensation and military retirement 

pay in full. Logically, this should have applied to the surviving spouse at the same 

time—death should have been included in the 100 percent disabled category for survivor concurrent receipt as well. 

GSW understands that Congress does not permit the private sector or other Federal benefit programs to reduce or terminate retired annuities because the survivor 

is also eligible for DIC. So it begs to question, how can the full receipt of SBP and 

DIC be considered double dipping when in 2004 it was determined by Congress that 

the 100 percent disabled would receive their full retirement and disability compensation payments? Survivor compensation is provided to widows based on the 

military member who is rated at 100 percent disabled. There is no greater disability 

than death. 

59 

SBP/DIC Offset Conclusion 

Senator Bill Nelson stated simply for the record before the Senate Armed Services 

Committee Subcommittee on Personnel Hearing on March 10, 2010, ‘‘To truly honor 

our servicemembers, we all agree that the U.S. Government must take care of our 

veterans, their widows and orphans. In keeping with that moral principle, we must 

repeal the unjust offset that denies widows and orphans the annuity their deceased 

loved ones have earned on active duty or purchased for them. . . . Our efforts have 

been important steps in the right direction, but they are not enough. We must meet 

our obligation to the widow and orphan with this same sense of honor as was the 

service their loved one had rendered. We must completely eliminate the SBP/DIC 

offset.’’ 

GSW is heartened by all the support and legislation introduced to fix the ‘‘widow’s 

tax’’ over the past 11 years; however, we are perplexed that none of it has led to 

the necessary change—the complete elimination of the SBP/DIC offset. Even the 

Veterans Disability Benefits Commission, chartered by Congress, recommended the 

elimination of the offset in its top six priorities for Congress. Military widows have 

done all that is asked of them over the years and have worked tirelessly to educate 

the government, the public and military communities and new members to our own 

membership. They followed all the advice provided by Congress to get the word out 

to the public, garner support within Congress and have had numerous champions 

sponsor legislation to end this offset but to no avail. Our champions retire, widows 

die, and the offset still remains. We watch as other programs are easily funded that 

do not impact the quality of life for their recipients. We wait and wait. It is time 

to do the right thing, eliminate the DIC offset to the SBP this session. 

Gold Star Wives would like to thank Senator Bill Nelson for introducing S. 260 

and the 30 plus cosponsors supporting this effort to eliminate the SBP/DIC Offset. 

II. EDUCATION

GSW is greatly encouraged by the Gunnery Sergeant John David Fry Scholarship 

Program and request this program be included in the Yellow Ribbon Education Program. The Yellow Ribbon Education Program does not currently apply to children 

of the fallen, yet it would help ensure these children have a brighter future. We believe this was an oversight when the Fry Scholarship was created with the intention 

of matching education benefits to mirror the New GI Bill. 

III. TRICARE DENTAL PLAN FOR CHILDREN OF ACTIVE DUTY FALLEN

GSW is thankful for this needed piece of legislation for active duty children to 

continue to receive dental care but we are perplexed and concerned at the length 

of time which has passed without implementation. Time is of the essence for many 

of these children who are at an age when dental is pertinent for their optimal wellbeing. Eighteen months is more than sufficient and should have been implemented 

but has not. 

IV. OTHER ISSUES

Caregiver/Family Support Services 

While the TMC supports caregiver services, the surviving spouses who provided 

care for their husbands 8 or more years have this ‘‘caregiver’’ allowance incorrectly 

included in the DIC check and therefore additionally offset from their SBP. 

TRICARE Premiums 

Approximately 33,000 Surviving Spouses of Active Duty and Service Connected 

deaths receive NO RETIRED SBP due to the offset with which to pay any TRICARE 

Premiums. 

V. RECOGNIZING GOLD STAR WIVES

Gold Star Wives thanks Senator Burr, NC, for sponsoring legislation for a Gold 

Star Wives Day in April 5, 2011 and 2012. The recognition of widows’ service to our 

Nation was truly appreciated. These same widows and widowers served beside their 

military member silently, determined and unwavering despite hazardous duty, multiple deployments, numerous family moves, serving as both parents to their children, and through the loss of longevity in their own chosen careers. Many widows 

and widowers were full-time caregivers for their military members. Often backbreaking work and enduring financial hardships, these caregivers saved the government untold hundreds of thousands of dollars in nursing and hospital care, usually 

to the detriment of their own health. It is a shame these same selfless widows and 

widowers rarely receive accolades or honorable mentions in speeches or written 

60 

statements made by our political or military leaders. We ask that you include survivors in your speeches, written statements and honorable mentions today and into 

the future. 

This testimony began with one of GSW’s most critical issues—the elimination of 

the SBP/DIC offset. Included are several other priority issues for GSW that are not 

unfamiliar to Congress. We request your support in caring for our widows and widowers as they look to GSW as their support and their voice in Congress. We are 

the vanguards for changing the inequities in military survivor benefits, educating 

the public and military communities, as well as, educating Congress on the needs 

of our members. 

Our husbands would be appalled at the lack of action taken by Congress to care 

for their widows and children. They would be shocked to learn their wives and children had to walk the halls of Congress and beg for the benefits they had worked 

so hard for on the battlefield. No other group of widows and children are forced to 

be paraded for all to see. These families should be heralded as heroes themselves 

for surviving the life of a military family. I believe that you who serve on this committee feel similarly. Let us work to make this statement one of action and not just 

rhetoric. 

I appreciate the opportunity to submit testimony for the record. Thank you. 

PREPARED STATEMENT BY PETER J. DUFFY OF THE NATIONAL GUARD ASSOCIATION OF

THE UNITED STATES

Chairman Jim Webb, Ranking Member Lindsey Graham, and members of the 

subcommittee: Thank you for the opportunity to present written testimony on behalf 

of the National Guard Association of the United States to address critical personnel 

issues facing members of the National Guard and their families. This brief submission will provide factual background, analysis, and corrective recommendations for 

the committee to consider. 

THE UNIQUE CITIZEN SERVICEMEMBER

The National Guard is unique among components of the Department of Defense 

(DOD) in that it has the dual State and Federal mission. While serving operationally overseas on Title 10 active duty status, National Guard units are under the 

command and control of the President. However, upon release from active duty, 

members of the National Guard return to the far reaches of their states under the 

command and control of their governors where as a special branch of the Selected 

Reserves they train not just for their Federal missions but for their potential state 

active duty missions such as protecting the border and airspace, fire fighting, flood 

control, and providing assistance to civil authorities in a variety of possible disaster 

scenarios. 

Activation numbers for the National Guard as of April 5, 2011 are as follows: 

Guardsmen Currently Activated in Support of Operations Noble Eagle/Enduring Freedom/New Dawn (as of April 5): 

ARNG: 43,288 

ANG: 5,637 

Total Guardsmen Activated in Support of Operations Noble Eagle/Enduring 

Freedom/New Dawn (Since September 11) 

ARNG: 342,446 

ANG: 87,103 

While serving in their States, members are scattered geographically with their 

families as they hold jobs, own businesses, pursue academic programs and participate actively in their civilian communities. Against this backdrop, members of the 

National Guard remain ready to uproot from their families and civilian lives to 

serve their governor domestically or their President in distance parts of the globe 

as duty calls and to return to the same communities when their missions are accomplished. 

Military service in the National Guard is uniquely community based. The culture 

of the National Guard remains little understood outside of its own circles. When 

DOD testifies before Congress stating its programmatic needs, it will likely recognize the indispensable role of the National Guard as a vital operational force in the 

current wars but it will say little and seek less to address the benefit disparities, 

training challenges and unmet medical readiness issues that exist for National 

Guard members and their families at the State level before, during and after deployment. The National Guard Association of the United States asks this subcommittee 

to please understand that the personnel issues of the National Guard are different 

61 

from those of the Active Forces, and in some cases radically so. We ask that they 

be given a fresh look with the best interests of the National Guard members and 

their families in mind, in reviewing the recommendations set forth below. 

SUPPORT FOR INDIVIDUAL MEDICAL READINESS NEEDS

According to The Task Force on the Future of Military Health Care, ‘‘Today’s 

Operational Tempo raises the importance of all responsible parties doing their part 

to ensure the Individual Medical Readiness (IMR) requirements are satisfied to facilitate maximum deployability of our forces.’’ 

DOD requires all members of the National Guard to be medically ready as a condition for deployment. IMR must address the medical and dental needs of those 

members deploying for the first time as well as those subject to redeployment whose 

mental health care needs arising from prior service in OIF and OEF have become 

paramount. However, using the National Guard as an operational force requires 

more accessible health care particularly mental health care for members and their 

families pre and post deployment in order to maintain the necessary medical readiness required by deployment cycles. It cannot be a simple post deployment send off 

by the active military of ‘‘Good job. See you in 3 years.’’ 

DOD must do more to bring the National Guard to a constant state of medical 

readiness to better support the short notice deployments that occur regularly within 

the National Guard. For example, the Air National Guard must maintain constant 

dental and medical readiness because of the short notices they receive for deployments, which sometimes can be as little as 72 hours. Short notice deployments also 

occur regularly with cross leveled members who, with as little as 2 or 3 weeks notice, must fill in for members from other deploying units who for various reasons 

become disqualified for deployment. Members in the pool of Individual Mobilization 

Augmentees whose files are kept at the Human Resources Command in St. Louis 

can also be assigned to fill positions in deploying units on short notice without the 

benefit of the premobilization preparations taking place in the deploying unit. 

The Army National Guard currently has the highest suicide rate in the military 

yet there remains no authority in Title 10 to authorize the Service Secretaries to 

provide mental health care for our members during dwell time to maintain readiness. In fact, outside of the deployment windows which extend from the issuance 

of an alert order to the close of the 6 month Transitional Assistance Management 

Program (TAMP) period following deployment, there is no authority for the Service 

Secretaries to provide any care beyond fixing dental readiness issues identified in 

annual screenings. 

Commanders currently lack the tools during dwell periods to fix medical and behavioral readiness issues identified during annual screenings identifies. The government pays good money to identify treatable medical and behavioral readiness conditions but no money to fix them during dwell time. This heightens the risks that 

members with untreated conditions that otherwise could have been fixed will be deployed only to be released from active duty at the mobilization stations because of 

the untreated condition. This in turn sets into motion the difficult cross leveling 

process with the unit losing key personnel at the worst time and a surrogate stepping in on very short notice at great hardship to the member and the member’s family. This problem is solvable but Congress must act by giving the Service Secretaries 

discretionary authority to correct treatable medical and behavioral readiness deficiencies discovered during dwell time screenings. Members with conditions that cannot be corrected can be separated or reassigned in a more timely manner outside 

of deployment windows. This would allow for a more medically and dentally ready 

deployable force even before the issuance of alert notices. This in turn would help 

to limit the time diverted for treatment during the training intensive alert periods. 

Recommendation: 

The National Guard Association of the United States recommends that the National Guard Bureau, DOD, and the Congress of the United States support authorization and appropriations for programs that will: 

• Amend 10 U.S.C. 1074 a(f)(l) to authorize Service Secretaries provide the 

treatment needed to correct treatable readiness deficiencies identified during dwell time screenings. 

POST-DEPLOYMENT HEALTH ASSESSMENTS AND MEDICAL SCREENINGS AT THE HOME

STATION

It is imperative post deployment that our members while still on active duty deployment orders be examined confidentially at the home station by a qualified 

health care provider in order to address the under reporting of physical and mental 

62 

health conditions that is occurring on the self-administered Post-Deployment Health 

Assessment (PDHA). The PDHA is currently being completed by a homeward bound 

member in theater or at the demobilization site often several States away from 

home. 

When the PDHA is completed, it is accompanied with the instruction that the selfassessing member maybe medically held on active duty at the demobilization site 

if he or she reports a medical condition requiring that action. To avoid the risk of 

being held at the demobilization site after a long deployment, members are simply 

not fully reporting their physical and behavioral injuries. This underreporting not 

only delays treatment but can prejudice later claims with the VA for service connected disabilities arising from conditions not previously reported on the PDHA. 

What is needed forthwith is a free and confidential reporting of physical and mental health conditions at the home station by all members, stigma free, to a health 

care provider trained to elicit that information and to screen for those conditions 

without the fear of being medically held far from home. If medically holding the 

member is advisable, it should be done as close to home as possible. 

The irony in the current PDHA under reporting phenomenon is that a medical 

hold is usually in the best interest of the member and his or her family as it allows 

pay and benefits to continue during treatment for a condition that may well render 

the member unemployable once discharged. The medical hold should not cynically 

be administered as a threat to discourage reporting of injuries when, if properly administered in a friendly environment, it offers substantial benefits to the members 

and his or her family. 

The PDHA needs to be completed by returning members at home in the presence 

of a trained health care professional who can screen, observe, and ask with the skill 

necessary to elicit medical issues either unknown to the self-reporting member or 

unreported for fear of being retained at far removed demobilization site. Insurance 

companies in performing their due diligence before the issuance of an insurance policy do not allow individuals to self-assess their health. Neither should the military. 

If geographical separation from families is causing under reporting and non reporting of physical and psychological combat injuries on the PDHA, then moving this 

process to the home station would likely produce a better yield at a critical time 

when this information needs to be captured in order for prompt and effective treatment to be administered. If necessary and appropriate, the examining health care 

provider in coordination with the National Guard J–1 and State’s Surgeon General 

can cause the member to be retained on active duty locally for further treatment 

and evaluation. 

This is especially critical in screening for behavioral conditions. At all stages of 

post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and depression, treatment is time sensitive 

but this is particularly so after onset as the illness could persist for a lifetime if 

not promptly and adequately treated and could render the member permanently disabled. The effects of this permanent disability on the member’s entire family can 

be devastating. It is absolutely imperative that members returning from deployment 

be screened with full confidentiality at the home station while still on active duty 

by trained and qualified mental health care providers from VA staff and/or qualified 

health care providers from the civilian community that could include primary care 

physicians, physician assistants and nurse practitioners who have training in assessing psychological health presentations. Prompt diagnosis and treatment will 

help to mitigate the lasting effects of mental illness. 

Please see the copy of a November 5, 2008, electronic message to NGAUS from 

Dr. Dana Headapohl set forth in the Appendix which strongly recommends a surveillance program for our members before they are released from active duty. Dr. 

Headapohl opines the obvious in stating that inadequate medical screening of our 

members before they are released from active duty is ‘‘unacceptable to a group that 

has been asked to sacrifice for our country.’’ (emphasis added) 

Recommendation: 

The National Guard Association of the United States recommends that Congress 

support authorization and appropriations for programs that will: 

• Require the PDHA for National Guard members to be administered at 

the home station before releasing members from active duty 

• Mandate medical and behavioral screening of all National Guard members returning from deployment by health care professionals at the home 

station before releasing the members from active duty. 

63 

EMBED MENTAL HEALTH CARE PROVIDERS IN ARMORIES AND RESERVE CENTERS DURING

DRILL

National Guard and Reserve suicides nearly doubled from 80 deaths in 2009 to 

145 deaths in 2010. This highest suicide rate in the military underscores the need 

to provide the National Guard and Reserve with convenient access to mental health 

care providers in a command supported local setting. 

Using the National Guard and Reserve as an operational force in the current war 

requires a funded mental health readiness care program during dwell time in order 

to maintain an important component of medical readiness required by deployment 

cycles. 

As our members reintegrate into their civilian communities or prepare for future 

deployments, many show no signs of physical injury but suffer from the psychological effects of traumatic stress requiring treatment. These psychological effects 

may range in severity from behavioral readjustment concerns to PTSD with some 

conditions not manifesting themselves until months or even years after returning 

from deployment. Early referral and treatment of behavioral and PTSD issues are 

essential for positive outcomes. 

DOD must provide better access for all National Guard and Reserve members 

during duty hours to seek the assistance of mental health care professionals in a 

convenient stigma free environment. Increased access would more thoroughly and 

expeditiously identify members in need of treatment. 

Embedding mental health care providers in armories and Reserve training centers 

during drill would enable on site self referrals or mandatory unit wide referrals 

which would mitigate the perceived stigma associated with National Guard members individually seeking mental health counseling. This would also eliminate the 

need for our members to take medical leave and drive potentially great distances 

to seek similar services during the work week. As states with piloted programs attest, the embedded mental health care provider program works. 

Tri-West with its own funds has instituted a pilot program in California that supports 27 mental health care providers as embedded screeners with 40 California National Guard units to provide support and referral assistance during drill weekends 

and family readiness events. These providers can earn the trust of soldiers and 

build relationships through regular contact in a familiar environment. For those National Guard and Reserve members and their families who may not have access to 

the support and resources more commonly found in active duty military communities, this outreach is particularly important. The pilot program offers soldiers a 

greater access to the type of care they are most comfortable seeking. 

S. 325, The Embedded Mental Health Providers for Reserves Act of 2011 introduced by Senators Patty Murray and Claire McCaskill, now before the 112th Congress would require the Service Secretaries to provide to any and all members of 

the Reserve components performing inactive-duty unit training access to mental 

health assessments and treatment with a licensed mental health professional who 

would be available for referrals during duty hours on the premises of the principal 

duty location of the member’s unit. 

The Congressional Budget Office has preliminarily estimated the 5 year outlay for 

S. 325 to be $109 million. Secretary Gates has requested $677 million in the President’s fiscal year 2012 budget for treatment of PTSD and TBI. A fair allocation of 

this sum and future requests should more than cover the cost of S. 325. In light 

of the recent GAO castigation of the waste and lack of direction in the Defense Center of Excellence, the embed program offers a bargain in caring for the mental 

health needs of deserving members of the military. Congress needs to require DOD 

to fairly share mental health appropriations with the National Guard and Reserve 

who can apply those funds efficiently with an embedded provider program. 

Our young men and women deserve appropriate and timely mental health care 

assessments and care as they attempt to reintegrate into civilian life and maintain 

medical readiness for future deployments. 

Recommendation: 

Support the passage of S. 325. 

EQUITABLY AMEND THE 2008 NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT IN REDUCING THE

AGE FOR MEMBERS OF THE RESERVE COMPONENTS TO COLLECT RETIREMENT PAY

Having transitioned to an operational force, the National Guard of the United 

States is spending more time on active duty as it shares responsibility for the current wars. 

More than 60 years ago, the Congress of the United States established the age 

limit for receipt of retired pay by Reserve component members. That law, most reVerDate Aug 31 2005 09:55 Jan 25, 2012 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00069 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 Y:\BORAWSKI\DOCS\68089.TXT JUNE PsN: JUNEB
64 

cently amended in the 2008 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), states that 

a retired Reserve component member can begin to draw military retired pay upon 

reaching 60 years of age regardless of number of years served. A National Guard 

member who enlists after high school at age 18 and retires after 20 years of service 

at age 48 must wait 22 years before drawing a retirement check. 

RETROACTIVITY

Led by the efforts of Senator Saxby Chambliss, the NDAA for Fiscal Year 2008 

reduced the 60 year eligibility age for retired members of the Ready Reserve to collect retirement pay 3 months for each aggregate of 90 days per fiscal year of active 

duty performed in Title 10 status in support of a contingency operation or in Title 

32 status in responding to a national emergency. Unfortunately, these historic provisions applied only to service after January 28, 2008, the date of enactment of the 

2008 NDAA. Making these changes fully retroactive to September 11 is the number 

one benefit issue in the Guard and Reserve. 

Since September 11, 2001 members of the Reserve component have continued to 

serve as an ‘‘operational’’ force with their active counterparts in Iraq, Afghanistan, 

and other dangerous locations around the globe. If active duty service of the Reserve 

components in wartime and national emergencies after January 28, 2008 is now recognized in reducing the age to collect military retirement pay, it is inequitable to 

not credit retroactively all otherwise qualifying service performed after September 

11, 2001. Those members currently deployed who fought in OIF/OEF before January 

28, 2008 know painfully that their earlier service is not truly respected. Our members who so bravely risked their lives in service to our country deserve that respect. 

The Congressional Budget Office last year estimated the cost of a bill to provide 

retroactivity be 1.353 billion over 10 years. NGAUS understands that Reserve retirement is considered mandatory spending which would require passage of a retroactivity bill to have an offset commensurate with its estimated cost. 

In the event the Senate fields a bill this session that would establish the subject 

retroactivity, NGAUS urges Congress to please search for an offset to fund this necessary legislation, or in the event a War Supplemental Bill should be introduced 

this session, to fund such a bill as an emergency spending measure. 

ELIMINATING THE FISCAL YEAR REQUIREMENT FOR 90 DAYS OF QUALIFYING SERVICE

The NDAA for Fiscal Year 2008 requires the aforementioned 90 days of qualifying 

service to occur within a single fiscal year thereby unfairly not crediting otherwise 

qualifying service spread over 2 fiscal years. 

For example, if one served 90 days in OIF from September 1, 2008 through November 29, 2008, that service would not be credited in reducing the retirement eligibility age. However, if the person served 90 days in OIF from October 1, 2008 

through December 29, 2008, that service would be fully credited. This distinction 

unfairly penalizes those who serve bravely with orders spanning 2 fiscal years. 

NGAUS urges Congress to correct this inequity by fully crediting each aggregate 

of 90 days of qualifying service irrespective of the fiscal year in which it is served. 

Recommendation: 

The National Guard Association of the United States recommends that the Congress of the United States support legislation to make the Reserve retirement law 

changes in the NDAA for Fiscal Year 2008 retroactive to September 11 and to eliminate the fiscal year requirement for the 90 days of qualifying service to reduce the 

eligibility age. 

SPACE AVAILABLE TRAVEL PRIORITY ON PARITY WITH THE ACTIVE FORCE

A popular misconception on the Hill holds that Space Available (Space A) aircraft 

travel is governed exclusively by DOD Joint Travel Regulations (JTR). Although the 

JTRs establish the priority categories, Congress does intervene with statutory corrections from time to time to redirect the Secretary of Defense to reestablish equitable travel priorities. Attached to this written testimony is a copy of 110 U.S.C. 

Section 2641b which did just that relative to travel to receive specialty care. 

Another statutory change in Space Priorities is in order to bring members of the 

National Guard and Reserve and their dependents on level Space A priority with 

the Active Forces and their dependents. DOD would still establish priority categories in the JTR but whatever priority category assigned to the Active Forces on 

leave and their dependents would by law apply to the National Guard and Reserve 

members and their dependents. 

The National Guard has established itself as an indispensable operational force 

in defending our country in a most cost effective manner. Serving shoulder to shoulVerDate Aug 31 2005 09:55 Jan 25, 2012 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00070 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 Y:\BORAWSKI\DOCS\68089.TXT JUNE PsN: JUNEB
65 

der with the Active component worldwide, members of the National Guard as citizen 

soldiers remain ready to uproot from their families and civilian lives to serve their 

governor domestically or their President in distant parts of the globe as duty calls 

and to return to the same communities when their missions are accomplished. 

In recognition of this service, Congress has worked hard since September 11, 2010 

to establish Federal legislation to close the benefit gap that exists for our deserving 

members and their families. Expanding space-available travel for our members and 

gray area retirees would be a significant step in that direction. It appears that the 

bills would also be budget neutral. 

S. 542 introduced by Senator Mark Begich would provide space-available travel 

on defense department aircraft for members of the Reserve components on the same 

basis as active members of the Armed Forces; retired members of the Reserve component eligible to receive retirement pay but for age on the same basis as retired 

members of the Armed Forces entitled to receive retirement pay; widows of retired 

members entitled or eligible to receive retirement pay; and the accompanying dependents of these members, retired members or widows. This legislation is likely 

budget neutral. 

Recommendation: 

Please support the passage of S. 542. 

EXTEND TAMP COVERAGE WITH TRICARE PRIME REMOTE

Post-deployment care for members under the TAMP and their families must be 

for a period equal to the period of deployment but not less than 6 months. The 

TAMP program allows members to obtain at government expense up to 6 months 

of TRICARE coverage that is similar, but not identical, to the TRICARE Prime coverage they had been receiving on active duty. 

Effective TAMP coverage is a medical readiness issue for the overwhelming majority of our returning members who are subject to redeployment and must maintain 

their medical and dental readiness. Unfortunately, many are slipping through the 

cracks post deployment with undiagnosed medical conditions, particularly behavioral conditions, which may not be reported by the returning members when they 

self-assess their medical condition on the PDHA administered at the demobilization 

site. Unreported conditions cannot be treated. As these conditions become known 

over time, a reasonable period is needed for proper treatment. The current 6 month 

TAMP period is proving to be inadequate either because of other demands on the 

returning members’ time or the late disclosure of a service connected injury. 

The coverage available under TAMP does not include access to the provider network under TRICARE Prime Remote, the rural active duty coverage available to 

family beneficiaries while the military sponsor is deployed. This breaks provider 

continuity for rural beneficiaries switching to TAMP post deployment who had been 

treating under the TRICARE Prime Remote program while the military sponsor was 

deployed. This requires many of our rural families who had been using TRICARE 

Prime Remote during the deployment to search for a new provider and hopefully 

find one. The TAMP program needs adjusting to expand its provider network and 

to specifically allow rural beneficiaries to have access to the same TRICARE Prime 

Remote providers they had been using. 

Recommendation: 

It is the recommendation of the National Guard Association of the United States 

that the Congress of the United States support funding and authority for: 

• Extending post-deployment TAMP coverage for a period equal to the period of deployment but not less than 6 months. 

• To include access to the TRICARE Prime Remote provider network as 

part of the TAMP coverage benefit. 

• To expand the TRICARE provider network. 

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, we at NGAUS hope that we have both reinforced and amplified this 

subcommittee’s understanding of personnel needs of the National Guard. Thank you 

again for the opportunity to submit testimony to this subcommittee and for all that 

you do for our Nation’s servicemembers. 

66 


413per1.eps
67 


413per2.eps
68 

Senator WEBB. Having just gone through this on the last hearing, I think we’ll start from your right, and my left, and move this 

way. If you could summarize your statements in 5 minutes, the full 

statements will be entered into the record as read. 

Mr. Barnes welcome. 

STATEMENT OF MASTER CHIEF JOSEPH L. BARNES, USN 

(RET.) 

Mr. BARNES. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Members of the subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to 

appear before you today. 


413per3.eps
69 

My name is Joe Barnes, and I have the privilege of serving as 

FRA’s national executive director and also as cochair of TMC. I’ll 

be addressing several priority personnel issues. My colleagues will 

do likewise in the areas of family and survivor issues, healthcare, 

and Guard and Reserve issues. 

Military service is unlike any other career or occupation. Associated with this is ensuring adequate pay and benefits for Active and 

Reserve personnel, and their families and survivors, and fulfilling 

commitments to provide healthcare and other benefits for career 

personnel after retirement. 

Thanks to the strong support from this distinguished subcommittee, there have been significant pay and benefits improvements enacted since 2000. 

The Coalition appreciates the exemption of military personnel 

from the Federal pay freeze and strongly supports the administration’s proposed 1.6 percent 2012 Active Duty pay adjustment, 

which is based on the employment cost index data used in preparing the budget request. 

Pay is a major concern for military personnel. If approved, this 

would be the second smallest pay increase in nearly 50 years, behind the 1.4 percent pay increase this year. 

Adequate end strengths are essential to maintaining readiness, 

prosecuting war efforts, and supporting other operations throughout the world, including the recent Libya operations and disaster 

relief in Japan. End-strength levels are also related to sufficient 

dwell time between deployments, and debilitating stress on repeatedly deployed servicemembers and their families. An article in this 

week’s Navy Times cites stresses on Navy personnel and references 

longer deployments, shorter dwell times, and a 15 percent increase 

in underway days over the past decade, with 10 percent fewer 

ships. 

There are other troubling indicators of the impact of stress on 

personnel and their families after 10 years of war and other demanding operational requirements. These include increased drug 

usage, alarming suicide rates, and divorces. 

The Coalition strongly supports the military resale system to ensure access to commissaries and exchanges for all beneficiaries and 

provide important support for Morale, Welfare, and Recreation 

(MWR) programs. The pending implementation of the Tax Increase 

Prevention and Reconciliation Act will require a 3-percent withholding on payments to vendors, and likely result in higher costs 

being passed on to beneficiaries, and reduced MWR program support. Accordingly, TMC urges an exemption to the law for the military resale system. 

The Coalition supports legislation sponsored by Senator Mark 

Begich that would authorize shipment of a second private-owned 

vehicle to Alaska, Hawaii, and Guam, and increase certain permanent change-of-station mileage reimbursement rates. 

Finally, the Coalition supports authorization of full concurrent 

receipt of military retired pay and disability compensation for all 

disabled retirees. This includes phasing out the disability offset for 

all Chapter 61 retirees, as previously endorsed by the President 

and this subcommittee. We also urge support for Senator Reid’s 

legislation on this issue. 

70 

Thank you again for the opportunity to present our views on 

these issues. 

[The prepared statement of Chief Barnes follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT BY THE FLEET RESERVE ASSOCIATION

THE FLEET RESERVE ASSOCIATION

The Fleet Reserve Association (FRA) is a leading advocate on Capitol Hill for enlisted active duty, Reserve, retired and veterans of the Navy, Marine Corps, and 

Coast Guard. It is Congressionally Chartered, recognized by the Department of Veterans’ Affairs (VA) as an accrediting Veteran Service Organization (VSO) for claim 

representation and entrusted to serve all veterans who seek its help. In 2007, FRA 

was selected for full membership on the National Veterans’ Day Committee. 

FRA was established in 1924 and its name is derived from the Navy’s program 

for personnel transferring to the Fleet Reserve or Fleet Marine Corps Reserve after 

20 or more years of active duty, but less than 30 years for retirement purposes. During the required period of service in the Fleet Reserve, assigned personnel earn retainer pay and are subject to recall by the Secretary of the Navy. 

FRA’s mission is to act as the premier ‘‘watch dog’’ organization in maintaining 

and improving the quality of life for Sea Service personnel and their families. The 

Association also sponsors a National Americanism Essay Program and other recognition and relief programs. In addition, the newly established FRA Education 

Foundation oversees the Association’s scholarship program that presented awards 

totaling nearly $120,000 to deserving students last year. 

The Association is also a founding member of The Military Coalition (TMC), a 33- 

member consortium of military and veteran’s organizations. FRA hosts most TMC 

meetings and members of its staff serve in a number of TMC leadership roles. 

FRA’s motto is: ‘‘Loyalty, Protection, and Service.’’ 

CERTIFICATION OF NON-RECEIPT OF FEDERAL FUNDS

Pursuant to the requirements of House Rule XI, the Fleet Reserve Association has 

not received any Federal grant or contract during the current fiscal year or either 

of the 2 previous fiscal years. 

OVERVIEW

The Fleet Reserve Association (FRA) is an active participant and leading organization in TMC and strongly supports the extensive recommendations addressed in 

the TMC testimony prepared for this hearing. The intent of this statement is to address issues of particular importance to FRA’s membership and the Sea Services enlisted communities. 

INTRODUCTION

Mr. Chairman, the FRA salutes you, members of the subcommittee, and your staff 

for the strong and unwavering support of programs essential to Active Duty, Reserve component, and retired members of the uniformed services, their families, and 

survivors. The subcommittee’s work has greatly enhanced care and support for our 

wounded warriors, improved military pay, eliminated out-of-pocket housing expenses, improved health care, and enhanced other personnel, retirement and survivor programs. This support is critical in maintaining readiness and is invaluable 

to our Armed Forces engaged throughout the world fighting the global War on Terror, supporting the NATO effort in Libya, assisting Japan with recovery efforts, sustaining other operational requirements and fulfilling commitments to those who’ve 

served in the past. 

A huge budget deficit, the reduction of troops in Iraq and a planned drawdown 

in Afghanistan increases pressure to slash the defense budget. But as the increased 

hostility on the Korean peninsula last November and the recent political instability 

in the Middle East shows, there are many potential conflicts around the world that 

requires the military to be prepared not only in terms of new weapons systems but 

also with adequate personnel strength that is well trained and not stressed from 

continued deployments. 

TRICARE

Ensuring adequate funding the Military Health System (MHS) and VA health 

care is FRA’s top legislative priority and important to every segment of our membership, Auxiliary and widows. Our members appreciate Chairman Webb’s comments 

71 

that the TRICARE fee increase proposal ‘‘violates a moral contract that the government has with those who served in the military.’’ The importance of health care is 

reflected in responses to the Association’s 2011 online survey completed in February, which revealed that over 90 percent of all Active Duty, Reserve, retired, and 

veteran respondents cited health care access as a critically important quality-of-life 

benefit associated with their military service. 

Higher health care costs are not unique to the military, and FRA appreciates the 

subcommittee’s opposition to past proposals to drastically increase TRICARE fees 

and pharmacy co-pays. Our membership believes there are management efficiencies 

and cost saving initiatives that can significantly offset higher costs—something first 

referenced in FRA’s 2006 testimony on these issues before this distinguished subcommittee. An example is the expanded use of the more economical pharmacy home 

delivery option for prescriptions, which saved the department over $30 million in 

2010. 

FRA also notes recommendations in recent Government Accountability Office 

(GAO) testimony before the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform 

which identified Federal programs, agencies, offices and initiatives that have duplicative goals or activities. Number two on a list of 81 areas for consideration is realigning DOD’s military medical command structures and consolidating common 

functions to increase efficiency which would result in projected savings of from 

‘‘$281 million to $460 million’’ annually. In addition, GAO cites opportunities for 

DOD and the Department of Veterans’ Affairs (VA) to jointly modernize their respective electronic health record systems, and also control drug costs by increasing 

joint contracting. 

Identifying a permanent solution to pending cuts in Medicare physician reimbursement rates is integral to ensuring access to care for all beneficiaries seeking 

care outside the MHS or under TRICARE for Life. Congress has repeatedly punted 

on this matter and the latest extension preventing cumulative reimbursement rate 

cuts now totaling 29.5 percent expires on December 31, 2011. The Association supports a further 2-year extension included in the administration’s 2012 budget, however, a permanent fix is sorely needed. 

HEALTH CARE FEES PROPOSAL

Regarding the administration’s 2012 health care fees proposal, the Association believes first and foremost that military service is unlike any other civilian career or 

occupation. Associated with this reality and maintaining readiness, are commitments to provide health care and other benefits for career personnel after their service careers. As stated in the Senate testimony referenced above, ‘‘Providing and 

funding health care benefits for all beneficiaries is part of the cost of defending our 

Nation.’’ It’s also important to remember that only about 1 percent of the population 

is currently serving in the uniformed services to defend our freedoms and prosecute 

the continuing war efforts. 

The Department of Defense’s lax management of health care fees since TRICARE 

was established in 1995 led to drastic fee hike proposals from 2006 to 2008 including a TRICARE Standard enrollment fee which would not enhance access to care 

for beneficiaries in that program. 

Bipartisan legislation was subsequently introduced in successive Congresses that 

would shift oversight responsibilities from DOD to Congress (H.R. 1092 sponsored 

by Reps. Walter Jones and Dan Boren was recently introduced in the 112th Congress), and a Senate bill in the 110th Congress (S.604 sponsored by Senators Lautenberg and Hagel). If enacted, the Senate bill would have prohibited health care 

fee adjustments from exceeding the annual Consumer Price Index (CPI), which determines military retired pay adjustments and other Federal benefits pegged to inflation. FRA supports (supported) these and related bills in the current and previous 

Congresses. 

Compared to past proposals, the 2012 TRICARE fee changes are more reasonable—however, the 2012 adjustments characterized by DOD as ‘‘modest’’ are only 

part of the plan and the Association is very concerned about the yet-to-determined 

annual adjustment index for TRICARE Prime fees in 2013 and beyond. 

FRA supports other aspects of the proposal including the elimination of co-pays 

for generic drugs dispensed via TRICARE’s Home Delivery pharmacy program to encourage expanded use of this program—and survivors and medically retired personnel are not impacted by the proposal. There are also no active duty fee increases, 

no changes to TRICARE Standard—and something especially important to Medicare 

eligible retirees—no additional TRICARE for Life fees. 

72 

HEALTH CARE INFLATION

The Bureau of Labor Statistics’ Consumer Price Index (CPI) is the basis for annual retired pay adjustments and absent a baseline statutory measure for determining health care costs, this index is integral to examining proposals to adjust 

TRICARE Prime enrollment and other health care related fees. 

DOD cites a 6.2 percent assumption with regard to adjustments for 2013 and beyond while acknowledging a number of health care inflation indexes. FRA’s research 

found that 1-year Standard & Poor’s (S&P) Healthcare Economic Indices through 

November 2010 ranged from 2.71 percent (S&P Healthcare Hospital Medicare 

Index) to 6.27 percent (S&P Healthcare Economic Composite Index), to 9.04 percent 

(S&P Healthcare Economic Commercial Index). A January 20, 2011 press release on 

this data states that ‘‘Average per capita cost of healthcare services covered by commercial insurance and Medicare programs rose 6.27 (percent),’’ which is perhaps the 

benchmark DOD actuaries used in conjunction with projected multi-year savings associated with annual health care fee adjustments for military retirees. 

USFHP AND COMMUNITY HOSPITALS REIMBURSEMENTS

The plan also would require new Uniformed Services Family Health Plan 

(USFHP) beneficiaries to enroll in Medicare Part B and shift to Medicare as primary provider at age 65—a change that would impact future enrollees to this highly 

regarded program which serves approximately 115,000 beneficiaries in 6 areas 

throughout the United States. 

Although the FRA does not have expertise on the proposed adoption of Medicare 

payment rules at over 400 Sole Community Hospitals over 4 years, we understand 

that perhaps 20 of the facilities are near military bases and request consideration 

and/or analysis of the impact of these changes with regard to ensuring future access 

to care for TRICARE beneficiaries at these hospitals. 

CONTINUED ATTENTION TO IMPROVED SERVICE AND COST EFFICIENCIES

FRA continues its strong advocacy regarding the need to improve service, streamline operations and further identify and implement cost saving measures within 

DOD, all of which are essential to maintaining readiness and fulfilling commitments 

made to all beneficiaries. The Association notes the elimination of 780 contract positions in conjunction with streamlining TRICARE Management Activity functions 

along with increasing inter-service cooperation and co-locating medical headquarters 

operations. 

WOUNDED WARRIOR CARE

FRA appreciates the extraordinary efforts by this subcommittee to help our 

wounded warriors. Last year this subcommittee authorized a monthly stipend under 

the DOD family caregiver program for catastrophically injured or ill wounded warriors that is equal to the caregiver stipend provided by the Department of Veterans’ 

Affairs (VA). Unfortunately, this program of which the Veterans’ Affairs Committees 

have jurisdiction has yet to be implemented. 

A recent Navy Times survey on wounded warrior care (November 29, 2010) indicates that 77 percent of caregivers have no life of their own; 72 percent feel isolated; 

and 63 percent suffer from depression. The new program will help many caregivers, 

however, the enactment and implementation of the legislation is only the first step 

and effective oversight and sustained funding are also critical to ensuring future 

support for these caregivers. 

FRA supports additional changes detailed in the full TMC statement which include establishing a permanent independent office for the DOD/VA Interagency program with expanded authority to include oversight of all components of achieving 

a true seamless transition; authorizing active duty TRICARE benefits, regardless of 

accessibility of VA care, for 3 years after medical retirement to help ease transition 

from DOD to VA; and extending and making permanent the charter of the ‘‘Special 

Oversight Committee’’ to ensure improved and enduring coordination with DOD and 

VA initiatives to help wounded warriors. 

DES

In response to the Dole/Shalala Commission Report a pilot program was created 

(NDAA for Fiscal Year 2008—Public Law 110–181) known as the Disability Evaluation System (DES). The pilot provides a single disability exam conducted to VA 

standards that will be used by both VA and DOD and a single disability rating by 

VA that is binding upon both Departments. The program, now called the Integrated 

Disability Evaluation System (IDES) recently became permanent and is being imVerDate Aug 31 2005 09:55 Jan 25, 2012 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00078 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 Y:\BORAWSKI\DOCS\68089.TXT JUNE PsN: JUNEB
73 

plemented at military medical facilities. This is a common-sense approach that FRA 

believes will reduce bureaucratic red-tape and help streamline the process throughout the entire disability rating system. Despite jurisdictional concerns, the Association urges the subcommittee to provide oversight as the IDES is implemented. According to a recent GAO report the new system takes 10 months to traverse as compared to the current system that on average takes about 18 months. 

Achieving an effective delivery system between DOD and VA to guarantee seamless transition and quality services for wounded personnel, particularly those suffering from Post Traumatic Stress (PTS) and Traumatic Brain Injuries (TBI) is very 

important to our membership. DOD should also make every effort to de-stigmatize 

mental health conditions that should include outreach, counseling, and mental 

health assessment for all servicemembers returning from the combat zone. 

SUICIDE RATES

FRA is deeply concerned about military suicide rates. Active duty suicides have 

been reduced or at least leveled off, but suicides for non-active duty Reserve component are increasing. 

For example, the Marine Corps ended calendar year 2010 with suicides at a 3- 

year low. The Service reported 37 confirmed or suspected suicides in 2010 as compared to 52 in 2009, and 173 marines attempted suicide in 2010, which is 9 more 

than the previous year. The Navy reports a decline from 46 per 100,000 personnel 

in 2009 to 38 in 2010. Despite this, attempted suicides have increased since 2006. 

Intervention has been helpful for active duty personnel but suicides for the Reserve component (RC) not on active duty are increasing. Regarding these, (all Services and Guard), 145 suicides were reported for 2010 which reflects a significant increase from 80 suicides the previous year. A March 30, 2011 Fox News segment indicated that Guard and Reserve suicides are increasing and that 85 percent of those 

committing suicide in the Guard and Reserve had jobs. A common theme also appears to be marriage problems (see USFSPA section below for related information.) 

FRA supports legislation (H.R. 208) sponsored by Rep. Thomas Rooney that authorizes reimbursement for mental health counseling under TRICARE. 

DEFENSE BUDGET

FRA supports a defense budget of at least 5 percent of GDP that will adequately 

fund both people and weapons programs. The current level of defense spending (4.7 

percent including supplemental spending in fiscal year 2010) is significantly lower 

than past wartime periods as a percentage of GDP and the Association is concerned 

that the administration’s 5-year spending plan of 1 percent above inflation may not 

be adequate in maintaining readiness and associated support for both people programs and weapon systems. 

ACTIVE DUTY PAY

FRA appreciates that the military has been excluded from the pay freeze for Federal employees announced by President Obama on November 29, 2010 and supports 

the proposed 1.6 percent pay increase that equals the 2010 Employment Cost Index 

(ECI). The United States however, is in the 10th year of war and there is no more 

compelling issue for our current warriors than adequate pay. 

A total of 92 percent of active duty personnel who responded to FRA’s recent quality of life issues survey consider pay as ‘‘very important,’’ which was the highest rating. The Association appreciates the strong support from this distinguished subcommittee in reducing the 13.5 percent pay gap to 2.4 percent since 1999 and reiterates the fact that the ECI lags 15 months behind the effect date of pay adjustments 

due to budget preparation and associated congressional action on annual authorizing and appropriations legislation. The enacted fiscal year 2011 1.4 percent pay 

increase and proposed fiscal year 2012 adjustment are equal the ECI, are the smallest pay increases in recent memory, and do not further reduce the pay gap. 

The Association recommends that this distinguished subcommittee authorize an 

active duty pay increase at least equal to the ECI so as not to increase the pay gap 

between civilian and military pay. 

END STRENGTHS

Sufficient military end strengths are vital for success in Afghanistan and to sustaining other operations vital to our national security. FRA is concerned about calls 

for reducing end strength in the out years to save money on the Defense budget 

while we’re still engaged in war in Iraq and Afghanistan. The strain of repeated deployments continues and is reflected in troubling stress-related statistics that inVerDate Aug 31 2005 09:55 Jan 25, 2012 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00079 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 Y:\BORAWSKI\DOCS\68089.TXT JUNE PsN: JUNEB
74 

clude alarming suicide rates, prescription drug abuse, alcohol use, and military divorce rates. These are also related to the adequacy of end strengths and the need 

for adequate dwell time between deployments—issues that have been repeatedly addressed in congressional oversight hearings. 

CONCURRENT RECEIPT

FRA’s recent survey indicates that nearly 70 percent of military retirees cite concurrent receipt as ‘‘very important.’’ The Association supports Senate Majority Leader, Harry Reid’s ‘‘Retired Pay Restoration Act’’ (S. 344) and Rep. Sanford Bishop’s 

‘‘Disabled Veterans Tax Termination Act’’ (H.R. 333). Both proposals would authorize comprehensive concurrent receipt reform, and Rep. Gus Bilirakis’ ‘‘Retired Pay 

Restoration Act’’ (H.R. 303) would authorize current receipt for retirees receiving 

CRDP with a disability rating of 50 percent or less. 

The Association is disappointed that the administration failed to address concurrent receipt reform in its budget request as it has for the last 2 years, but strongly 

supports House Personnel Subcommittee Chairman Joe Wilson’s bill (H.R. 186), that 

expands concurrent receipt for servicemembers who were medically retired with less 

than 20 years of service (Chapter 61 retirees) and would be phased-in over 5 years. 

This proposal mirrors the administration’s proposal from the 110th Congress. In 

2008, Congress voted to expand eligibility for Combat-Related Special Compensation 

(CRSC) coverage to Chapter 61 retirees and the proposed legislation would, in effect, 

extend eligibility for Concurrent Retirement and Disability Pay (CRDP) to all Chapter 61 retirees over 5 years. 

USFSPA

FRA again urges Congress to take a serious look at the Uniformed Services 

Former Spouses Protection Act (USFSPA) with a goal of addressing inequities in the 

law and amending language therein to ensure that the Federal Government is adequately protecting servicemembers against State courts that ignore provisions of 

poorly written law. As noted above, marriage problems may also be associated with 

suicide rates. 

The USFSPA was enacted 29 years ago, the result of congressional maneuvering 

that denied the opposition an opportunity to express its views in open public hearings. The last hearing, in 1999, was conducted by the House Veterans’ Affairs Committee rather than the Armed Services Committee which has oversight authority for 

amending the law. 

Few provisions of the USFSPA protect the rights of the servicemember, and none 

are enforceable by the Department of Justice or DOD. If a State court violates the 

right of the servicemember under the provisions of USFSPA, the Solicitor General 

will make no move to reverse the error. Why? Because the act fails to have the enforceable language required for Justice or the Defense Department to react. The 

only recourse is for the servicemember to appeal to the court, which in many cases 

gives that court jurisdiction over the member. Some State courts also award a percentage of veterans’ compensation to ex-spouses, a clear violation of U.S. law; yet, 

the Federal Government does nothing to stop this. 

Other provisions weigh heavily in favor of former spouses including divorce decrees in which the former spouse is awarded a percentage of the servicemember’s 

retired pay which should be based on the member’s pay grade at the time of the 

divorce—not at a higher grade that may be held upon retirement. 

FRA believes that the Pentagon USFSPA study recommendations strike a balance 

providing needed improvements for the former spouse and servicemember and are 

a reasonable starting point for reform. 

RESERVE EARLY RETIREMENT

The Reserve retirement age provision in the NDAA for Fiscal Year 2008 reduces 

the age requirement by 3 months for each cumulative 90-days ordered to active duty 

is effective upon the enactment of the legislation (January 28, 2008) and NOT retroactive to October 7, 2001. Accordingly the Association supports ‘‘The National 

Guardsmen and Reservists Parity for Patriots Act ’’ (H.R. 181) sponsored by Chairman Wilson, to authorize reservists mobilized since October 7, 2001, to receive credit in determining eligibility for receipt of early retired pay. Since September 11, 

2001 the Reserve component has changed from a Strategic Reserve to an Operational Reserve and the Association urges the subcommittee to support this important legislation. 

75 

RETENTION OF FINAL FULL MONTH’S RETIRED PAY

FRA urges the subcommittee to authorize the retention of the full final month’s 

retired pay by the surviving spouse (or other designated survivor) of a military retiree for the month in which the member was alive for at least 24 hours. FRA 

strongly supports ‘‘The Military Retiree Survivor Comfort Act’’ (H.R. 493), introduced by Rep. Walter Jones. 

Current regulations require survivors of deceased Armed Forces retirees to return 

any retirement payment received in the month the retiree passes away or any subsequent month thereafter. Upon the demise of a retired servicemember in receipt 

of military retired pay the surviving spouse is to notify the department of the death. 

Without consideration of the survivor’s financial status, the Defense Finance and 

Accounting Service (DFAS) then stops payment on the retirement account, recalculates the final payment to cover only the days in the month the retiree was alive, 

forwards a check for those days to the surviving spouse (beneficiary) and, if not reported in a timely manner, recoups any payment(s) made covering periods subsequent to the retiree’s death. 

The measure is related to a similar Department of Veterans’ Affairs pay policy 

enacted in 1996 that allows a surviving spouse to retain the veteran’s disability and 

VA pension payments issued for the month of the veteran’s death. FRA believes 

military retired pay should be no different. 

MILITARY RESALE SYSTEM

FRA strongly supports adequate funding for the Defense Commissary Agency 

(DeCA) to ensure access to the commissary benefit for all beneficiaries. As noted by 

Thomas T. Gordy, President of the Armed Forces Marketing Council, at a recent 

oversight hearing by the House Armed Services Personnel Subcommittee, ‘‘Since 

2000, DeCA’s budget has remained flat in real dollars, meaning they have done 

more with less for the past 11 years.’’ He also reported that ‘‘With the $1.31 billion 

DeCA received in 2010, it generated savings to military families in the amount of 

$2.69 billion.’’ 

The Association also strongly supports the military exchange systems (AAFES, 

NEXCOM, and MCX), and urges against revisiting the concept of consolidation. FRA 

instead urges a thorough review of the findings of an extensive and costly ($17 million) multi-year study which found that this is not a cost-effective approach to running these important systems. 

Our members are also concerned about the impact of the ‘‘Tax Increase Prevention and Reconciliation Act’’ (P.L. 109–222) on the Military Resale System. Withholding 3 percent on payments to vendors that provide products sold in exchanges 

and commissaries will result in part to higher costs being passed on to beneficiaries 

and reduce resources to support MWR programs. Accordingly, FRA asks for support 

to exempt the Military Resale System from the law which becomes effective on January 1, 2012. 

FIT BUT NOT DEPLOYABLE

FRA appreciates the inclusion of Section 571 in the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2010 which addresses the discredited practice of finding a 

servicemember fit but nondeployable who is then given an administrative discharge 

without benefits. This provision requires approval by a Physical Evaluation Board 

(PEB) and requires the Secretary of Defense to make the final adjudication. The Association urges this subcommittee to provide continued oversight to ensure disabled 

servicemembers are adequately compensated for their injuries and illnesses incurred 

while serving our country. 

PCS REFORM

A recent Navy Times poll indicates that nearly 41 percent of servicemembers had 

more than one problem with their most recent permanent change of station move 

(PCS). FRA supports legislation sponsored by Sen. Mark Begich entitled ‘‘The 

Servicemembers Permanent Change of Station Relief Act’’ (S. 472) which would authorize reimbursement for shipping a second POV to Alaska, Hawaii, and Guam; 

and increase PCS mileage rates from 24 to 51 cents per mile. 

TRAVEL COST REIMBURSEMENT

FRA appreciates the NDAA for Fiscal Year 2008 provision (section 631) that permits travel reimbursement for reservist’s weekend drills, not to exceed $300, if the 

commute is outside the normal commuting distance. The Association urges the subcommittee to make this a mandatory provision. This is a priority issue for many enVerDate Aug 31 2005 09:55 Jan 25, 2012 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00081 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 Y:\BORAWSKI\DOCS\68089.TXT JUNE PsN: JUNEB
76 

listed reservists who must travel long distances to participate in weekend drills 

without reimbursement for travel costs. Providing this travel reimbursement would 

assist with retention and recruitment of reservists—particularly during the current 

period of increased reliance on these personnel to sustain the war effort and other 

operational commitments. 

FLEXIBLE SPENDING ACCOUNTS

Many military families need flexible spending accounts that are available to most 

civilian employees and to Federal civilian workers. The accounts allow 

servicemembers to invest their earnings that are matched dollar-for-dollar by the 

Federal Government up to a specific amount. DOD has authority to implement flexible spending accounts but has elected not to do so which is why FRA supports legislation (S. 387) sponsored by Sens. Barbara Boxer, Richard Burr, and Kristin 

Gillibrand, and legislation (H.R. 791) sponsored by Rep. Loretta Sanchez. These proposals would mandate that DOD set up flexible spending accounts within 6 months 

after enactment and would require the Pentagon to study the feasibility of flexible 

spending accounts for the Reserve component. 

CONCLUSION

FRA is grateful for the opportunity to present these recommendations to this distinguished subcommittee. 

Senator WEBB. Thank you very much, Master Chief Barnes. 

Colonel Strobridge, welcome. 

STATEMENT OF COL. STEVEN P. STROBRIDGE, USAF (RET.), DIRECTOR OF GOVERNMENT RELATIONS, MILITARY OFFICERS 

ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA 

Mr. STROBRIDGE. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. 

We very much appreciate this opportunity to present our views. 

My portion of the Coalition’s testimony will cover healthcare issues. 

Our primary concern is protection of military beneficiaries 

against dramatic budget-driven fluctuations in this vital element, 

a servicemember’s career compensation package. One example is 

the Deficit Commission’s proposal to reduce the value of TRICARE 

for Life by $3,000 per year for a retiree, $6,000 for a couple, for 

older and disabled beneficiaries, through deductible and copayment 

increases. That would be a major about-face from what Congress 

saw as ‘‘earned coverage’’ when TRICARE for Life was enacted 10 

years ago. We hope the subcommittee would oppose inclusion of 

any such change in the budget resolution. 

We also urge the subcommittee to continue its oversight of 

wounded warrior and caregiver issues. Although we believe both 

DOD and VA are pursuing seamless transition initiatives in good 

faith, we urge joint hearings by the Armed Services and Veterans’ 

Affairs Committees to track progress and any stumbling blocks on 

a wide variety of ongoing issues. 

The Coalition continues to be concerned about the adequacy of 

provider participation in TRICARE, especially for TRICARE Standard beneficiaries. We’re grateful to the subcommittee for establishing statutory surveys of participation adequacy, but that requirement expires this year. We hope you’ll renew the requirement 

and establish more specific actions to ensure compliance with participation standards. 

On the issue of TRICARE fees, the Coalition has a diversity of 

views, but believes strongly that the DOD proposed indexing methodology is inappropriate. Speaking for MOAA and the 13 other associations that endorsed our statement, we haven’t taken the posiVerDate Aug 31 2005 09:55 Jan 25, 2012 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00082 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 Y:\BORAWSKI\DOCS\68089.TXT JUNE PsN: JUNEB
77 

tion that TRICARE fees should never rise, but that Congress 

should establish principles in that regard to explicitly recognize 

that the bulk of what military people pay for their healthcare isn’t 

paid in cash, but is paid upfront through decades of service and 

sacrifice. We’re encouraged that the new DOD proposal does a far 

better job of acknowledging that than did those of several years 

ago. 

Our principal objection is to DOD’s plan to index future 

TRICARE prime increases to some undetermined healthcare index 

they project to rise at 6.2 percent per year. In our view, the main 

problem is that current law leaves much of the fee-setting process 

to the Secretary’s discretion. DOD went years proposing no 

changes, making beneficiaries believe there wouldn’t be any. Then 

a new Secretary with a new budget situation proposed tripling fees, 

which upset beneficiaries and implied they hadn’t earned their 

healthcare. 

We have statutory guidelines for setting and adjusting basic pay, 

retired pay, survivor benefits, and most other military compensation elements. We believe strongly that the law should specify several principles on military healthcare. 

First, it should acknowledge, if only as a Sense of Congress, that 

the military retirement and healthcare package is the primary offset for the extraordinary demands and sacrifices inherent in a 

multidecades military career. 

Second, it should acknowledge that those decades of service and 

sacrifice constitute a very large prepaid premium for their 

healthcare and retirement, over and above what they pay in cash. 

Finally, it should explicitly acknowledge that extraordinary upfront 

premium in the adjustment process by limiting the percentage 

growth in TRICARE fees in any year to the percentage growth in 

military retired pay. 

In the meantime, MOAA and TMC pledge our support to work 

with DOD and the subcommittee to find other ways to hold down 

military healthcare cost growth. We believe much more can be done 

to encourage voluntary use of the mail-order pharmacy system, reduce costs of chronic conditions, reduce systemic duplications, and 

cut contract and procurement costs, to name a few. 

Thank you. That concludes my portion of the statement. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Strobridge follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT BY THE MILITARY COALITION

Mr. Chairman and distinguished members of the subcommittee, on behalf of The 

Military Coalition (TMC), a consortium of nationally prominent uniformed services 

and veterans’ organizations, we are grateful to the committee for this opportunity 

to express our views concerning issues affecting the uniformed services community. 

This testimony provides the collective views of the following military and veterans’ 

organizations, which represent approximately 5.5 million current and former members of the 7 uniformed services, plus their families and survivors: 

• Air Force Association 

• Air Force Sergeants Association 

• Air Force Women Officers Associated 

• AMVETS (American Veterans) 

• Army Aviation Association of America 

• Association of Military Surgeons of the United States 

• Association of the U.S. Army 

• Association of the U.S. Navy 

• Chief Warrant Officer and Warrant Officer Association, U.S. Coast Guard 

78 

• Commissioned Officers Association of the U.S. Public Health Service, Inc. • Enlisted Association of the National Guard of the United States • Fleet Reserve Association • Gold Star Wives of America, Inc. • Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America • Jewish War Veterans of the United States of America • Marine Corps League • Marine Corps Reserve Association • Military Chaplains Association of the United States of America • Military Officers Association of America • Military Order of the Purple Heart • National Association for Uniformed Services • National Guard Association of the United States • National Military Family Association • Naval Enlisted Reserve Association • Noncommissioned Officers Association • Reserve Enlisted Association • Reserve Officers Association • Society of Medical Consultants to the Armed Forces • The Retired Enlisted Association • U.S. Army Warrant Officers Association • U.S. Coast Guard Chief Petty Officers Association • Vietnam Veterans of America 

The Military Coalition, Inc. does not receive any grants or contracts from the Federal Government. 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Deficit Reduction Proposals 

Cost-of-Living Adjustments (COLAs) 

A top Coalition priority is to guard against any discriminatory treatment of retired members of the uniformed services compared to other Federal COLA-eligibles 

and to ensure continued fulfillment of congressional COLA intent ‘‘to provide every 

military retired member the same purchasing power of the retired pay to which he 

was entitled at the time of retirement [and ensure it is] not, at any time in the future . . . eroded by subsequent increases in consumer prices.’’ 

Military Pay 

The Coalition urges against short-sighted proposals to freeze or cap uniformed 

services pay raises below private sector pay growth, and recommends a 2012 raise 

of at least 1.6 percent to match Employment Cost Index (ECI) growth. 

Health Care Fees 

Coalition member associations hold a diversity of views concerning the Department of Defense (DOD)-proposed TRICARE fee adjustments for fiscal year 2012. 

However, the Coalition strongly objects to the DOD-proposed adjustment methodology that would tie TRICARE Prime fee increases for nondisabled military beneficiaries aged 38 to 64 in future years to an as-yet-unspecified measure of health 

cost growth for the broader population that DOD actuaries assume would grow at 

an average of 6.2 percent per year. 

The Coalition believes that military beneficiaries from whom America has demanded decades of extraordinary service and sacrifice have earned coverage that is 

the best America has to offer, consistent with their extraordinarily high pre-paid 

premiums of decades of service and sacrifice. 

Congress needs to protect military beneficiaries against dramatic budget-driven 

fluctuations in this vital element of servicemembers’ career compensation incentive 

package. 

Reducing the value of TRICARE for Life by $3,000 per year ($6,000 for a couple) 

as recommended by the Deficit Commission would be inconsistent with military 

beneficiaries’ sacrifices and would undermine Congress’ intent when it authorized 

TFL in 2001—less than 10 years ago. 

Reducing military retirement benefits would be particularly ill-advised when an 

overstressed force already is at increasing retention risk despite the current downturn of the economy and current recruiting successes. 

TMC believes: 

• All retired servicemembers earned equal health care coverage by virtue 

of their service. 

• Means-testing has no place in setting military health fees. 

79 

• Congress should direct DOD to pursue any and all options to constrain 

the growth of health care spending in ways that do not disadvantage beneficiaries. 

• TRICARE Prime enrollment fees for nondisabled retirees under 65 should 

not be adjusted based on health cost increases for the broader population, 

as proposed by DOD. 

• It should be Congress’ responsibility, not the Defense Secretary’s, to establish appropriate and stable parameters governing crucial career retention programs such as the healthcare package for currently serving and retired military members and their families and survivors. 

Military Retirement 

The Coalition strongly opposes initiatives that would ‘‘civilianize’’ the military retirement system and inadequately recognize the unique and extraordinary demands 

and sacrifices inherent in a military career. 

Reducing incentives for serving arduous careers of 20 years or more can only undermine long-term retention and readiness, with particularly adverse effects in 

times of war. Simultaneously increasing compensation for those who leave short of 

fulfilling a career would only compound those adverse effects. 

DOD Schools 

The Coalition opposes closing or curtailing DOD dependent schools based primarily on budget concerns. The need for the schools should continue to be evaluated 

based on the capacity of local school districts to provide quality educational opportunities for military students. 

Consolidation of DOD Retail Operations 

The Coalition supports continuing efforts to improve commissary and exchange 

program efficiency, but objects to initiatives that reduce benefit value for patrons 

and the associated retention value for the uniformed services. 

Wounded Warrior Care 

Institutional Oversight 

The Coalition urges joint hearings by the Armed Services and Veterans Affairs 

Committees to assess the effectiveness of current seamless transition oversight efforts and systems and to solicit views and recommendations from DOD, VA, the 

military Services, and nongovernmental organizations concerning how joint communication, cooperation, and oversight could be improved. In addition, the hearings 

should focus on implementation progress concerning: 

• Single separation physical; 

• Single disability evaluation system; 

• Bidirectional electronic medical and personnel records data transfer; 

• Medical centers of excellence operations and research projects; 

• Coordination of care and treatment, including DOD–VA Federal/recovery 

care coordinator clinical and non-clinical services and case management 

programs; and 

• Consolidated government agency support services, programs, and benefits. 

Continuity of Health Care 

The Coalition recommends: 

• Authorizing service-disabled members and their families to receive activeduty-level TRICARE benefits, independent of availability of VA care for 3 

years after medical retirement to help ease their transition from DOD to 

VA. 

• Ensuring Guard and Reserve members have adequate access and treatment in the DOD and VA health systems for Post Traumatic Stress Disorder and Traumatic Brain Injury following separation from active duty 

service in a theatre of operations. 

Caregiver/Family Support Services 

The Coalition recommends: 

• Providing enhanced training of DOD and VA medical and support staff 

on the vital importance of involving and informing designated caregivers in 

treatment of and communication with severely ill and injured personnel. 

• Providing health and respite care for non-dependent caregivers (e.g., parents and siblings) who have had to sacrifice their own employment and 

health coverage while the injured member remains on active duty, commenVerDate Aug 31 2005 09:55 Jan 25, 2012 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00085 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 Y:\BORAWSKI\DOCS\68089.TXT JUNE PsN: JUNEB
80 

surate with what the VA authorizes for medically retired or separated 

members’ caregivers. 

• Authorizing up to 1 year of continued residence in on-base housing facilities for medically retired, severely wounded, ill, and injured servicemembers and their families. 

Active Forces and Their Families 

End Strength 

The Coalition urges the subcommittee to: 

• Sustain or increase end strength as needed to sustain the war and other 

operational requirements and enhance dwell time for servicemembers and 

families; and 

• Sustain adequate recruiting and retention resources to enable the uniformed services to achieve required optimum-quality personnel strength. 

Family Readiness and Support 

The Coalition recommends that the subcommittee: 

• Encourage DOD to assess the effectiveness of programs and support 

mechanisms designed to assist military members and their families with 

deployment readiness, responsiveness, and reintegration. 

• Fully fund effective programs and ensure their costs are included in the 

annual budget process. 

• Expand child care availability and funding to meet the needs of the total 

force uniformed services community. 

• Monitor and continue to expand family access to mental health counseling. 

• Promote expanded opportunities for military spouses to further educational and career goals, such as the My Career Advancement Account 

(MyCAA) program. 

• Promote implementation of flexible spending accounts to enable military 

families to pay health care and child care expenses with pre-tax dollars. 

Permanent Change-of-Station (PCS) Allowances 

The Coalition recommends the subcommittee: 

• Authorize shipment of a second privately-owned vehicle at government 

expense to Alaska, Hawaii, and U.S. territories. 

• Authorize reimbursement of house-hunting expenses, as is done for Federal civilians. 

• Authorize payment of a dislocation allowance to servicemembers making 

their final change of station upon retirement from the uniformed services. 

• Increase PCS mileage rates to more accurately reflect actual transportation costs. 

• Further modify the PCS weight allowance tables for personnel in pay 

grades E–7, E–8, and E–9 to coincide with allowances for officers in grades 

O–4, O–5, and O–6 respectively. The allowance for a senior E–9 enlisted 

leader without dependents remains the same as for a single O–3, despite 

the normal accumulation of household goods over the course of a career. 

National Guard and Reserve 

Operational Reserve Retention and Retirement Reform 

TMC recommends: 

• Authorizing early retirement credit to all Guard and Reserve members 

who have served active duty tours of at least 90 days, retroactive to September 11, 2001. 

• Eliminating the fiscal year limitation which effectively denies full early 

retirement credit for active duty tours that span the October 1 start date 

of a fiscal year. 

• Modernizing the Reserve retirement system to incentivize continued service beyond 20 years and provide fair recognition of increased requirements 

for active duty service. 

Health Care Access Options 

The Coalition recommends: 

• Requiring DOD to justify the seven-fold increase in TRICARE rates for 

individual TRR premiums for reservists who immediately enroll in TRR 

upon retirement from the Selected Reserve and have TRS coverage until 

separation. 

81 

• Authorizing TRICARE for early Reserve retirees who are in receipt of retired pay prior to age 60 

• Permitting employers to pay TRS premiums for reservist-employees as a 

bottom-line incentive for hiring and retaining them. 

• Authorizing an option for the government to subsidize continuation of a 

civilian employer’s family coverage during periods of activation, similar to 

FEHBP coverage for activated Guard-Reserve employees of Federal agencies. 

• Extending corrective dental care following return from a call-up to ensure 

G–R members meet dental readiness standards. 

• Allowing eligibility in Continued Health Care Benefits Program (CHCBP) 

for Selected reservists who are voluntarily separating and subject to 

disenrollment from TRS. 

• Allowing beneficiaries of the FEHBP who are selected reservists the option of participating in TRICARE Reserve Select. 

Yellow Ribbon Reintegration Program 

The Military Coalition urges the subcommittee to hold oversight hearings and direct additional improvements in coordination, collaboration, and consistency of Yellow Ribbon services between States. 

Reserve Compensation System 

TMC recommends: 

• Crediting all inactive duty training points earned annually toward Reserve retirement. 

• Parity in special incentive pay for career enlisted/officer special aviation 

incentive pay, diving special duty pay, and pro-pay for Reserve component 

medical professionals. 

• Authorizing recalculation of retirement points after 1 year of mobilization. A recent law change allowed certain flag and general officers to recalculate retirement pay after 1 year of mobilization. TMC believes this opportunity should be made available to all ranks. 

Guard/Reserve GI Bill 

TMC recommends: 

• Restoring basic Reserve MGIB benefits for initially joining the Selected 

Reserve to the historic benchmark of 47–50 percent of active duty benefits. 

• Integrating Reserve and active duty MGIB laws in Title 38. 

• Enacting academic protections for mobilized Guard and Reserve students 

including refund guarantees and exemption of Federal student loan payments during activation. 

Family Support Programs 

TMC recommends: 

• Ensuring programs are in place to meet the special information and support needs of families of individual augmentees or those who are geographically dispersed. 

• Funding joint programs among military and community leaders to support servicemembers and families during all phases of deployments. 

• Providing preventive counseling services for servicemembers and families 

and training so they know when to seek professional help related to their 

circumstances. 

• Authorizing and funding child care, including respite care, family readiness group meetings and drill time. 

• Improving the joint family readiness program to facilitate understanding 

and sharing of information between all family members. 

Health Care 

TRICARE Reimbursement Rates 

TMC urges reversal of the 30 percent cut in Medicare/TRICARE payments to doctors scheduled for January 2012 and a permanent fix for the flawed formula that 

mandates these recurring annual threats to seniors’ and military beneficiaries’ 

health care access. 

TRICARE Cost Efficiency Options 

TMC continues to believe strongly that DOD has not sufficiently investigated options to make TRICARE more cost-efficient without shifting costs to beneficiaries. 

82 

TRICARE Prime 

The Military Coalition urges the subcommittee to: 

• Require reports from DOD and the managed care support contractors on 

actions being taken to improve Prime patient satisfaction, provide assured 

appointments within Prime access standards, reduce delays in 

preauthorization and referral appointments, and provide quality information to assist beneficiaries in making informed decisions. 

• Require increased DOD efforts to ensure consistency between the MTF 

and purchased care sectors in meeting Prime access standards. 

• Ensure timely notification of and support for beneficiaries affected by 

elimination of Prime service areas under the new TRICARE contracts. 

TRICARE Standard 

The Coalition urges the subcommittee to: 

• Insist on immediate delivery of an adequacy threshold for provider participation, below which additional action is required to improve such participation. 

• Require a specific report on participation adequacy in the localities where 

Prime Service Areas will be discontinued under the new TRICARE contracts. 

• Oppose establishment of a TRICARE Standard enrollment fee, since 

Standard does not entail any guaranteed access to care. 

• Increase locator support to beneficiaries seeking providers who will accept 

new Standard patients, particularly for mental health specialties. 

• Seek legislation to eliminate the limit when TRICARE Standard is second 

payer to other health insurance (OHI): e.g., return to the policy where 

TRICARE pays up to the amount it would have paid, had there been no 

OHI. 

• Bar any further increase in the TRICARE Standard inpatient copay for 

the foreseeable future. 

TRICARE For Life 

The Coalition urges the subcommittee to: 

• Resist initiatives to establish an enrollment fee for TFL, as many beneficiaries already experience difficulties finding providers who will accept 

Medicare patients. 

• Seek ways to include TFL beneficiaries in DOD programs to incentivize 

compliance with preventive care and healthy lifestyles. 

• Resolve the discrepancy between TRICARE and Medicare treatment of 

the shingles vaccine. 

Survivors’ Coverage 

The Coalition recommends restoration of TRICARE benefits to previously eligible 

survivors whose second or subsequent marriage ends in death or divorce. 

Pharmacy 

The Coalition urges the subcommittee to: 

• Advance the use of the mail order option by lowering or waiving copays, 

enhancing communication with beneficiaries, and using technological advances to ease initial signup. 

• Require DOD to include alternate packaging methods for pharmaceuticals 

to enable nursing home, assisted living, and hospice care beneficiaries to 

utilize the pharmacy program. Packaging options should additionally include beneficiaries living at home who would benefit from this program because of their medical condition (for example beginning stages of Alzheimer’s). 

• Create incentives to hold down long-term health costs by eliminating 

copays for medications for chronic conditions, such as asthma, diabetes, and 

hypertension or keeping copays at the lowest level regardless of drug status, brand or generic. 

Retiree Issues 

Concurrent Receipt 

The Coalition’s continuing goal is to fully eliminate the deduction of VA disability 

compensation from earned military retired pay for all disabled retirees. In pursuit 

of that goal, the Coalition’s immediate priorities include: 

83 

• Phasing out the VA disability offset for all chapter 61 (disability) retirees, 

as previously endorsed by the President and the subcommittee; 

• Clarifying the law to resolve technical disparities that inadvertently 

cause underpayment of certain eligibles for Combat Related Special Compensation (CRSC); and, 

• Clarifying the law to ensure a disabled retiree’s CRSC payment is not reduced when the retiree’s VA disability rating increases, until the retiree is 

afforded the opportunity to elect between CRSC or CRDP. 

Disability Severance Pay 

The Coalition recommends: 

• Further expanding eligibility to include all combat-related injuries, using 

the same definition as CRSC; and ultimately 

• Expanding eligibility to include all service-connected disabilities, consistent with TMC view that there should not be a distinction between the 

treatment of members disabled in combat vice members with non-combat, 

service-caused disabilities. 

Former Spouse Issues 

The Coalition supports legislative action to: 

• Base the award amount to the former spouse on the grade and years of 

service of the member at time of divorce (not time of retirement); 

• Prohibit the award of imputed income while on active duty, which effectively forces active duty members into retirement; 

• Extend 20/20/20 benefits to 20/20/15 former spouses; • Permit the designation of multiple Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP) beneficiaries with the presumption that SBP benefits must be proportionate to 

the allocation of retired pay; 

• Eliminate the ‘‘10-year Rule’’ for the direct payment of retired pay allocations by the Defense Finance and Accounting Service (DFAS); 

• Permit SBP premiums to be withheld from the former spouse’s share of 

retired pay if directed by court order; 

• Permit a former spouse to waive SBP coverage; • Repeal the 1-year deemed election requirement for SBP; and • Assist DOD and Services with greater outreach and expanded awareness 

to members and former spouses of their rights, responsibilities, and benefits 

upon divorce. 

Survivor Issues 

SBP–DIC Offset 

The Coalition recommends: 

• Repeal of the SBP–DIC offset. • Reinstating SBP for survivors who previously transferred payments to 

children when the youngest child attains majority, or upon termination of 

a remarriage. 

• Allowing SBP eligibility to switch to children if a surviving spouse is convicted of complicity in the member’s death. 

Special Needs Trust 

The Coalition recommends authorizing payment of SBP annuities for disabled survivors into a Special Needs Trust. 

Final Retired Paycheck 

TMC recommends authorizing survivors of retired members to retain the final 

month’s retired pay for the month in which the retiree dies, as VA survivors are 

allowed to retain a disabled veteran’s final-month disability paycheck. 

Morale, Welfare, and Recreation and Quality of Life Programs 

TMC urges the subcommittee to: 

• Seek report updates from DOD and the Services to ensure delivery of 

needed MWR and quality of life program support at gaining and losing locations affected by Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) and rebasing. 

• Direct DOD to report to Congress on all DOD and Service Active and Reserve component MWR Category A, B, and C Programs and Family Support/Readiness (Quality of Life [QoL] Programs), including the Yellow Ribbon Program. 

• Protect recreational and alternative therapy programs that integrate 

MWR, fitness and other quality of life programs and infrastructure to faciliVerDate Aug 31 2005 09:55 Jan 25, 2012 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00089 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 Y:\BORAWSKI\DOCS\68089.TXT JUNE PsN: JUNEB
84 

tate warrior treatment and care and to promote psychological health and 

welfare of troops and their families. 

Military Construction 

The Coalition recommends the subcommittee: 

• Support military construction projects that modernize or replace the following 

infrastructure to meet increased personnel and operational deployment requirements: 

• child development centers (CDCs) and youth centers; 

• defense schools; 

• bachelor and family housing; and, 

• other traditional QoL program facilities. 

• Encourage full funding of military housing repair and maintenance accounts 

to reduce backlogs and provide for safe, well-maintained housing units. 

• Ensure that military housing privatization initiatives meet expected DODService outcome goals and positively impact servicemember and family needs. 

• Support a Health Facilities Program that modernizes or replaces Military 

Treatment Facilities (MTFs) and supports world-class health care delivery capability and capacity for all eligible beneficiaries. 

• Ensure MWR, MILCON, housing, and family support construction policies 

and projects improve access for persons with disabilities. 

OVERVIEW

Mr. Chairman, The Military Coalition extends our thanks to you and the entire 

subcommittee for your strong support of our Active Duty, Guard, Reserve, retired 

members, and veterans of the uniformed services and their families and survivors. 

Your efforts have had a significant and positive impact in the lives of the entire uniformed services community. 

This past year was extremely arduous, with servicemembers still at war on two 

separate fronts in southwest Asia and the Nation slowly recovering from the recent 

economic crisis. Congress and the administration have had difficult choices to make 

as they attempted to stimulate the economy while facing record-breaking budget 

deficits. 

We are grateful that both the Defense Department and Congress placed top priority on personnel issues last year. As we enter the 10th year of intense wartime 

operations, the Coalition believes that this prioritization should continue for fiscal 

year 2012. 

Despite the extraordinary demands, men and women in uniform are still answering the call—thanks in no small measure to the subcommittee’s strong and consistent support—but only at the cost of ever-greater sacrifices. 

Dramatic increases in suicide rates reflect the long-term effects of requiring the 

same people to return to combat again and again—and yet again. 

In these times of growing political and economic pressures, the Coalition relies on 

the continued good judgment of the Armed Services Committees to ensure the Nation allocates the required resources to sustain a strong national defense, and in 

particular, to properly meet the pressing needs of the less than 1 percent of the 

American population—servicemembers and their families—who protect the freedoms 

of the 99 percent. 

In this testimony, The Coalition offers our collective recommendations on what 

needs to be done to meet these essential needs. 

DEFICIT REDUCTION PROPOSALS

The National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform and several less 

publicized deficit-reduction panels have proposed a wide range of spending cuts, including proposed cutbacks in Federal cost-of-living adjustments (COLAs); defense 

spending, including military pay and retirement; and Federal health care programs, 

including TRICARE and TRICARE for Life. 

The Coalition agrees with the fiscal commission’s key premise: ‘‘America cannot 

be great if we go broke.’’ The rapidly growing debt problem facing our country is 

all too real, and there is no easy fix. Solving this problem for the long term will 

involve shared pain by all Americans. 

Congress has improved retention and readiness by addressing a number of quality 

of life issues for the military community over the last decade, authorizing TRICARE 

For Life and TRICARE Senior Pharmacy coverage, establishing concurrent receipt 

for most severely disabled and combat-disabled retirees, improving pay and allowances for currently serving personnel, upgrading health coverage for the Guard and 

85 

Reserve community, passing major GI Bill improvements, and eliminating the age62 SBP reduction for military widows, among other important initiatives. 

Now, ironically, critics decry the growth in personnel and health care spending 

since 2000. To put that in context, it’s important to recall that there were compelling reasons why all of those changes needed to be enacted. 

Twelve years ago, military leaders were complaining of retention problems as decades of pay raise caps had depressed military pay nearly 14 percent below private 

sector pay. Military retirees and their spouses were being unceremoniously dumped 

from military health coverage at age 65 and all disabled retirees were forced to fund 

their own VA disability compensation from their service-earned retired pay. Survivor Benefit Program (SBP) widows suffered a 34-percent benefit cut at age 62, and 

GI Bill benefits had eroded dramatically, among many other challenges. 

Congress’ actions to address those problems were spurred in no small part by national concern to protect the interests of military people whose severe and extended 

wartime sacrifices have been highlighted on every front page and every evening 

newscast for nearly a decade. 

A more extended view of history demonstrates that public and congressional support for protecting military people programs can fade quickly in times of strained 

budgets or when a period of extended military conflict is (or is expected to be) coming to an end. That was true in the 1940s, 1950s, 1970s, 1980s and 1990s. 

As Congress assesses how to fairly allocate necessary sacrifices among the various 

segments of the population, the Coalition urges that you bear in mind that: 

• Assertions about personnel and health cost growth since 2000 are highly 

misleading, because 2000 is not an appropriate baseline for comparison. As 

mentioned above, that was the nadir of the erosion of benefits era, when 

military pay was nearly 14 percent below private sector pay, currently serving members had suffered a major retirement cutback, older retirees and 

their families were being jettisoned from any military health coverage, disabled retirees and survivors were suffering dramatic financial penalties, 

and retention and readiness were suffering as a result. Congressional action 

(and spending) to fix those problems was a necessary thing, not a bad thing. 

• No segment of the population has been called upon for more sacrifice 

than the military community. Currently serving military members have 

been asked to bear 100 percent of our Nation’s wartime sacrifice while the 

broader population was asked to contribute to the war effort by ‘‘going shopping.’’ 

• Retired servicemembers, their families and survivors also have been no 

stranger to sacrifice. Hundreds of thousands of today’s retirees served in 

multiple wars, including Iraq and Afghanistan, Gulf War I, Vietnam, 

Korea, and WWII eras, and the multiple conflicts and cold wars in between. 

Older retirees endured years when the government provided them no military health coverage, and those under 65 already have forfeited an average 

10 percent of earned retired pay because they retired under pay tables that 

were depressed by decades of capping military pay raises below private sector pay growth. 

• There is a readiness element to military compensation decisions beyond 

the budgetary element. Regardless of good or bad budget times, a military 

career is a unique and arduous calling that cannot be equated to civilian 

employment. Sufficient numbers of high-quality personnel will choose to 

pursue a career in uniform only if they perceive that the extreme commitment demanded of them is reciprocated by a grateful nation, and the 

unique rewards for completing such a career are commensurate with the 

unique burden of sacrifice that they and their families are required to accept over the course of it. 

• Military members’ and families’ sacrifices must not be taken for granted 

by assuming they will continue to serve and endure regardless of significant 

changes in their career incentive package. 

• History shows clearly that there are unacceptable retention and readiness consequences for short-sighted budget decisions that cause 

servicemembers to believe their steadfast commitment to protecting their 

nation’s interests is poorly reciprocated. 

Cost-of-Living Adjustments (COLAs) 

The Fiscal Commission has proposed adjusting the Consumer Price Index (CPI) 

methodology to the so-called ‘‘chained CPI’’ calculation as a means of holding down 

COLA growth for military and Federal civilian retired pay, Social Security, and all 

other Federal annuities over time. 

86 

Proponents of the chained CPI say it more accurately reflects changes in annuitants’ cost of living by recognizing that their purchasing behavior changes as prices 

change. If the price of beef rises, for example, consumers may purchase more chicken and less beef. 

The real issue with the chained CPI is whether one is measuring changes in 

prices or changes in quality of life. If one continues the logical progression of the 

argument, consumers might find themselves substituting hot dogs or pasta for 

chicken, etc. 

The Bureau of Labor Statistics has estimated that implementation of the chained 

CPI would depress COLAs by about one-quarter of a percentage point per year. 

The DOD actuary estimates that inflation will average 3 percent per year over 

the long term. 

Using those two estimates, applying chained-CPI COLAs for a servicemember retiring at age 42 would yield about 10 percent less in his or her retired paycheck 

at age 80 relative to the current COLA system. 

Some members of the deficit commission previously have proposed delaying any 

COLAs on military retired pay until age 60 or later, barring COLAs on annuity levels above some set dollar amount, or reducing the CPI by one-half percent or a full 

percentage point per year. 

The Coalition believes such initiatives would constitute a major breach of faith 

with military people and constitute a grossly disproportional penalty. 

COLAs are particularly important to military retirees, disabled retirees, and survivors because they start drawing their annuities at younger ages than most other 

COLA-eligibles and thus experience the compounding effects over a greater number 

of years. To the extent that COLAs fail to keep up with living costs, real purchasing 

power continues to decline ever more dramatically as long as one lives. 

A top Coalition priority is to guard against any discriminatory treatment of retired members of the uniformed services compared to other Federal COLA-eligibles 

and to ensure continued fulfillment of congressional COLA intent ‘‘to provide every 

military retired member the same purchasing power of the retired pay to which he 

was entitled at the time of retirement [and ensure it is] not, at any time in the future . . . eroded by subsequent increases in consumer prices.’’ 

Military Pay 

The Fiscal Commission’s co-chairs proposed freezing ‘‘non-combat’’ military pay 

and allowances for 3 years. 

The Coalition is grateful that the President exempted the uniformed services community from the fiscal year 2011 Federal pay freeze, and thanks the subcommittee 

for its consistent commitment to restoring and sustaining pay comparability with 

the private sector—a fundamental underpinning of the All-Volunteer Force. 

History has shown that capping military raises is a slippery slope that has never 

ended well. 

Throughout the 1980s and 1990s, military pay raises were consistently capped 

below private sector pay growth, causing a ‘‘pay comparability gap’’ which reached 

13.5 percent in 1998–99, and contributed significantly to serious retention problems. 

Congress has made great strides in the intervening years paring the gap by approving military raises that have been at least .5 percent above private sector pay 

growth. 

Now that significant progress has been made and the ‘‘erosion of pay and benefits’’ 

retention-related problems have abated, some have renewed calls to cut back on 

military raises, create a new comparability standard, or substitute more bonuses for 

pay raises in the interests of deficit reduction. 

The Defense Department is advocating a new comparability standard under which 

each pay and longevity cell would represent the 70th percentile of compensation for 

similarly-educated civilians. A 2010 Congressional Budget Office report asserted 

that, considering adjustments in housing allowances, military people actually are 

paid 10 percent more than their civilian counterparts in terms of Regular Military 

Compensation (RMC), composed of basic pay, food and housing allowances, and the 

tax advantage that accrues because the allowances are tax-free. 

The Coalition believes these assertions are fundamentally flawed. 

First, the RMC concept was developed in the 1960s, when all servicemembers received the same allowances, regardless of location, and the allowances were arbitrary figures that weren’t actually based on anything. In the interim, Congress has 

transformed the allowances into reimbursements for actual food costs and median 

locality-based housing costs. 

If one were to use the RMC comparability methodology in this scenario, basic 

pay—the largest element of military compensation and the one that drives retired 

pay—would become a ‘‘flex’’ compensation element. With tax rates and allowances 

87 

figures set independently, a year in which average housing allowances rose (e.g., 

based on growth in high-cost areas) and taxes increased could actually yield a requirement to cut basic pay (and future retirement value) to restore comparability. 

Second, the Coalition is not convinced that the civilian comparison cohort or percentile comparison points proposed by DOD are the proper ones, given that the military: 

• Recruits from the top half of the civilian aptitude population; • Finds that only about 25 percent of America’s youth qualify for entry; • Requires career-long education and training advancement; and • Enforces a competitive ‘‘up-or-out’’ promotion system to ensure progressive quality enhancements among those with longer service. 

A fundamental requirement for any pay comparability standard is that it should 

be transparent and understandable. The Coalition has asked for, but has never been 

provided by DOD, any data on what civilian comparison cohort was selected and 

why, and what rationale was used to establish a specific percentile comparison 

point. 

Third, the Coalition believes it is essential to recognize that compensation is not 

simply the amount one is paid. It is pay divided by what’s required of the recipient 

to earn that pay. If we increase pay 25 percent but require 100 percent more sacrifice to earn it, that’s not a pay raise. 

In that context, today’s conditions of service are far more arduous than anything 

envisioned 40 years ago by the creators of the All-Volunteer Force, who believed a 

protracted war would require reinstitution of the draft. 

The Coalition agrees with the approach the subcommittee has consistently 

taken—that the best comparability measure is a comparison of the military basic 

pay raise percentage with the percentage growth private sector pay, as measured 

by the Bureau of Labor Statistics’ Employment Cost Index (ECI). 

The government uses the ECI for every other measure of private pay growth, and 

it’s very transparent to government leaders and servicemembers alike. 

The statutory ECI-based pay raise for 2012 is 1.6 percent—the second-smallest 

raise in nearly 50 years, exceeding only the 1.4 percent raise for 2011. The Coalition 

believes this is the least a grateful nation should do to acknowledge the continuing, 

extraordinary wartime sacrifices of currently serving members and families. 

The Coalition urges against short-sighted proposals to freeze or cap uniformed 

services pay raises below private sector pay growth, and recommends a 2012 raise 

of at least 1.6 percent to match ECI growth. 

Heath Care Fees 

The Fiscal Commission embraced the concept put forth by the Defense Department in past years that TRICARE benefits for retired beneficiaries should be 

brought more in line with civilian coverage by significantly increasing fees for retired beneficiaries and family members under 65. While no specific fee increases 

were cited, the implication is that they envisioned fee levels similar to those proposed by the Defense Department in past years, which Congress rejected as excessive. 

The Commission also recommended significant cutbacks in coverage by all Medicare supplements, including TRICARE For Life. Specifically, it proposed establishing a $500 annual deductible and limiting coverage to 50 percent of the next 

$5,000 after the deductible—effectively increasing annual out-of-pocket costs for 

TFL-eligibles by up to $3,000 per person per year ($6,000 for a married couple). 

The Coalition appreciates the subcommittee’s consistent support in recent years 

to protect beneficiaries from disproportional health care fee increases. 

We continue to object strongly to simple comparisons of military vs. civilian cash 

fees, which we see as ‘‘apple to orange’’ comparisons that ignore most of the very 

great price career military members and families pay for their coverage in retirement. 

The unique package of military retirement benefits—of which a key component is 

a superior health care benefit—is the primary offset provided uniformed servicemembers for enduring a career of unique and extraordinary sacrifices that few 

Americans are willing to accept for 1 year, let alone 20 or 30. It is an unusual and 

essential compensation package which a grateful Nation provides to a relatively 

small fraction of the population who agree to subordinate their personal and family 

lives to protecting our national interests for so many years. This sacrifice, in a very 

real sense, constitutes a pre-paid premium for their future healthcare. 

For all practical purposes, those who wear the uniform of their country are enrolled in a 20- to 30-year prepayment plan that they must complete to earn lifetime 

health coverage. In this regard, military retirees and their families pay enormous 

‘‘up-front’’ premiums for such coverage through decades of service and sacrifice. 

88 

Once that prepayment is already rendered, the government cannot simply ignore it 

and focus only on post-service cash payments—as if the past service, sacrifice, and 

commitments had no value. 

DOD and the Nation—as good-faith employers of the trusting members from 

whom they demand such extraordinary commitment and sacrifice—have a reciprocal 

health care obligation to retired servicemembers and their families and survivors 

that far exceeds any civilian employer’s. 

The Coalition also believes the recent fee controversy is caused in part by the lack 

of any statutory record of the purpose of military health care benefits and the specific benefit levels earned by a career of service in uniform. Under current law, the 

Secretary of Defense has broad latitude to make administrative adjustments to fees 

for TRICARE Prime and the pharmacy systems. Absent congressional intervention, 

the Secretary can choose not to increase fees for years at a time or choose to quadruple fees in 1 year. 

Until a few years ago, this was not a particular matter of concern, as no Secretary 

had previously proposed dramatic fee increases. 

The experience of the recent past—during which several Secretaries proposed no 

increases and then a new Secretary proposed doubling, tripling, and quadrupling 

various fees—has convinced the Coalition that current law leaves military beneficiaries excessively vulnerable to the varying budgetary inclinations of the incumbent Secretary of Defense. 

The Coalition believes the law should be changed to reflect that it should be Congress’ responsibility, not the Defense Secretary’s, to establish appropriate and stable 

parameters governing crucial career retention programs such as the healthcare 

package for currently serving and retired military members and their families and 

survivors. 

The reciprocal obligation of the government to maintain an extraordinary benefit 

package to offset the extraordinary sacrifices of career military servicemembers is 

a practical as well as moral obligation. Mid-career military losses cannot be replaced 

like civilians can. 

Eroding benefits for career service can only undermine long-term retention/readiness. Today’s servicemembers are very aware of Congress’ actions toward those who 

preceded them in service. One reason Congress enacted TRICARE For Life in 2000 

is because the Joint Chiefs of Staff at that time said inadequate retiree health care 

was affecting attitudes among active duty servicemembers. 

It’s true that many private sector employers are choosing to shift an ever-greater 

share of health care costs to their employees and retirees, and that’s causing many 

still-working military retirees to fall back on their service-earned TRICARE coverage. Fallout from the recession has reinforced this trend. 

In the bottom-line-oriented corporate world, many firms see their employees as 

merely another form of capital, from which maximum utility is to be extracted at 

minimum cost, and those who quit are replaceable by similarly experienced new 

hires. But that perception simply cannot exist in the culture of the military’s AllVolunteer Force, whose long-term effectiveness is dependent on establishing a sense 

of mutual, long-term commitment between the servicemember and the Nation. 

The Coalition believes it’s essential to bear other considerations in mind when 

considering the extent to which military beneficiaries should share in military 

health care costs. 

First and foremost, the military health system is not built for the beneficiary, but 

to sustain military readiness. Each Service maintains its unique facilities and systems to meet its unique needs, and its primary mission is to sustain readiness by 

keeping a healthy force and to be able to treat casualties from military actions. That 

model is built neither for cost efficiency nor beneficiary welfare. It’s built for military readiness requirements. 

When military forces deploy, the military medical force goes with them, and that 

forces families, retirees and survivors to use the more expensive civilian health care 

system in the absence of so many uniformed health care providers. 

These military-unique requirements have significantly increased readiness costs. 

But those added costs were incurred for the convenience of the military, not for any 

beneficiary consideration, and beneficiaries should not be expected to bear any share 

of military-driven costs—particularly in wartime. 

Coalition member associations hold a diversity of views concerning the DOD-proposed TRICARE fee adjustments for fiscal year 2012. 

However, the Coalition strongly objects to the DOD-proposed adjustment methodology that would tie TRICARE Prime fee increases for nondisabled military beneficiaries aged 38 to 64 in future years to an as-yet-unspecified measure of health 

cost growth for the broader population that DOD actuaries assume would grow at 

an average of 6.2 percent per year. 

89 

The Coalition believes that military beneficiaries from whom America has demanded decades of extraordinary service and sacrifice have earned coverage that is 

the best America has to offer, consistent with their extraordinarily high pre-paid 

premiums of decades of service and sacrifice. 

Congress needs to protect military beneficiaries against dramatic budget-driven 

fluctuations in this vital element of servicemembers’ career compensation incentive 

package. 

Reducing the value of TRICARE for Life by $3,000 per year ($6,000 for a couple) 

as recommended by the Deficit Commission would be inconsistent with military 

beneficiaries’ sacrifices and would undermine Congress’ intent when it authorized 

TFL in 2001—less than 10 years ago. 

Reducing military retirement benefits would be particularly ill-advised when an 

overstressed force already is at increasing retention risk despite the current downturn of the economy and current recruiting successes. 

TMC believes: 

• All retired servicemembers earned equal health care coverage by virtue 

of their service. 

• Means-testing has no place in setting military health fees. 

• Congress should direct DOD to pursue any and all options to constrain 

the growth of health care spending in ways that do not disadvantage beneficiaries. 

• TRICARE Prime enrollment fees for nondisabled retirees under 65 should 

not be adjusted based on health cost increases for the broader population, 

as proposed by DOD. 

• It should be Congress’ responsibility, not the Defense Secretary’s, to establish appropriate and stable parameters governing crucial career retention programs such as the healthcare package for currently serving and retired military members and their families and survivors. 

Military Retirement 

Although the Deficit Commission did not make specific recommendations to revamp the uniformed services retirement system, they did recommend creating yet 

another commission to develop initiatives aimed at bringing military retirement 

‘‘more in line with standard practices from the private sector.’’ 

The Coalition’s experience is that such efforts to ‘‘civilianize’’ the military retirement program and wring budget savings from it pose a significant threat to longterm retention and readiness by decreasing the attractiveness of serving for two or 

three decades in uniform, with all of the extraordinary demands and sacrifice inherent in such extended career service. 

Too often, critics ignore the reality that uniformed service is fundamentally different from civilian employment, and a unique package of powerful incentives is essential to induce top-quality people to serve for 20 to 30 years under conditions the 

majority of Americans are unwilling to endure even for one term of service. 

In this regard, the deficit commission suggests changes such as those recommended by the 10th Quadrennial Review of Military Compensation (QRMC), 

which the Coalition believes fail utterly to recognize the fundamental purpose of the 

military retirement system in offsetting service conditions that are radically more 

severe than those experienced by the civilian workforce. 

The QRMC proposed converting the military retirement system to a civilian-style 

plan under which full retired pay wouldn’t be paid until age 57–60; vesting retirement benefits after 10 years of service; and using flexible ‘‘gate pays’’ and separation 

pay at certain points of service to encourage continued service in certain age groups 

or skills and encourage others to leave, depending on service needs for certain kinds 

of people at the time. 

Reduced to its essence, this plan would take money from people who stay for a 

career in order to pay additional benefits to those who leave the military short of 

a career. 

If this system were in place today, a 10-year infantryman facing his or her fourth 

combat tour would be offered a choice between (a) allowing immediate departure 

with a vested retirement vs. (b) continuing under current service conditions for another 10–20 years and having to wait until age 57 for immediate retired pay. 

The Coalition believes strongly that, if such a system existed for today’s force 

under today’s service conditions, the military Services would already be mired in a 

deep and traumatic retention crisis. 

Further, the QRMC proposal is so complicated that people evaluating career decisions at the 4- to 10-year point would have no way to project their future military 

retirement benefits. Gate pays available at the beginning of a career could be cut 

90 

back radically if the force happened to be undergoing a strength reduction later in 

a member’s career. 

In contrast, the current military retirement system makes it very clear from the 

pay table what level of retired pay would be payable, depending how long one served 

and how well one progressed in grade. 

The sustained drawing power of the 20-year retirement system provides an essential long-term moderating influence that keeps force managers from over-reacting to 

short-term circumstances. Had force planners had such a system in effect during the 

drawdown-oriented 1990s, the services would have been far less prepared for the 

post-September 11 wartime environment. 

Many such proposals have been offered in the past, and have been discarded for 

good reasons. The only initiative to substantially curtail/delay military retired pay 

that was actually enacted—the 1986 REDUX law—had to be repealed 13 years later 

after it was demonstrated to inhibit retention. 

The Coalition strongly opposes initiatives that would ‘‘civilianize’’ the military retirement system and inadequately recognize the unique and extraordinary demands 

and sacrifices inherent in a military career. 

Reducing incentives for serving arduous careers of 20 years or more can only undermine long-term retention and readiness, with particularly adverse effects in 

times of war. Simultaneously increasing compensation for those who choose to leave 

short of fulfilling a career would only compound those adverse effects. 

DOD Schools 

Last November, the plan endorsed by Fiscal Commission Co-Chairs Simpson and 

Bowles recommended closing DOD Dependent and Domestic Elementary and Secondary Schools (DDESS) and integrating the serviced children into local school districts to secure savings estimated at $1.1 billion by 2015. 

DDESS operates some 64 schools on 16 installations and services more than 

26,000 students of military servicemembers as well as DOD civilian employees. 

The schools are provided at locations where civilian schools have been deemed inadequate to meet the needs of military students. 

The Coalition opposes closing or curtailing DOD dependent schools based primarily on budget concerns. The need for the schools should continue to be evaluated 

based on the capacity of local school districts to provide quality educational opportunities for military students. 

Consolidation of Commissaries and Exchanges 

In November, the plan endorsed by Fiscal Commission Co-Chairs Simpson and 

Bowles recommended consolidating all DOD retail activities and raising prices in 

those facilities to achieve expected savings of $800 million by 2015. 

The Coalition has supported multiple previous initiatives to improve retail program efficiencies while recognizing there are unique service needs to be accommodated as well in operations of the exchange and MWR systems. Creation of the Defense Commissary Agency and consolidation of some ‘‘back room’’ functions among 

the service exchanges have been productive. 

The key to the Coalition has been that the benefit to store patrons should not be 

reduced. Several past efforts to reduce the commissary subsidy have been rejected 

because they failed to recognize the extraordinary benefit value of this key program, 

which delivers several dollars in savings to patrons for each dollar of the Federal 

subsidy. That’s a very powerful ‘‘benefit bang for the Federal buck.’’ 

Raising store prices can only lead to a counterproductive spiral of reduced benefit 

value, lower patronage, and eventual undermining of one of the Defense Department’s most cost-effective benefit programs. 

The Coalition supports continuing efforts to improve commissary and exchange 

program efficiency, but objects to initiatives that reduce benefit value for patrons 

and the associated retention value for the uniformed services. 

WOUNDED WARRIOR CARE

As the Pentagon marks a decade at war, seamless transition between the Departments of Defense (DOD) and Veterans Affairs (VA) continues to be problematic in 

many cases for our wounded, ill, injured troops; disabled veterans; and their family 

caregivers. TMC acknowledges the significant progress that has been made in caring 

for our Nation’s heroes and thanks the subcommittee for its leadership and oversight on these pressing issues, particularly in the last 4 years since the Walter Reed 

scandal that brought to light the flaws and inadequacies of both DOD and VA 

health care and benefits systems. 

But complex challenges remain in overseeing and validating massive policy and 

program changes among the military services; the DOD; the VA; several Centers of 

91 

Excellence; a multitude of civilian contractors and nongovernmental agencies; and 

at least six congressional oversight committees. 

The Coalition looks forward to continued work with the subcommittee to address 

the remaining issues and fully establish systems of seamless care and benefits that 

support our transitioning wounded warriors and family members. 

DOD–VA Seamless Transition 

Institutional Oversight 

While many legislative changes have improved the care and support of our 

wounded warriors, the Coalition is concerned that the sunset in law of the DOD– 

VA Senior Oversight Committee (SOC) poses significant risks for effective day-today leadership and coordination of DOD and VA seamless transition efforts. While 

an informal SOC exists, the Pentagon has relegated responsibility and authority to 

lower levels of the agency, making it difficult for senior official involvement and 

oversight on these matters and limiting the Department’s ability to fully establish 

a synchronized, uniform and seamless approach to care and services. 

Previously, the Coalition has expressed concern that the change of administration 

posed a significant challenge to the two departments’ continuity of joint effort, as 

senior leaders whose personal involvement had put interdepartmental efforts back 

on track left their positions and were replaced by new appointees who had no experience with past problems and no personal stake in ongoing initiatives. 

Unfortunately, those concerns were realized, as many appointive positions in both 

departments went unfilled for long periods, requiring reorganization of responsibilities and entry of new people with little or no background or authority to engage 

systems and continue to move forward. 

While many well-meaning and hard working military and civilians are doing their 

best to keep pushing progress forward, leadership, organization and mission 

changes have left many leaders frustrated with the process. 

The Coalition urges joint hearings by the Armed Services and Veterans Affairs 

Committees to assess the effectiveness of current seamless transition oversight efforts and systems and to solicit views and recommendations from DOD, VA, the 

military Services, and nongovernmental organizations concerning how joint communication, cooperation, and oversight could be improved. 

In addition, the hearings should focus on implementation progress concerning: 

• Single separation physical; • Single disability evaluation system; • Bi-directional electronic medical and personnel records data transfer; • Medical centers of excellence responsibilities vs. authority, operations, 

and research projects; 

• Coordination of care and treatment, including DOD–VA Federal/recovery 

care coordinator clinical and non-clinical services and case management 

programs; and 

• Consolidated government agency support services, programs, and benefits. 

Continuity of Health Care 

Transitioning between DOD and VA health care systems remains challenging and 

confusing to those trying to navigate and use these systems. Systemic, cultural, and 

bureaucratic barriers often prevent the servicemember or veteran from receiving the 

continuity of care they need to heal and have productive and a high level of quality 

of life they so desperately need and desire. 

Servicemembers and their families repeatedly tell us that DOD has done much 

to address trauma care, acute rehabilitation, and basic short-term rehabilitation. 

They are less satisfied with their transition from the military health care systems 

to longer-term care and support in military and VA medical systems. 

We hear regularly from members who have experienced significant disruptions of 

care upon separation or medical retirement from service. 

One is in the area of cognitive therapy, which is available to retired members 

under TRICARE only if it is not available through the VA. Unfortunately, members 

are caught in the middle because of differences between DOD and VA authorities 

on what constitutes cognitive therapy and the degree to which effective, evidencedbased therapy is available. 

Action is needed to further protect the wounded and disabled. The subcommittee 

has acted previously to authorize 3 years of active-duty-level TRICARE coverage for 

the family members of those who die on active duty. The Coalition believes we owe 

equal transition care continuity to those whose service-caused illnesses or injuries 

force their retirement from service. 

The Coalition recommends: 

92 

• Authorizing service-disabled members and their families to receive activeduty-level TRICARE benefits, independent of availability of VA care for 3 

years after medical retirement to help ease their transition from DOD to 

VA. 

• Ensuring Guard and Reserve members have adequate access and treatment in the DOD and VA health systems for Post Traumatic Stress Disorder and Traumatic Brain Injury following separation from active duty 

service in a theatre of operations. 

DOD–VA Disability Evaluation System (DES) 

One of the most emotional issues that emerged from the Walter Reed scandal was 

the finding that Services were ‘‘low-balling’’ disabled servicemembers’ disability ratings, with the result that many significantly disabled members were being separated and turned over to the VA rather than being medically retired (which requires 

a 30 percent or higher disability rating)—a trend that continues today, especially 

for those in the Guard and Reserves. 

Congress has taken positive steps to address this situation, including establishment of the Physical Disability Board of Review (PDBR) to give previously separated servicemembers an opportunity to appeal too-low disability ratings. 

A jointly executed DOD–VA DES pilot has been implemented and expanded, with 

positive feedback from participants that it has simplified the process and provided 

a more standardized disability rating outcome. 

TMC was further encouraged that wounded, ill, and injured members would benefit from the Dec. 19, 2007 Under Secretary of Defense (Personnel and Readiness) 

Directive Type Memorandum (DTM) which added ‘‘deployability’’ as a consideration 

in the DES decision process—permitting medical separation/retirement based on a 

medical condition that renders a member non-deployable. 

Unfortunately, several cases surfaced indicating the Services failed to incorporate 

the DTM in their DES process. In this regard, many members found ‘‘fit’’ by the 

PEB have been deemed by the service to be ‘‘unsuitable’’ for continued service—and 

administratively separated—because the member’s medical condition prevents them 

from being able to deploy or maintain their current occupational skill. The Coalition 

is grateful to the subcommittee for including a provision in the National Defense 

Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2011 prohibiting this practice. 

Unfortunately, some services still use other loopholes, such as designating disorders as ‘‘existing prior to service’’—even though the member was deemed fit 

enough to serve in a combat zone. The Coalition believes strongly that once we have 

sent a soldier, sailor, airman, or marine to war, the member should be given the 

benefit of the doubt that any condition subsequently found should not be considered 

as existing prior to service. 

The Coalition believes strongly that all ‘‘unfitting’’ conditions members should be 

included in the DOD disability rating, and any member determined by the parent 

service to be 30 percent or more disabled should continue to be eligible for a military 

disability retirement with all attendant benefits, including lifetime TRICARE eligibility for the member and his/her family. We do not support efforts to disconnect 

health care eligibility from disability retired pay eligibility. 

The Coalition also agrees with the opinion expressed by Secretary Gates that a 

member forced from service for wartime injuries should not be separated, but should 

be awarded a high enough rating to be retired for disability. 

The Coalition recommends: 

• Preserving the statutory 30 percent disability threshold for medical retirement in order to provide lifetime TRICARE coverage for those who are 

injured while on active duty. 

• Reforming the DOD disability retirement system to require inclusion of 

all unfitting conditions. 

• Ensuring any restructure of the DOD and VA disability and compensation systems does not inadvertently reduce compensation levels for disabled 

servicemembers. 

• Eliminating distinctions between disabilities incurred in combat vs. noncombat when determining benefits eligibility for retirement. 

• Revision of the VA schedule for rating disabilities (VASRD) to improve 

the care and treatment of those wounded, ill and injured, especially those 

diagnosed with PTSD and TBI. 

• Barring designation of disabling conditions as ‘‘existing prior to service’’ 

for servicemembers who have been deployed to a combat zone. 

93 

Caregiver/Family Support Services 

The sad reality is that, for the most severely injured servicemembers, family 

members or other loved ones are often required to become full-time caregivers. 

Many have lost their jobs, homes, and savings in order to meet caregiver needs of 

a servicemember who has become incapacitated due to service-caused wounds, injuries or illness. 

The Coalition believes the government has an obligation to provide reasonable 

compensation and training for such caregivers, who never dreamed that their own 

well-being, careers, and futures would be devastated by military-caused injuries to 

their servicemembers. 

In 2009, the subcommittee authorized a special payment to an active duty 

servicemember to allow compensation of a family member or professional caregiver. 

The authorized payment was in the same amount authorized by the VA for veterans’ aid-and-attendance needs, reflecting the subcommittee’s thinking that caregiver compensation should be seamless when the member transitions from active 

duty to VA care, as long as the caregiver requirements remain the same. 

The Coalition appreciates the subcommittee’s effort to sustain that principle in 

the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2011 in terms of caregiver 

support, and urges additional steps to ensure that non-dependent caregivers (e.g., 

parents and siblings) who have had to sacrifice their own employment and health 

coverage are provided health and respite care while the injured member remains 

on active duty, commensurate with what the VA authorizes for medically retired or 

separated members’ caregivers. 

In a similar vein, many wounded or otherwise-disabled members experience significant difficulty transitioning to medical retirement status. To assist in this process, consideration should be given to authorizing medically retired members and 

their families to remain in on-base housing for up to 1 year after retirement, in the 

same way that families are allowed to do when a member dies on active duty. 

Another important care continuity issue for the severely wounded, ill and injured 

is the failure to keep caregivers of these personnel involved in every step of the care 

and follow-up process. Again and again, we are told of clinicians and administrative 

people who seek to exclude caregiver participation and talk only to the injured member—despite the reality that the injured member may not be capable of remembering instructions or managing their appointments and courses of care. In many 

cases, this occurs even when the caregiver has a power of attorney and other responsibilities documented in the member’s records. 

Just as Congress, DOD, and the VA have worked to get essential information to 

the wounded and their caregivers, similar efforts are urgently needed to educate 

medical providers and administrative staff at all levels that the final responsibility 

for ensuring execution of prescribed regimens of care for severely injured members 

typically rests with the caregivers, who must be kept involved and informed on all 

aspects of such members’ treatment, appointments, and evaluations. 

The Coalition recommends: 

• Providing enhanced training of DOD and VA medical and support staff 

on the vital importance of involving and informing designated caregivers in 

treatment of and communication with severely ill and injured personnel. 

• Providing health and respite care for non-dependent caregivers (e.g., parents and siblings) who have had to sacrifice their own employment and 

health coverage while the injured member remains on active duty, commensurate with what the VA authorizes for medically retired or separated 

members’ caregivers. 

• Authorizing up to 1 year of continued residence in on-base housing facilities for medically retired, severely wounded servicemembers and their families. 

ACTIVE FORCES AND THEIR FAMILIES

In our overview, the Coalition expressed our collective concern over the stressors 

our servicemembers and their families are experiencing due to the long, repeated 

deployments and unrelenting operations tempo. In order to sustain a sufficient, 

highly trained and highly capable Active Force, the continuing overriding requirement is to find additional ways to ease the terrible burden of stress on 

servicemembers and their families. 

Military End Strength 

Increased end strength is the only effective way to reduce stress on forces and 

families as long as deployment requirements not only continue, but actually increase. 

94 

The creators of the All-Volunteer Force never envisioned that the force would be 

deployed into combat 1 year out of 3—let alone every other year, as has been the 

case with many ground units. 

Regrettably, the scenario faced by today’s forces is not unlike the World War II 

‘‘Catch-22’’ situation described by Joseph Heller, in which aircrews braving horrendous enemy flak had their wartime mission requirements increased again and 

again, until they perceived that the sacrifices being demanded of them would never 

end. 

Unfortunately, many in government and among the public seem to have become 

desensitized to the truly terrible sacrifices that the current mismatch between missions and force levels has already imposed on those in uniform. They acknowledge 

the problem, but most assume that servicemembers and families will simply continue to accept these—or even greater—levels of sacrifice indefinitely. 

Many point to the achievement of service recruiting and retention goals as indicators that all is well. 

Such perceptions grossly underestimate the current stresses on the force and the 

risk that poses for readiness and national security. The Coalition believes any complacency about retention is sadly misplaced, and that the status of the current force 

should be viewed in the context of a rubber band that has been stretched to its 

limit. The fact that it has not yet broken is of little comfort. 

Well-respected studies have shown that 20 to 30 percent of combat returnees have 

experienced PTSD, TBI, or depression, and that the likelihood of a servicemember 

returning as a changed person rises with each subsequent deployment. Other studies have shown that rising cumulative family separations are having significant negative effects on servicemembers’ children. 

These are not mere academic exercises. They are hard facts of life to those actually experiencing them. 

A far truer, and truly tragic, indicator of these extremely troubling circumstances 

has been the significant rise in servicemembers’ suicide rates. 

So the Coalition is very grateful for the subcommittee’s support for end strength 

increases for all services in the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 

2010, and for fending off the efforts of those who proposed cutting force levels to 

fund hardware needs. 

But we must not understate the reality that the increases approved to date will 

not significantly improve dwell time for military families anytime in the near future, 

given increasing operational requirements in Afghanistan, and recurring demands 

for humanitarian relief for natural and other disasters around the globe, whether 

in foreign lands or on home soil. 

The Coalition urges the subcommittee to: 

• Sustain or increase end strength as needed to sustain the war and other 

operational requirements and enhance dwell time for servicemembers and 

families; and 

• Sustain adequate recruiting and retention resources to enable the uniformed services to achieve required optimum-quality personnel strength. 

Family Readiness and Support 

A fully funded, robust family readiness program continues to be crucial to overall 

readiness of our military, especially with the demands of frequent and extended deployments. 

Resource issues continue to plague basic installation support programs. At a time 

when families are dealing with increased deployments, they often are being asked 

to do without in other important areas. We are grateful that the subcommittee included a provision in last year’s defense bill that will help improve family readiness 

and support through greater outreach. The Department’s establishment of a comprehensive benefits website for servicemembers and their families will help provide 

virtual assistance regardless of their physical proximity to installation-supported 

networks. 

Additionally, we urge the subcommittee to continue to press the Defense Department to exercise their authority to establish flexible spending accounts (FSAs) for 

servicemembers so they can participate in the same pre-tax program available to all 

other Federal employees for their out-of-pocket health and dependent care expenses. 

Quality education is a top priority for military families. Servicemembers are assigned all across the United States and the world. Providing appropriate and timely 

funding of Impact Aid through the Department of Education is critical to ensuring 

quality education military children deserve, regardless of where they live. 

The Coalition recommends that the subcommittee: 

95 

• Encourage DOD to assess the effectiveness of programs and support 

mechanisms designed to assist military members and their families with 

deployment readiness, responsiveness, and reintegration. 

• Fully fund effective programs and ensure their costs are included in the 

annual budget process. 

• Expand child care availability and funding to meet the needs of the total 

force uniformed services community. 

• Monitor and continue to expand family access to mental health counseling. 

• Promote expanded opportunities for military spouses to further educational and career goals, such as the My Career Advancement Account 

(MyCAA) program. 

• Promote implementation of flexible spending accounts to enable military 

families to pay health care and child care expenses with pre-tax dollars. 

Permanent Change of Station (PCS) Allowances 

It’s an unfortunate fact that servicemembers and their families are forced to incur 

significant out-of-pocket expenses when complying with government-directed moves. 

For example, the current Monetary Allowance in Lieu of Transportation (MALT) 

rate used for PCS moves still fall significantly short of meeting members’ actual 

travel costs. The current rate of 24 cents per mile is less than half the 51 cents per 

mile authorized for temporary duty travel. Also, military members must make any 

advance house-hunting trips at personal expense, without any government reimbursements such as Federal civilians receive. 

DOD states that the MALT rate was not intended to reimburse servicemembers 

for travel by automobile, but simply a payment in lieu of providing transportation 

in-kind. 

The Coalition believes strongly that the MALT concept is an outdated one, having 

been designed for a conscripted, single, non-mobile force. 

Travel reimbursements should be adjusted to reflect the reality that today’s allvolunteer servicemembers do, in fact, own cars and that it is unreasonable not to 

reimburse them for the cost of driving to their next duty stations in conjunction 

with PCS orders. 

Simply put, PCS travel is no less government-ordered than is TDY travel, and 

there is simply no justification for paying less than half the TDY travel rate when 

personal vehicle use is essential. 

Additionally, the government should acknowledge that reassigning married 

servicemembers within the United States (including overseas locations) usually requires relocation of two personal vehicles. In that regard, the overwhelming majority of service families consist of two working spouses, making two privately owned 

vehicles a necessity. Yet the military pays for shipment of only one vehicle on overseas moves, including moves to Hawaii and Alaska, which forces relocating families 

into large out-of-pocket expenses, either by shipping a second vehicle at their own 

expense or selling one car before leaving the States and buying another upon arrival. 

At a minimum, the Coalition believes military families being relocated to Alaska, 

Hawaii, and U.S. territories should be authorized to ship a second personal vehicle, 

as the subcommittee has rightly supported in the past. 

The Coalition recommends the subcommittee: 

• Further modify the PCS weight allowance tables for personnel in pay 

grades E–7, E–8, and E–9 to coincide with allowances for officers in grades 

O–4, O–5, and O–6 respectively. While these allowances were increased 

slightly in the NDAA for Fiscal Year 2010 for E–5 through E–9 personnel, 

the personal property weight for a senior E–9 enlisted leader without dependents remains the same as for a single O–3, despite the normal accumulation of household goods over the course of a career. 

• Authorize shipment of a second privately-owned vehicle at government 

expense to Alaska, Hawaii, and U.S. territories. 

• Authorize reimbursement of house-hunting expenses commensurate with 

programs now supporting Federal civilian personnel. 

• Authorize payment of a dislocation allowance to servicemembers making 

their final change of station upon retirement from the uniformed services. 

• Increase PCS mileage rates to more accurately reflect actual transportation costs. 

96 

NATIONAL GUARD AND RESERVE

Over 91,000 Guard and Reserve service men and women are serving on active 

duty (as of January 2011). 

Since September 11, 2001, more than 793,853 Guard and Reserve servicemembers 

have been called up, including over 250,000 who have served multiple tours. There 

is no precedent in American history for this sustained reliance on citizen-soldiers 

and their families. To their credit, Guard and Reserve combat veterans continue to 

reenlist, but the ongoing pace of routine, recurring activations and deployments cannot be sustained indefinitely. 

Guard and Reserve members and families face unique challenges in their readjustment following active duty service. Unlike active duty personnel, many Guard 

and Reserve members return to employers who question their contributions in the 

civilian workplace, especially as multiple deployments have become the norm. Many 

Guard-Reserve troops return with varying degrees of combat-related injuries and 

stress disorders, and encounter additional difficulties after they return that can cost 

them their jobs, careers, and families. 

Despite the continuing efforts of the Services and Congress, most Guard and Reserve families do not have access to the same level of counseling and support that 

active duty members have. In short, the Reserve components face increasing challenges virtually across the board, including major equipment shortages, end 

strength requirements, wounded warrior health care, and pre- and post-deployment 

assistance and counseling. 

Operational Reserve Retention and Retirement Reform 

Congress took the first step in modernizing the Reserve compensation system 

with enactment of early retirement eligibility for certain reservists activated for at 

least 90 continuous days served since January 28, 2008. This change validates the 

principle that compensation should keep pace with service expectations and serve 

as an inducement to retention and sustainment of the Operational Reserve Force. 

Guard/Reserve mission increases and a smaller Active-Duty Force mean Guard/ 

Reserve members must devote a much more substantial portion of their working 

lives to military service than ever envisioned when the current retirement system 

was developed in 1948. 

Repeated, extended activations make it more difficult to sustain a full civilian career and impede reservists’ ability to build a full civilian retirement, 401(k), etc. Regardless of statutory protections, periodic long-term absences from the civilian workplace can only limit Guard/Reserve members’ upward mobility, employability and financial security. Further, strengthening the Reserve retirement system will serve 

as an incentive to retaining critical mid-career officers and NCOs for continued service and thereby enhance readiness. 

As a minimum, the next step in modernizing the Reserve retirement system is 

to provide equal retirement-age-reduction credit for all activated service rendered 

since September 11, 2001. The current law that credits only active service since January 28, 2008 disenfranchises and devalues the service of hundreds of thousands of 

Guard/Reserve members who served combat tours (multiple tours, in thousands of 

cases) between 2001 and 2008. 

The statute also must be amended to eliminate the inequity inherent in the current fiscal year retirement calculation, which only credits 90 days of active service 

for early retirement purposes if it occurs within the same fiscal year. The current 

rule significantly penalizes members who deploy in July or August vs. those deploying earlier in the fiscal year. 

It is patently unfair, as the current law requires, to give 3 months retirement age 

credit for a 90-day tour served from January through March, but only half credit 

for a 120-day tour served from August through November (because the latter covers 

60 days in each of 2 fiscal years). 

In addition, the law-change authorizing early Reserve retirement credit for qualifying active duty served after 28 Jan 2008 severed eligibility for TRICARE coverage 

until the reservist reaches age 60. 

TMC recommends: 

• Authorizing early retirement credit to all Guard and Reserve members 

who have served on active duty tours of at least 90 days retroactive to September 11, 2001. 

• Eliminating the fiscal year limitation which effectively denies full early 

retirement credit for active duty tours that span the October 1 start date 

of a fiscal year. 

97 

• Modernizing the Reserve retirement system to incentivize continued service beyond 20 years and provide fair recognition of increased requirements 

for active duty service. 

Guard and Reserve Health Care Access Options 

The Coalition is very grateful for sustained progress in providing reservists’ families a continuum of government-sponsored health care coverage options throughout 

their military careers into retirement, but key gaps remain. 

For years, TMC has recommended continuous government health care coverage 

options for Guard and Reserve (G–R) families. Operational Reserve policy during 

two protracted wars has only magnified that need. 

DOD took the first step in the 1990s by establishing a policy to pay the Federal 

Health Benefits Program (FEHB) premiums for G–R employees of the Department 

during periods of their active duty service. 

Thanks to this subcommittee’s efforts, considerable additional progress has been 

made in subsequent years to provide at least some form of military health coverage 

at each stage of a Reserve component member’s life, including: 

• TRICARE Reserve Select (TRS) for actively drilling Guard and Reserve 

families, with premiums set at 28 percent of the actual program cost. The 

2011 monthly premiums are $53.16 for individual reservists in drill status 

and $197.76 for member and family coverage. 

• TRICARE Retired Reserve (TRR) for ‘‘gray area’’ reservists who have retired from active drilling status but have not yet attained age 60, with premiums set to cover 100 percent of program cost. Rates for 2011 are $408.01 

for member-only coverage, or $1,020.05 for TRR member-and-family coverage. 

• TRICARE Standard/Prime for retired reservists with 20 or more years of 

qualifying service, once they attain age 60 and retired pay eligibility. 

• TRICARE for Life as second-payer to Medicare for career reservists with 

20 or more years of qualifying service at age 65, provided they enroll in 

Medicare Part B. 

However, as noted earlier in this statement, early Reserve retirees who are in receipt of non-regular retired pay before age 60 are ineligible for TRICARE. 

TMC continues to support closing the remaining gaps to establish a continuum 

of health coverage for operational Reserve families, including members of the Individual Ready Reserve subject to call-up. 

The Coalition recommends: 

• Requiring DOD to justify the sevenfold increase in TRICARE rates for individual TRR premiums for reservists who immediately enroll in TRR upon 

retirement from the Selected Reserve and have TRS coverage until separation. 

• Authorizing TRICARE for early Reserve retirees who are in receipt of retired pay prior to age 60. 

• Permitting employers to pay TRS premiums for reservist-employees as a 

bottom-line incentive for hiring and retaining them. 

• Authorizing an option for the government to subsidize continuation of a 

civilian employer’s family coverage during periods of activation, similar to 

FEHBP coverage for activated Guard-Reserve employees of Federal agencies. 

• Extending corrective dental care following return from a call-up to ensure 

G–R members meet dental readiness standards. 

• Allowing eligibility in Continued Health Care Benefits Program (CHCBP) 

for Selected reservists who are voluntarily separating and subject to 

disenrollment from TRS. 

• Allowing beneficiaries of the FEHBP who are Selected reservists the option of participating in TRICARE Reserve Select. 

Yellow Ribbon Reintegration Program 

Congress has provided increased resources to support the transition of warriorcitizens back into the community. But program execution remains spotty from State 

to State and falls short for returning Federal Reserve warriors in widely dispersed 

regional commands. Military and civilian leaders at all levels must improve the coordination and delivery of services for the entire operational Reserve Force. Many 

communities are eager to provide support and do it well. But Yellow Ribbon efforts 

in a number of locations amount to little more than PowerPoint slides and little or 

no actual implementation. 

DOD must ensure that State-level best practices—such as those in Maryland, 

Minnesota, and New Hampshire—are applied for all operational Reserve Force 

98 

members and their families, and that Federal Reserve veterans have equal access 

to services and support available to National Guard veterans. Community groups, 

employers and service organization efforts need to be encouraged and better coordinated to supplement unit, component, Service and VA outreach and services. 

The Military Coalition urges the subcommittee to hold oversight hearings and direct additional improvements in coordination, collaboration and consistency of Yellow Ribbon services between States. 

Reserve Compensation System 

The increasing demands of qualifications, mental skills, physical fitness, and 

training readiness on the Guard and Reserve to perform national security missions 

at home and abroad and increased training requirements indicate that the compensation system needs to be improved to attract and retain individuals into the 

Guard/Reserve. The added responsibility of returning to active duty multiple times 

over the course of a Reserve career require improvements to the compensation package and to make it more equitable with the Active component. 

TMC recommends: 

• Crediting all inactive duty training points earned annually toward Reserve retirement. 

• Parity in special incentive pay for career enlisted/officer special aviation 

incentive pay, diving special duty pay, and pro-pay for Reserve component 

medical professionals. 

• Authorizing recalculation of retirement points after 1 year of mobilization. A recent law change allowed certain flag and general officers to recalculate retirement pay after 1 year of mobilization. TMC believes this opportunity should be made available to all ranks. 

Guard/Reserve GI Bill 

The Coalition is most grateful to Congress for passage of the Post-9/11 GI Bill. 

The Post-9–11 GI Bill incorporates a number of major Coalition goals for the GI Bill 

including benefits that match the cost of education, extension of the post-service 

usage period to 15 years, and cumulative credit for Guard-Reserve service on active 

duty. However, volunteers who join the Selected Reserve were left behind in this 

legislation. 

Benefits for joining the Selected Reserve were not upgraded or integrated in the 

Post-9/11 GI Bill as TMC has long recommended. Moreover, these benefits are not 

just about the principle of ‘‘proportional equity’’ but also are essential to successful 

recruitment programs for the Guard and Reserve. 

TMC recommends: 

• Restoring basic Reserve MGIB benefits for initially joining the Selected 

Reserve to the historic benchmark of 47–50 percent of active duty benefits. 

• Integrating Reserve and active duty MGIB laws in Title 38. 

• Enacting academic protections for mobilized Guard and Reserve students, 

including refund guarantees and exemption of Federal student loan payments during activation. 

Guard/Reserve Family Support Programs 

We have seen considerable progress in outreach programs and services for returning Guard-Reserve warriors and their families. Family support programs promote 

better communication with servicemembers. Specialized support and training for 

geographically separated Guard and Reserve families and volunteers are needed. 

TMC recommends: 

• Ensuring programs are in place to meet the special information and support needs of families of individual augmentees or those who are geographically dispersed. 

• Funding joint programs among military and community leaders to support servicemembers and families during all phases of deployments. 

• Providing preventive counseling services for servicemembers and families 

and training so they know when to seek professional help related to their 

circumstances. 

• Authorizing and funding child care, including respite care, family readiness group meetings and drill time. 

• Improving the joint family readiness program to facilitate understanding 

and sharing of information between all family members. 

99 

HEALTH CARE

TRICARE Reimbursement Rates 

Physicians consistently report that TRICARE is virtually the lowest-paying insurance plan in America. Other national plans typically pay providers 25–33 percent 

more. In some cases the difference is even higher. 

While TRICARE rates are tied to Medicare rates, TRICARE Managed Care Support Contractors make concerted efforts to persuade providers to participate in 

TRICARE Prime networks at a further discounted rate. Since this is the only information providers receive about TRICARE, they see TRICARE as lower-paying than 

Medicare. 

This is exacerbated by annual threats of further reductions in TRICARE rates due 

to the statutory Medicare rate-setting formula. 

In this regard, unless Congress acts before the end of the year, current law will 

force a 30 percent reduction in Medicare and TRICARE payments as of January 1, 

2012, which would cause many providers to stop seeing military beneficiaries. 

TMC urges reversal of the 30 percent cut in Medicare/TRICARE payments scheduled for January 2012 and a permanent fix for the flawed formula that mandates 

these recurring annual threats to seniors’ and military beneficiaries’ health care access. 

TRICARE Cost Efficiency Options 

TMC continues to believe strongly that DOD has not sufficiently investigated options to make TRICARE more cost-efficient without shifting costs to beneficiaries. 

The Coalition has offered for several years a long list of alternative cost-saving possibilities, including: 

• Positive incentives to encourage beneficiaries to seek care in the most appropriate and cost effective venue; 

• Encouraging improved collaboration between the direct and purchased 

care systems and implementing best business practices and effective quality 

clinical models; 

• Focusing the military health system, health care providers, and beneficiaries on quality measured outcomes; 

• Improving MHS financial controls and avoiding overseas fraud by establishing TRICARE networks in areas fraught with fraud; 

• Promoting retention of other health insurance by making TRICARE a 

true second-payer to other insurance (far cheaper to pay another insurance’s co-pay than have the beneficiary migrate to TRICARE); 

• Encouraging DOD to effectively utilize data from their electronic health 

records to better monitor beneficiary utilization patterns to design programs which truly match beneficiaries needs; 

• Sizing and staffing military treatment facilities to reduce reliance on network providers and develop effective staffing models which support enrolled 

capacities; 

• Reducing long-term TRICARE Reserve Select (TRS) costs by allowing 

servicemembers the option of a government subsidy of civilian employer 

premiums during periods of mobilization; 

• Working more closely with the Coalition to better incorporate beneficiary 

perspectives in encouraging use of mail-order pharmacy system and formulary medications; and 

• Encouraging retirees to use lowest-cost-venue military pharmacies at no 

charge, rather than discouraging such use by limiting formularies, curtailing courier initiatives, etc. 

The Coalition is pleased that DOD has begun to act on some of these suggestions. 

We hope for further action to jointly pursue these and other options that offer potential for reducing costs. 

TRICARE Prime 

The Coalition is very concerned about growing dissatisfaction among TRICARE 

Prime enrollees—which is actually higher among active duty families than among 

retired families. The dissatisfaction arises from increasing difficulties experienced 

by beneficiaries in getting appointments, referrals to specialists, and sustaining continuity of care from specific providers. 

Increasingly, beneficiaries with a primary care manager in a military treatment 

facility find they are unable to get appointments because so many providers have 

deployed, have been gone PCS, or are otherwise understaffed or unavailable. 

The Coalition supports implementation of a pilot study by TMA in each of the 

three TRICARE Regions to study the efficacy of revitalizing the resource sharing 

100 

program used prior to the implementation of the TRICARE—The Next Generation 

(T–NEX) contracts under the current Managed Care Support contract program. 

The Coalition supports adoption of the ‘‘Medical Home’’ patient-centered model to 

help ease such problems. 

The Coalition strongly advocates the transparency of healthcare information via 

the patient electronic record between both the MTF provider and network providers. 

Additionally, institutional and provider healthcare quality information should be 

available to all beneficiaries so that they can make better informed decisions. 

We are concerned about the impact on beneficiaries of the elimination of some 

Prime service areas under the new contract. This will entail a substantive change 

in health care delivery for thousands of beneficiaries, may require many to find new 

providers, and will change the support system for beneficiaries who have difficulty 

accessing care. 

To date, largely because of the delay in award of the new contracts, beneficiaries 

who live in the areas where Prime service will be terminated have not received any 

information on this and how it may affect them. 

The Military Coalition urges the subcommittee to: 

• Require reports from DOD and the managed care support contractors on 

actions being taken to improve Prime patient satisfaction, provide assured 

appointments within Prime access standards, reduce delays in 

preauthorization and referral appointments, and provide quality information to assist beneficiaries in making informed decisions. 

• Require increased DOD efforts to ensure consistency between both the 

MTFs and purchased care sectors in meeting Prime access standards. 

• Ensure timely notification of and support for beneficiaries affected by 

elimination of Prime service areas. 

TRICARE Standard 

The Coalition appreciates the subcommittee’s continuing interest in the specific 

problems unique to TRICARE Standard beneficiaries. TRICARE Standard beneficiaries need assistance in finding participating providers within a reasonable time 

and distance from their home. This is particularly important with the expansion of 

TRICARE Reserve Select and the upcoming change in the Prime Service Areas, 

which will place thousands more beneficiaries into TRICARE Standard. 

The Coalition is concerned that DOD has not yet established benchmarks for adequacy of provider participation, as required by section 711(a)(2) of the NDAA for 

Fiscal Year 2008. Participation by half of the providers in a locality may suffice if 

there is not a large Standard beneficiary population, but could severely constrain 

access in other areas with higher beneficiary density. The Coalition hopes to see an 

objective participation standard (perhaps based on the number of beneficiaries per 

provider) that would help shed more light on which locations have participation 

shortfalls of Primary Care Managers and Specialists that require positive action. 

The Coalition continues to oppose initiatives that would establish an enrollment 

fee for TRICARE Standard. If a beneficiary is to be required to pay an enrollment 

fee, the beneficiary should gain some additional benefit from enrollment. TRICARE 

Prime features an enrollment fee, but in return offers guaranteed access to care. In 

contrast, Standard offers no such guaranteed access, and beneficiaries typically are 

on their own in finding a participating provider who is accepting new patients. 

A source of recurring concern is the TRICARE Standard inpatient copay for re- tired members, which now stands at $535 per day. For each of the last several 

years, Congress has had to insert a special provision in the Defense Authorization 

Act to preclude increasing that by another $115 per day or more. The Coalition believes the $535 per day amount already is excessive, and should be capped at that 

rate for the foreseeable future. 

The Coalition urges the subcommittee to: 

• Insist on immediate delivery of an adequacy threshold for provider participation, below which additional action is required to improve such participation. 

• Require a specific report on participation adequacy in the localities where 

Prime Service Areas will be discontinued under the new TRICARE contracts. 

• Oppose establishment of a TRICARE Standard enrollment fee, since 

Standard does not entail any guaranteed access to care. 

• Increase locator support to TRICARE Standard beneficiaries seeking providers who will accept new Standard patients, particularly for mental 

health specialties. 

• Seek legislation to eliminate the limit when TRICARE Standard is second 

payer to other health insurance (OHI): e.g., return to the policy where 

101 

TRICARE pays up to the amount it would have paid, had there been no 

OHI. 

• Bar any further increase in the TRICARE Standard inpatient copay for 

the foreseeable future. 

TRICARE For Life 

When Congress enacted TRICARE For Life (TFL) in 2000, it explicitly recognized 

that this coverage was fully earned by career servicemembers’ decades of sacrifice, 

and that the Medicare Part B premium would serve as the cash portion of the beneficiary premium payment. The Coalition believes that this remains true today. 

Some have proposed establishing an enrollment fee for TFL. The Coalition believes this is inappropriate, since beneficiaries have no guarantee of access to Medicare-participating providers. 

The Coalition is aware of the challenges imposed by Congress’ mandatory spending rules, and appreciates the subcommittee’s efforts to include TFL-eligibles in the 

preventive care pilot programs included in the NDAA for Fiscal Year 2009. We believe their inclusion would, in fact, save the government money and hope the subcommittee will be able to find a more certain way to include them than the current 

discretionary authority, which DOD has declined to implement. 

The Coalition also hopes the subcommittee can find a way to resolve the discrepancy between Medicare and TRICARE treatment of medications such as the shingles vaccine, which Medicare covers under pharmacy benefits and TRICARE covers 

under doctor visits. This mismatch, which requires TFL patients to absorb the cost 

in a TRICARE deductible or purchase duplicative Part D coverage, deters beneficiaries from seeking this preventive medication. 

The Coalition urges the subcommittee to: 

• Resist initiatives to establish an enrollment fee for TFL, given that many 

beneficiaries already experience difficulties finding providers who will accept Medicare patients. 

• Seek ways to include TFL beneficiaries in DOD programs to incentivize 

compliance with preventive care and healthy lifestyles. 

• Resolve the discrepancy between TRICARE and Medicare treatment of 

the shingles vaccine. 

Survivors’ Coverage 

When a TRICARE-eligible widow/widower remarries, he/she loses TRICARE benefits. When that individual’s second marriage ends in death or divorce, the individual 

has eligibility restored for military ID card benefits, including SBP coverage, commissary/exchange privileges, etc.—with the sole exception that TRICARE eligibility 

is not restored. 

This is out of line with other Federal health program practices, such as the restoration of CHAMPVA eligibility for survivors of veterans who died of service-connected causes. In those cases, VA survivor benefits and health care are restored 

upon termination of the remarriage. Remarried surviving spouses deserve equal 

treatment. 

The Coalition recommends restoration of TRICARE benefits to previously eligible 

survivors whose second or subsequent marriage ends in death or divorce. 

Pharmacy 

The Coalition supports a strong TRICARE pharmacy benefit which is affordable 

and continues to meet the pharmaceutical needs of millions of eligible beneficiaries 

through proper education and trust. The TMC will oppose any degradation of current pharmacy benefits, including any effort to charge fees or copayments for use 

of military treatment facilities. 

The Coalition notes that due to continued legal maneuvering, Federal pricing still 

has not been implemented by the Executive Branch, and this failure is costing DOD 

tens of millions of dollars with every passing month. This is an excellent example 

of why the Coalition objects to basing beneficiary fees on a percentage of DOD 

costs—because DOD all-too-frequently does not act, or is not allowed to act, in a 

prudent way to hold costs down. 

The Coalition has volunteered to conduct a joint campaign with DOD to promote 

beneficiary use of lower-cost medications and distribution venues—a ‘‘win-win’’ opportunity that will reduce costs for beneficiaries and the government alike. But this 

will require additional consultation with the Coalition to ensure DOD communications effective address legitimate beneficiary concerns that now inhibit increased 

participation. 

The Coalition also believes that positive incentives are the best way to encourage 

beneficiaries to continue medication regimens that are proven to hold down longVerDate Aug 31 2005 09:55 Jan 25, 2012 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00107 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 Y:\BORAWSKI\DOCS\68089.TXT JUNE PsN: JUNEB
102 

term health costs. In this regard, TMC believes eliminating copays for medications 

to control chronic conditions (e.g., diabetes, asthma, high blood pressure, and cholesterol) are more effective than negative ones such as copayment increases. 

The Coalition urges the subcommittee to: 

• Advance the use of the mail order option by lowering or waiving copays, 

enhancing communication with beneficiaries, and using technological advances to ease initial signup. 

• Require DOD to include alternate packaging methods for pharmaceuticals 

to enable nursing home, assisted living, and hospice care beneficiaries to 

utilize the pharmacy program. Packaging options should additionally include beneficiaries living at home who would benefit from this program because of their medical condition (for example beginning stages of Alzheimer’s). 

• Create incentives to hold down long-term health costs by eliminating 

copays for medications for chronic conditions, such as asthma, diabetes, and 

hypertension or keeping copays at the lowest level regardless of drug status, brand or generic. 

RETIREE ISSUES

The Military Coalition remains grateful to the subcommittee for its support of 

maintaining a strong military retirement system to help offset the extraordinary demands and sacrifices inherent in a career of uniformed service. 

Concurrent Receipt 

In the NDAA for Fiscal Year 2003 and Fiscal Year 2004, Congress acknowledged 

the inequity of the disability offset to earned retired pay and established a process 

to end or phase out the offset for many disabled retirees. The Coalition is extremely 

grateful with the subcommittee’s efforts to continue progress in easing the adverse 

effects of the offset. 

We were very optimistic in 2009 that another very deserving group of disabled 

retirees would become eligible for concurrent receipt when the White House included a concurrent receipt proposal in the Budget Resolution—the first time in history any administration had ever proposed such a fix. 

The administration’s proposal would expand concurrent receipt eligibility over a 

5 year period to all those forced to retire early from Service due to a disability, injury, or illness that was service-connected (chapter 61 retirees). 

The Coalition is dismayed that, despite the subcommittee’s leadership efforts and 

White House support, the provision has not yet been enacted—an extremely disappointing outcome for a most deserving group of disabled retirees. 

Our fervent hope is that the subcommittee will redouble its efforts to authorize 

this initiative for the National Defense Authorization Bill for Fiscal Year 2012. 

Additionally, the Coalition is concerned that an inadvertent problem exists in the 

statutory Combat-Related Special Compensation (CRSC) computation formula 

causes many seriously disabled and clearly eligible members to receive little or 

nothing in the way of CRSC. The Defense Department has acknowledged the problem in discussions with the subcommittee staff, and the Coalition urges the subcommittee to correct this technical problem. 

The Coalition believes strongly in the principle that career military members earn 

their retired pay by service alone, and that those unfortunate enough to suffer a 

service-caused disability in the process should have any VA disability compensation 

from the VA added to, not subtracted from, their service-earned military retired pay 

and this remains a key goal in 2011. 

The Coalition’s continuing goal is to fully eliminate the deduction of VA disability 

compensation from earned military retired pay for all disabled retirees. In pursuit 

of that goal, the Coalition’s immediate priorities include: 

• Phasing out the VA disability offset for all chapter 61 (disability) retirees, 

as previously endorsed by the President and the subcommittee; 

• Clarifying the law to resolve technical disparities that inadvertently 

cause underpayment of certain eligibles for CRSC; and, 

• Clarifying the law to ensure a disabled retiree’s CRSC payment is not reduced when the retiree’s VA disability rating increases, until the retiree is 

afforded the opportunity to elect between CRSC or CRDP. 

Disability Severance Pay 

The Coalition is grateful for the subcommittee’s inclusion of a provision in the 

NDAA for Fiscal Year 2008 that ended the VA compensation offset of a 

servicemember’s disability severance for people injured in the combat zone. 

103 

However, we are concerned that the language of this provision imposes much 

stricter eligibility than that used for Combat-Related Special Compensation. 

The Coalition recommends: 

• Further expanding eligibility to include all combat-related injuries, using 

the same definition as CRSC; and 

• Expanding eligibility to include all service-connected disabilities, consistent with TMC view that there should not be a distinction between the 

treatment of members disabled in combat vice members with non-combat, 

service-caused disabilities. 

Former Spouse Issues 

For a decade, the recommendations of the Defense Department’s September 2001 

report to Congress on the Uniformed Services Former Spouse Protection Act 

(USFSPA) have gone nowhere. For several years, DOD submitted many of the report’s recommendations annually to Congress only to have one or two supported by 

the subcommittee while many others were dropped. 

The USFSPA is a very emotional topic with two distinct sides to the issue—just 

as any divorce has two distinct parties affected. The Coalition believes strongly that 

there are several inequities in the act that need to be addressed and corrected that 

could benefit both affected parties—the servicemember and the former spouse. 

But in order to make progress, we believe Congress cannot piecemeal DOD’s recommendations. We support a collective grouping of legislation that would provide 

benefit to both affected parties. Absent this approach, the legislation will be perceived as supporting one party over the other and go nowhere. 

To fairly address the problems with the act, all affected parties need to be heard— 

and the Coalition would greatly appreciate the opportunity to address the inequities 

in a hearing before the subcommittee. 

The Coalition supports legislative action to: 

• Base the award amount to the former spouse on the grade and years of 

service of the member at time of divorce (not time of retirement); 

• Prohibit the award of imputed income while on active duty, which effectively forces active duty members into retirement; 

• Extend 20/20/20 benefits to 20/20/15 former spouses; 

• Permit the designation of multiple SBP beneficiaries with the presumption that SBP benefits must be proportionate to the allocation of retired 

pay; 

• Eliminate the ‘‘10-year Rule’’ for the direct payment of retired pay allocations by the Defense Finance and Accounting Service (DFAS); 

• Permit SBP premiums to be withheld from the former spouse’s share of 

retired pay if directed by court order; 

• Permit a former spouse to waive SBP coverage; 

• Repeal the 1-year deemed election requirement for SBP; and 

• Assist the DOD and Services with greater outreach and expanded awareness to members and former spouses of their rights, responsibilities, and 

benefits upon divorce. 

SURVIVOR ISSUES

The Coalition is grateful to the subcommittee for its significant efforts in recent 

years to improve the SBP, especially its major achievement in eliminating the significant benefit reduction previously experienced by SBP survivors upon attaining 

age 62. 

SBP–DIC Offset 

The Coalition believes strongly that current law is unfair in reducing military 

SBP annuities by the amount of any survivor benefits payable from the DIC program. 

If the surviving spouse of a retiree who dies of a service-connected cause is entitled to DIC from the Department of Veterans Affairs and if the retiree was also enrolled in SBP, the surviving spouse’s SBP annuity is reduced by the amount of DIC. 

A pro-rata share of the SBP premiums is refunded to the widow upon the member’s 

death in a lump sum, but with no interest. This offset also affects all survivors of 

members who are killed on active duty. 

The Coalition believes SBP and DIC payments are paid for different reasons. SBP 

is insurance purchased by the retiree and is intended to provide a portion of retired 

pay to the survivor. DIC is a special indemnity compensation paid to the survivor 

when a member’s service causes his or her premature death. In such cases, the VA 

104 

indemnity compensation should be added to the SBP annuity the retiree paid for, 

not substituted for it. 

It should be noted as a matter of equity that surviving spouses of Federal civilian 

retirees who are disabled veterans and die of military-service-connected causes can 

receive DIC without losing any of their Federal civilian SBP benefits. 

The reality is that, in every SBP–DIC case, active duty or retired, the true premium extracted by the service from both the member and the survivor was the ultimate one—the very life of the member. This reality was underscored by the August 

2009 Federal Court of Appeals ruling in Sharp v. UNITED STATES which found, 

‘‘After all the servicemember paid for both benefits: SBP with premiums; DIC with 

his life.’’ 

The Veterans Disability Benefits Commission (VDBC) was tasked to review the 

SBP–DIC issue, among other DOD/VA benefit topics. The VDBC’s final report to 

Congress agreed with the Coalition in finding that the offset is inappropriate and 

should be eliminated. 

In 2005 then-Speaker Pelosi and other House leaders made repeal of the SBP– 

DIC offset a centerpiece of their GI Bill of Rights for the 21st Century. Leadership 

has made great progress in delivering on other elements of that plan, but the only 

progress to date on the SBP–DIC offset has been the enactment a small monthly 

Special Survivor Indemnity Allowance (SSIA). 

The Coalition recognizes that the subcommittee’s initiative in the fiscal year 2008 

defense bill to establish the SSIA was intended as a first, admittedly very modest, 

step in a longer-term effort to phase out the Dependency and Indemnity Compensation (DIC) offset to SBP. 

We appreciate the subcommittee’s subsequent work to extend the SSIA to survivors of members who died while on active duty, as well as its good-faith effort to 

increase SSIA payments as part of the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco 

Control Act. 

The Coalition was extremely disappointed that the final version of that legislation 

greatly diluted the House-passed provision and authorized only very modest increases several years in the future. 

While fully acknowledging the committee’s good-faith efforts to win more substantive progress, the Coalition shares the extreme disappointment and sense of 

abandonment of the SBP–DIC widows who are being forced to sacrifice up to $1,154 

each month and being asked to be satisfied with a $70 monthly rebate. 

For years, legislative leaders touted elimination of this ‘‘widow’s tax’’ as a top priority. The Coalition understands the mandatory-spending constraints the subcommittee has faced in seeking redress, but also points out that those constraints 

have been waived for many, many far more expensive initiatives. The Coalition believes widows whose sponsors’ deaths were caused by military service should not be 

last in line for redress. 

The Coalition recommends: 

• Repeal of the SBP–DIC offset. 

• Reinstating SBP for survivors who previously transferred payments to 

their children at such time as the youngest child attains majority, or upon 

termination of a second or subsequent marriage. 

• Allowing SBP eligibility to switch to children if a surviving spouse is convicted of complicity in the member’s death. 

SBP and Special Needs Trusts 

Certain permanently disabled survivors can lose eligibility for Supplemental Security Income (SSI) and Medicaid and access to means-tested State programs because 

of receipt of SBP. Title 10 currently does not authorize DOD to make the payment 

of a SBP annuity into a trust, but only to a ‘‘natural person’’. 

As a result, permanently disabled military survivors are unique in being unable 

to take advantage of Special Needs Trust authority specifically established by Congress to protect and assist disabled persons who are in need of special services. 

The Coalition recommends authorizing payment of SBP annuities for disabled survivors into a Special Needs Trust. 

Final Retired Paycheck 

Under current law, DFAS recoups from military widows’ bank accounts all retired 

pay for the month in which a retiree dies. Subsequently, DFAS pays the survivor 

a pro-rated amount for the number of days of that month in which the retiree was 

alive. This often creates hardships for survivors who have already spent that pay 

on rent, food, et cetera, and who routinely are required to wait several months for 

DFAS to start paying SBP benefits. 

105 

The Coalition believes this is an extremely insensitive policy imposed by the government at the most traumatic time for a deceased member’s next of kin. Unlike 

his or her active duty counterpart, a retiree’s survivor receives no death gratuity. 

Many older retirees do not have adequate insurance to provide even a moderate financial cushion for surviving spouses. 

In contrast to the law governing military retired pay treatment of survivors, the 

title 38 statute requires the VA to make full payment of the final month’s VA disability compensation to the survivor of a disabled veteran. 

The disparity between DOD and VA policy on this matter is indefensible. Congress should do for retirees’ widows the same thing it did 10 years ago to protect 

veterans’ widows. 

TMC urges the subcommittee to authorize survivors of retired members to retain 

the final month’s retired pay for the month in which the retiree dies. 

MORALE, WELFARE, AND RECREATION (MWR) AND QUALITY OF LIFE (QOL) PROGRAMS

MWR activities and QoL programs have become ever more critical in helping 

servicemembers and their families cope with the extended deployments and constant changes going on in the force. 

The availability of appropriated funds to support MWR activities is an area of 

continuing concern for the Coalition. We are especially apprehensive that additional 

reductions in funding or support services may occur due to slow economic recovery 

and record budget deficits. 

BRAC actions pose an additional concern, as DOD is struggling to meet the September 15, 2011 deadline at many BRAC locations. Two reports issued by the Government Accountability Office indicate significant challenges remain in areas of 

funding, facilities, and overall management. 

The Coalition is very concerned whether needed infrastructure and support programs will be in place in time to meet the needs of families. 

TMC urges the subcommittee to: 

• Direct DOD to report to Congress on all DOD and Service Active and Reserve 

component MWR Category A, B, and C Programs and Family Support/Readiness (Quality of Life [QoL] Programs), including the Yellow Ribbon Program. 

The report should include: 

• A current listing of individual program funding levels by category—actual 

program expenditures vs. program requirement; 

• An assessment of the effectiveness of each program, including program 

standards and metrics; and 

• A list of recommended changes to policy, including revisions in the current category program listings to more accurately support wartime mission 

requirements and the needs of the 21st century All-Volunteer Force. 

• Protect recreational and alternative therapy programs that integrate MWR, 

fitness and other quality of life programs and infrastructure to facilitate warrior 

treatment and care and to promote psychological health and welfare of troops 

and their families. 

Military Construction (MILCON) 

TMC believes MILCON Programs, including modernization and recapitalization, 

are critical elements to maintaining force, unit, and family readiness, and that these 

programs need immediate attention to maintain and sustain a 21st century military 

force. 

The Coalition recommends the subcommittee: 

• Support military construction projects that modernize or replace the following 

infrastructure to meet increased personnel and operational deployment requirements: 

• child development centers (CDCs) and youth centers; 

• defense schools; 

• bachelor and family housing; and, 

• other traditional QoL program facilities. 

• Encourage full funding of military housing repair and maintenance accounts 

to reduce backlogs and provide for safe, well-maintained housing units. 

• Ensure that military housing privatization initiatives meet expected 

DOD-Service outcome goals and positively impact servicemember and family needs. 

• Support a Health Facilities Program that modernizes or replaces Military 

Treatment Facilities (MTFs) and supports world-class health care delivery 

capability and capacity for all eligible beneficiaries. 

106 

• Ensure MWR, MILCON, housing, and family support construction policies and projects improve access for persons with disabilities. 

Senator WEBB. Thank you very much. 

Ms. Moakler, welcome. 

STATEMENT OF KATHLEEN B. MOAKLER, GOVERNMENT RELATIONS DIRECTOR, NATIONAL MILITARY FAMILY ASSOCIATION 

Ms. MOAKLER. Chairman Webb, the NMFA appreciates the opportunity to talk to you this afternoon about military families, the 

Nation’s families. 

Last week was a rough week for military families, when they experienced unnecessary additional stress as the budget debate 

raged. We heard from many family members, and I’m sure your offices did, as well. Our Association quickly assembled resources and 

set up a Web page so families could prepare if pay was delayed. 

Our first admonition was to warn servicemembers and families to 

avoid payday lenders and to offer financially responsible resources. 

When it was announced that all commissaries would be closing, 

we raised awareness about how military families living overseas 

would be severely impacted. This resulted in, first, overseas commissaries being deemed essential, and then having this designation 

expanded to all commissaries. 

When an agreement was reached, military families breathed a 

sigh of relief, but felt as though they had been used as pawns in 

a political chess game. We hope that we never have to experience 

this type of impending crisis again, but our Association made sure 

that the concerns of military families were heard. 

We continue to share the concerns of military families with policymakers, as we have for over 40 years. In the past several years, 

we have done informal surveys on our Web site, gauging the pulse 

of families. In our most recent survey, when 1,200 family members 

responded about their top priorities, over 84 percent felt it was important that Congress and DOD focus on ensuring support programs—that support programs meet the needs of families experiencing multiple deployments. Almost 80 percent felt that helping 

wounded servicemembers and their families should be a top priority, and 78 percent felt that helping surviving families was an 

important priority. Our top legislative priority, therefore, is to sustain funding for effective, proven military family support programs 

in order to promote readiness. Ten years of war and repeated deployments and reintegrations have put inordinate stress on 

servicemembers and their families, of all components. 

We know our Nation faces an austere budget environment, but 

assert that a failure to focus on the well-being of servicemembers 

and their families now will create longer-lasting and more expensive national security, healthcare, and readjustment issues at war’s 

end and beyond. 

While both DOD and the VA continue to work on program and 

transition improvements, our wounded, ill, and injured servicemembers and their families face many uncertainties. We ask Congress to allow medically-retired servicemembers and their families 

to maintain the Active Duty family TRICARE benefit for a transiVerDate Aug 31 2005 09:55 Jan 25, 2012 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00112 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 Y:\BORAWSKI\DOCS\68089.TXT JUNE PsN: JUNEB
107 

tion period of 3 years following the date of medical retirement, 

comparable to the benefit for surviving spouses. 

Caregivers of the wounded, ill, and injured must be provided 

with opportunities for training, compensation, and other support 

programs because of the important role they play in the successful 

rehabilitation and care of the servicemember and veteran. We are 

concerned that the implementation of recent VA caregiver legislation does not extend eligibility to the intended range of caregivers, 

and that DOD and the service training for caregivers does not start 

soon enough to be effective during the transition. 

Our surviving families deserve our support, and I’d like to recognize the Gold Star Wives that are here today. 

The Coalition supports S. 260, Senator Nelson’s bill, to end the 

Dependency and Indemnity Compensation offset to the Survivor 

Benefit Plan. Additionally, allowing payment of the SBP benefit 

into a special-needs trust in cases of disabled beneficiaries will preserve their eligibility for income-based support programs. 

We applaud the announcement yesterday of Joining Forces, the 

initiative sponsored by Mrs. Obama and Dr. Biden. Our recently 

released Finding Common Ground, a toolkit for communities supporting military families, includes easily achievable action items 

and useful resources to guide anyone who wants to support military families, but doesn’t know where to start. The toolkit can be 

downloaded for free at our Web site. 

Three areas of focus for the Join Forces Initiative are education, 

employment, and wellness. We ask you to join forces in support of 

the education of military children by increasing the DOD supplement to impact aid and to allow school districts experiencing high 

growth due to base realignments to apply for impact aid funds 

using current student enrollments. 

Military spouses employed as teachers, nurses, registered dieticians, physical therapists, and the like must have a State-specific 

license or credential before working in a State. We urge you to help 

military spouses maintain their careers by supporting the Military 

Spouse Job Continuity Act, S. 697. This bill will provide a military 

spouse with a tax credit to offset the cost of obtaining a new license 

or certificate at their new location. 

We urge Congress, DOD, healthcare providers, and beneficiaries 

to work together to sustain quality affordable healthcare for all 

military health system beneficiaries. We pledge to work with Congress and DOD to identify additional efficiencies to reduce 

healthcare costs, such as organizational streamlining, promotion of 

lower-cost pharmacy options, disease management, and beneficiary 

education on healthy habits and how to access care more effectively. 

Another aspect of wellness is financial wellness. Congress has 

provided the Armed Forces with the authority to establish flexible 

spending accounts, yet the Service Secretaries have not established 

these important tax savings accounts for servicemembers. We support S. 387, which presses for the Service Secretaries to create—— 

Senator WEBB. Ms. Moakler, could I ask you summarize the rest 

of your statement? I think you’ve been—— 

Ms. MOAKLER. Sure. 

Senator WEBB.—going for about 10 minutes. 

108 

Ms. MOAKLER. Thank you and I look forward to your questions. 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Moakler follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT BY KATHLEEN B. MOAKLER

Chairman Webb and distinguished members of the subcommittee, the National 

Military Family Association would like to thank you for the opportunity to present 

testimony for the record concerning the quality of life of military families—the Nation’s families. In the 10th year of war, we continue to see the impact of repeated 

deployments and separations on our servicemembers and their families. We appreciate your recognition of the service and sacrifice of these families. Your response 

through legislation to the increased need for support as situations have arisen has 

resulted in programs and policies that have helped sustain our families through 

these difficult times. 

We recognize, too, the emphasis that the administration is placing on supporting 

military families. The work of Mrs. Obama and Dr. Biden in raising awareness of 

the sacrifices military families are making has been well received by the Nation and 

appreciated by our families. The American people are beginning to understand how 

1 percent of our population in the United States is being called upon to bear 100 

percent of the burden of defending our Nation, giving up years of family life together, and how they need the support of the other 99 percent of Americans to continue carrying that burden. 

The recent Presidential Study Directive-9, which called on Federal agencies to 

outline how they are presently or could in the future support military families, reinforced administration support as well. The vision of the study, as contained in the 

report Strengthening Our Military Families, Meeting America’s Commitment, is, ‘‘to 

ensure that: 

• The U.S. military recruits and retains the highest-caliber volunteers to 

contribute to the Nation’s defense and security; 

• Servicemembers can have strong family lives while maintaining the highest state of readiness; 

• Civilian family members can live fulfilling lives while supporting their 

servicemember(s); and 

• The United States better understands and appreciates the experience, 

strength, and commitment to service of our military families.’’ 

This vision resonates with all that our Association has tried to work for during 

our 42 year history. We believe policies and programs should provide a firm foundation for families challenged by the uncertainties of deployment and transformation. 

Our Association cares about the health and resilience of military families. Innovative and evidence based approaches are essential to address the needs of military 

children. We realize support for servicemembers and their families is not solely provided by the government. Families promote a servicemember’s well being. Communities uphold the families. 

Our Nation did not expect to be involved in such a protracted conflict. Our military families continue to require effective tools and resources to remain strong. We 

ask Congress, policymakers, and communities to remain vigilant and respond in a 

proactive manner. Our Nation can express recognition for their sacrifices by promoting the well-being of military families. 

We endorse the recommendations contained in the statement submitted by The 

Military Coalition. In this statement, our Association will expand on several issues 

of importance to military families: 

I. Family Readiness 

II. Family Health 

III. Family Transitions 

I. FAMILY READINESS

Policies, programs, and services must adapt to the changing needs of 

servicemembers and families. Standardization in delivery, accessibility, and funding 

are essential. Educated and resourced families are able to take greater responsibility for their own readiness. Recognition should be given to the unique challenges 

facing families with special needs. Support should provide for families of all components, in every phase of military life, no matter where they live. 

We appreciate provisions in the National Defense Authorization Acts (NDAA) and 

Appropriations legislation in the past several years that recognized many of these 

important issues. Excellent programs exist across the Department of Defense (DOD) 

and the Services to support our military families. There are redundancies in some 

areas, and times when a new program was initiated before anyone looked to see if 

109 

an existing program could be adapted to answer an evolving need. We realize all 

Americans will be asked to tighten their belts in this time of tighter budgets and 

some military family programs may need to be downsized or eliminated. We ask 

your support for programs that do work when looking for efficiencies, rewarding 

best practices and programs that are truly meeting the needs of families. In this 

section we will highlight some of these best practices and identify needs. 

Child Care 

Child care remains a concern for military families, as evidenced by a recent Pew 

Center on the States survey (http://www.preknow.org/documents/2011— 

MilitaryFamiliesSurvey.pdf). We are pleased that in addition to building new Child 

Development Centers, DOD and the Services are taking innovative steps to address 

these concerns. 

In December, DOD announced a new pilot initiative in 13 States aimed at improving the quality of child care within communities, which should translate into increased child care capacity for military families living in geographically dispersed 

areas. Last year, DOD contracted with SitterCity.com to help military families find 

caregivers and military subsidized child care providers. The military Services and 

the National Association of Child Care Resource and Referral Agencies (NACCRRA) 

continue to partner to provide subsidized childcare to families who cannot access installation based child development centers. 

At our Operation Purple® Healing Adventures camp for families of the wounded, 

ill, and injured, families continue to tell us there is a tremendous need for child care 

services at or near military treatment facilities. Families need child care to attend 

medical appointments, especially mental health appointments. Our Association encourages the expansion of drop-in child care for medical appointments on the DOD 

or VA premises or partnerships with other organizations to provide this valuable 

service. 

We appreciate the requirement in the NDAA for Fiscal Year 2010 calling for a 

report on financial assistance provided for child care costs across the Services and 

components to support the families of servicemembers deployed in support of a contingency operation and we look forward to the results. 

Our Association urges Congress to sustain funding and resources to meet the 

child care needs of military families to include hourly, drop-in, and increased respite 

care across all Services for families of deployed servicemembers and the wounded, 

ill, and injured, as well as those with special needs family members. 

Working with Youth 

Older children and teens must not be overlooked. School personnel need to be educated on issues affecting military students and must be sensitive to their needs. To 

achieve this goal, schools need tools. Parents need tools, too. Military parents constantly seek more resources to assist their children in coping with military life, especially the challenges and stress of frequent deployments. Parents tell us repeatedly they want resources to ‘‘help them help their children.’’ Support for parents in 

their efforts to help children of all ages is increasing, but continues to be fragmented. New Federal, public-private initiatives, increased awareness, and support 

by DOD and civilian schools educating military children have been developed. However, many military parents are either not aware such programs exist or find the 

programs do not always meet their needs. 

Through our Operation Purple® camps, our Association has begun to identify the 

cumulative effects multiple deployments are having on the emotional growth and 

well being of military children and the challenges posed to the relationship between 

deployed parent, caregiver, and children in this stressful environment. Understanding a need for qualitative analysis of this information, we commissioned the 

RAND Corporation to conduct a longitudinal study on the experience of 1,500 families. RAND followed these families for 1 year, and interviewed the nondeployed caregiver/parent and one child per family between 11 and 17 years of age at three time 

points over the year. Recruitment of participants was extremely successful because 

families were eager to share their experiences. The research addressed three key 

questions: 

• How are school-age military children faring? 

• What types of issues do military children face related to deployment? 

• How are nondeployed caregivers handling deployment and what challenges do they face? 

In January 2011, RAND released the report, Views from the Homefront: The Experience of Youth and Spouses from Military Families (http://www.rand.org/pubs/ 

technical—reports/TR913.html),detailing the longitudinal research findings. The research showed: 

110 

• Older teens reported more difficulties during deployment and reintegration. 

• Girls reported more difficulties during reintegration. 

• There were few differences on military characteristics, but Reserve component youth reported more difficulties during deployment. 

• Reserve component caregivers reported more challenges with deployment 

and reintegration. 

• The total number of months away mattered more than the number of deployments. 

• There is a direct correlation between the mental health of the caregiver 

and the well-being of the child. 

• Quality of family communication mattered to both children and caregiver 

well-being. 

What are the implications of these findings? Families facing longer deployments 

need targeted support—especially for older teens, girls and the Reserve component. 

Support needs to be in place across the entire deployment cycle, including reintegration, and some non-deployed parents may need targeted mental health support. One 

way to address these needs would be to create a safe, supportive environment for 

older youth and teens. Dedicated installation Youth Centers with activities for our 

older youth would go a long way to help with this. Since many military families, 

especially those with older children, live off the installation, enhanced partnerships 

between DOD and national youth-serving organizations are also essential. DOD’s 

current work with the 4–H program is an example of this outreach and support of 

military children in the community. DOD can encourage other organizations to 

share outreach strategies and work together to strengthen a network of support for 

military youth in their civilian communities. We must ensure, however, that, once 

we have encouraged these community organizations and services to engage with 

families, we also encourage installations and installation services to be collaborative 

and not set up roadblocks to interaction and support. 

To address the issues highlighted by our research, our Association hosted a summit in May 2010, where we engaged with experts to develop research-based action 

items. Our Blue Ribbon Panel outlined innovative and pragmatic ideas to improve 

the well-being of military families, recognizing it is imperative solutions involve a 

broad network of government agencies, community groups, businesses, and concerned citizens. 

We’ve published the recommendations from the summit in Finding Common 

Ground: A Toolkit for Communities Supporting Military Families. The toolkit is organized in a format similar to our Association’s well-received Military Kids and 

Teens Toolkits. It contains cards for each of the intended communities—including 

Educators, Friends and Family, Senior leaders, Employers, and Health Care Providers—whose help is so important to military families. It also contains the summary document with the recommendations formulated by our Blue Ribbon Panel 

and summit participants. 

Our goal was to create a user-friendly resource, with easily-achievable action 

items and pertinent resources to guide everyone who wants to support military families but may not know how. The toolkit lists concrete actions individuals, organizations, and communities can take to assist and support our military families. We 

hope that when someone receives a copy, they will go first to the card that most 

fits their relationship to military families and look for ideas and resources. We then 

hope they will take the time to explore other cards and the summit summary. While 

many of the suggested actions are simple, we’ve also presented some of the tougher 

things that require the building of partnerships and a longer-term focus. These actions are not exhaustive. It is our hope this toolkit will start conversations and stimulate action. Everyone can contribute—it doesn’t need to be complicated or expensive. Just remembering to include military families in outreach is a start. 

Our Association feels that more dedicated resources, such as youth or teen centers 

and enhanced partnerships with national youth-serving organizations, would be important ways to better meet the needs of our older youth and teens during deployment. 

Families Overseas 

Families stationed overseas face increased challenges when their servicemember 

is deployed into theater. One such challenge we have heard from families stationed 

in EUCOM concerns care for a family member, usually the spouse, who may be injured or confined to bed for an extended illness during deployment. Instead of pulling the servicemember back from theater, why not provide transportation for an extended family member or friend to come from the States to care for the injured or 

111 

ill family member? This has been a recommendation from the EUCOM Quality of 

Life conference for several years. 

Our Association asks that transportation be provided for a designated caregiver 

to an overseas duty station to care for an incapacitated spouse when a 

servicemember is deployed. 

Military Housing 

In our recent study conducted by RAND, researchers found that living in military 

housing was related to fewer caregiver-reported deployment-related challenges. 

Fewer caregivers who lived in military housing reported their children had difficulties adjusting to parent absence (e.g., missing school activities, feeling sad, or not 

having peers who understand what their life is like) as compared to caregivers who 

rented homes. The study team explored the factors that determine a military family’s housing situation in more detail. Among the list of potential reasons provided 

for the question, ‘‘Why did you choose to rent?’’ researchers found that the top three 

reasons parents/caregivers cited for renting included: military housing was not 

available (31 percent), renting was most affordable (28 percent), and preference to 

not to invest in the purchase of a home (26 percent). 

Privatized housing expands the opportunity for families to live on the installation 

and is a welcome change for military families. We are pleased with the annual report that addresses the best practices for executing privatized housing contracts. As 

privatized housing evolves, the Services are responsible for executing contracts and 

overseeing the contractors on their installations. With more joint basing, more than 

one Service often occupies an installation. The Services must work together to create consistent policies not only within their Service, but across the Services as well. 

Pet policies, deposit requirements, and utility policies are some examples of differences across installations and across Services. How will Commanders address 

these variances under joint basing? Military families face many transitions when 

they move, and navigating the various policies and requirements of each contractor 

is frustrating and confusing. It’s time for the Services to increase their oversight 

and work on creating seamless transitions by creating consistent policies across the 

Services. 

We are pleased the NDAA for Fiscal Year 2010 calls for a report on housing 

standards and housing surveys used to determine the Basic Allowance for Housing 

(BAH) and look forward to reviewing the recommendations once the report is available. We hope Congress will work to address BAH inequities. 

We ask Congress to consider the importance of family well-being by addressing 

BAH inequities. 

Commissaries and Exchanges 

Our Association thanks this subcommittee for holding two hearings this year to 

discuss the importance of sustaining Morale, Welfare, and Recreation (MWR) programs and the commissary and exchange systems. We thank you, Mr. Chairman, 

for emphasizing the importance of MWR ‘‘as essential elements within a healthy 

military community.’’ We agree with you that these programs must not ‘‘become 

easy targets for the budget cutters.’’ The military resale hearing reinforced the importance of the commissary and exchange and stressed the need for them to remain 

fiscally sound without reducing the benefit to military families. Our Association 

couldn’t agree more and appreciates the subcommittee’s commitment to preserving 

these quality programs for military families, especially during this era of increased 

budget austerity. 

Our Association is concerned about one issue raised at the recent resale hearing: 

the potential negative repercussions of the Tax Increase Prevention and Reconciliation Act of 2005 (TIPRA) on the military community. This legislation included a 

provision, Section 511, mandating Federal, State, and local governments to withhold 

3 percent from payments for goods and services to contractors after December 31, 

2010. While the implementation has been delayed until December 31, 2011, we believe this withholding requirement will have a direct impact on military families. 

We believe vendors who provide products sold in exchanges and commissaries will 

end up passing on the implementation costs to patrons and will be less willing to 

offer deals, allowances, promotions, and prompt payment discounts, which will thus 

diminish the value of the benefit for military families. The implementation costs for 

the exchange systems may also result in reduced dividends for MWR programs, 

which already operate on tight budgets. Although our Association realizes this tax 

issue does not fall under the Armed Services Committee jurisdiction, we ask Congress to repeal Section 511 of TIPRA in order to protect this important benefit for 

military families. If full repeal is not possible, we urge Congress to exempt the Defense Commissary Agency, Exchanges and MWR programs from the withholding reVerDate Aug 31 2005 09:55 Jan 25, 2012 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00117 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 Y:\BORAWSKI\DOCS\68089.TXT JUNE PsN: JUNEB
112 

quirement. Military families, who have borne the burden of this war for nearly 10 

years, should not have to incur additional costs at commissaries and exchanges due 

to the effects of this law, which will compromise their quality of life programs when 

they need them most. 

The commissary benefit is a vital part of the compensation package for 

servicemembers and retirees, and is valued by them, their families, and survivors. 

Our surveys and those conducted by DOD indicate that military families consider 

the commissary one of their most important benefits. In addition to providing average savings of more than 30 percent over local supermarkets, commissaries provide 

a sense of community. Commissary shoppers gain an opportunity to connect with 

other military families and are provided with information on installation programs 

and activities through bulletin boards and publications. Commissary shoppers also 

receive nutritional information through commissary promotions and campaigns, as 

well as the opportunity for educational scholarships for their children. 

Active duty and Reserve component families have benefited greatly from the addition of case lot sales. Our Association thanks Congress for allowing the use of proceeds from surcharges collected at these sales to help defray their costs. Case lot 

sales continue to be extremely well received and attended by family members not 

located near an installation. According to Army Staff Sgt. Jenny Mae Pridemore, 

quoted in the Charleston Daily Mail, ‘‘We don’t have easy access to a commissary 

in West Virginia and with the economy the way it is everyone is having a tough 

time. The soldiers and the airmen really need this support.’’ On average, case lot 

sales save families between 40 and 50 percent compared to commercial prices. This 

provides tremendous financial support for our remote families, and is a tangible way 

to thank them for their service to our Nation. 

In addition to commissary benefits, the military exchange system provides valuable cost savings to members of the military community, while reinvesting their 

profits in essential MWR programs. Our Association strongly believes that every effort must be made to ensure that this important benefit and the MWR revenue is 

preserved, especially as facilities are down-sized or closed overseas. 

Our Association urges Congress to continue to protect the commissary and exchange benefits, and preserve the MWR revenue all of which are vital to maintaining a healthy military community. 

We also ask Congress to repeal Section 511 of TIPRA. If full repeal is not achievable, we urge Congress to exempt the Defense Commissary Agency, Exchanges and 

MWR programs from this withholding requirement. 

National Guard and Reserve 

Our Association has long recognized the unique challenges our National Guard 

and Reserve families face and their need for additional support. Reserve component 

families are often geographically dispersed, live in rural areas, have servicemembers 

deployed as individual augmentees, and do not consistently have the same family 

support programs as their active duty counterparts. According to the research conducted for us by the RAND Corporation, spouses of servicemembers in the National 

Guard and Reserves reported poorer emotional well-being and greater household 

challenges than their full-time active duty peers. Our Association believes that 

greater access to resources supporting National Guard and Reserve caregivers is 

needed to further strengthen our Reserve component families. 

We appreciate the great strides that have been made in recent years by both Congress and the Services to help support our Reserve component families. Our Association would like to thank Congress for the NDAA for Fiscal Year 2011 provision authorizing travel and transportation for members of the Uniformed Services and up 

to three designees to attend Yellow Ribbon Reintegration Program events, and for 

the provision enhancing the Yellow Ribbon Reintegration Program by authorizing 

service and State-based programs to provide access to all servicemembers and their 

families. We appreciate your ongoing support of the Yellow Ribbon Reintegration 

Program and ask that you continue funding this quality of life program for Reserve 

component families. 

Our Association is gratified that family readiness is now seen as a critical component to mission readiness. We have long believed that robust family programs are 

integral to maintaining family readiness, for both our active duty and Reserve component families. We are pleased the Department of Defense Reserve Family Readiness Award recognizes the top unit in each of the Reserve components that demonstrate superior family readiness and outstanding mission readiness. 

Our Association asks Congress to continue funding the Yellow Ribbon Reintegration Program and stresses the need for greater access to resources supporting our 

Reserve component caregivers. 

113 

Flexible Spending Accounts 

Congress has provided the Armed Forces with the authority to establish Flexible 

Spending Accounts (FSA), yet the Service Secretaries have not established these important tax savings accounts for servicemembers. We are pleased H.R. 791 and S. 

387 have been introduced to press each of the seven Service Secretaries to create 

a plan to implement FSAs for uniformed servicemembers. FSAs were highlighted as 

a key issue presented to the Army Family Action Plan at their 2011 Department 

of the Army level conference. FSAs would be especially helpful for families with outof-pocket dependent care and health care expenses. It is imperative that FSAs for 

uniformed servicemembers take into account the unique aspects of the military lifestyle, such as Permanent Change of Station (PCS) moves and deployments, which 

are not compatible with traditional FSAs. We ask that the flexibility of a rollover 

or transfer of funds to the next year be considered. 

Our Association supports Flexible Spending Accounts for uniformed servicemembers that account for the unique aspects of military life including deployments 

and PCS moves. 

Financial Readiness 

Ongoing financial literacy and education is critically important for today’s military families. Military families are not a static population; new servicemembers join 

the military daily. For many, this may be their first job with a consistent paycheck. 

The youthfulness and inexperience of junior servicemembers makes them easy targets for financial predators. Financial readiness is a crucial component of family 

readiness. The Department of Defense Financial Readiness Campaign brings financial literacy to the forefront and it is important that financial education endeavors 

include military families. 

Our Association looks forward to the establishment of the Office of Servicemember 

Affairs this July. We encourage Congress to monitor the implementation of this office to ensure it provides adequate support to servicemembers and their families. 

Military families should have a mechanism to submit a concern and receive a response. The new office must work in partnership with DOD. 

Military families are not immune from the housing crisis. We applaud Congress 

for expanding the Homeowners’ Assistance Program to wounded, ill, and injured 

servicemembers, survivors, and servicemembers with PCS orders meeting certain 

parameters. We have heard countless stories from families across the Nation who 

have orders to move and cannot sell their home. Due to the mobility of military life, 

military homeowners must be prepared to be a landlord. We encourage DOD to continue to track the impact of the housing crisis on military families. 

We appreciate the increase to the Family Separation Allowance (FSA) that was 

made at the beginning of the war. In more than 10 years, however, there has not 

been another increase. We ask that the FSA be indexed to the Cost-of-Living Allowance (COLA) to better reflect rising costs for services. 

Our Association asks Congress to increase the FSA by indexing it to COLA. 

Continuing Resolution 

As Congress begins the debate over the fiscal year 2012 budget, our Association 

is concerned about the impact of the Continuing Resolution and the lack of a fiscal 

year 2011 Defense Appropriations law on our military families. DOD has been 

forced to operate under Continuing Resolutions for more than 5 months. Short extensions do not allow the Services to adequately plan to fund upcoming programs 

or support services that are critical to supporting servicemembers and their families. In March, Deputy Secretary of Defense William J. Lynn III testified before the 

Senate Appropriations Committee Subcommittee on Defense and provided one example of how the Continuing Resolution is negatively impacting military families. 

In his written testimony, he stated, ‘‘Because of the [Continuing Resolution], the 

Navy has had to reduce its notice of Permanent Change of Station moves from the 

usual 6 months to two, which hurts Navy personnel and puts a greater strain on 

their families.’’ Without final orders in hand, a servicemember is not able to prepare 

his family for a move by requesting medical records, school transcriptions, arrange 

the movement of household goods, or put their name of the housing waiting list. 

This is one example of a myriad of programs which have been reduced or cut because they do not have funds to operate. A series of Continuing Resolutions hurts 

our military families. Our Association recommends Congress work quickly to pass 

the Defense Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 2011. 

Our Association urges Congress to pass the Defense Appropriations Act for Fiscal 

Year 2011 immediately. Funding delays cause the Services to cut essential programs, which negatively impacts military families. 

114 

II. FAMILY HEALTH

When considering changes to the health care benefit, our Association urges policymakers to recognize the unique conditions of service and the extraordinary sacrifices 

demanded of military members and families. Repeated deployments, caring for the 

wounded, and the stress of uncertainty create a need for greater access to professional behavioral health care for all military family members. 

Family readiness calls for access to quality health care and mental health services. Families need to be assured the various elements of their military health system are coordinated and working as a synergistic system. The direct care system 

of Military Treatment Facilities (MTFs) and the purchased care segment of civilian 

providers under the TRICARE contracts must work in tandem to meet military 

readiness requirements and ensure they meet access standards for all military beneficiaries. 

Improving Access to Care 

Our Association continues to monitor the experience of military families with accessing care within both the direct care and purchased care segments of the Military 

Health System (MHS). We are concerned our MTFs are stressed from 10 years of 

provider deployments, which directly affects the quality, access, and cost of health 

care. We have consistently heard from families that their greatest health care challenge has been getting timely care in both the direct and the purchased care systems. Their main challenges with the direct care system are: 

• access to their Primary Care Managers (PCM) 

• availability of after-hours care 

• having appointments available in MTFs for 60, 90, or 120-day follow-ups 

recommended by their providers. 

Beneficiaries’ main challenges with the purchased care system, according to 

TRICARE’s Health Care Survey of DOD Beneficiaries 2009 Annual Report, are difficulty in accessing personal doctors and specialty care. 

Our Association hears frequent complaints by families regarding the referral process. Families are often unfamiliar with the process at their MTF and in their 

TRICARE region and frequently report difficulties in obtaining an appointment 

within access standards. Often, they find that a provider on the TRICARE Managed 

Care Support Contractor’s list is no longer taking TRICARE or taking new patients. 

The difficulties sometimes cause the beneficiary to give up on the referral process 

and never obtain the specialty appointment their PCM believes they need. Our Association is concerned with the impact these delays or the lack of even getting the 

referral is having on the quality of care and beneficiary outcome. We cannot stress 

enough how continuity of care is important to maintain our families’ quality of care. 

We recommend Congress require a DOD report on the management of the referral 

process—both within the direct care system and between the direct care and purchased care sectors—and the impact on beneficiaries’ access to care. 

We see even more issues ahead that could affect beneficiary access. The TRICARE 

Management Activity (TMA) will roll out the new TRICARE Third Generation (T3) 

contract in the TRICARE North Region beginning April 2011. At that time, the remaining two TRICARE Regions will still be operating under the existing TRICARE 

Next Generation (T–Nex) contract. Because of the recent announcement of a T3 

award change in the South Region and subsequent protest filed, full T3 implementation will remain in a holding pattern, preventing contractors’ renegotiation with approximately 66 percent of our civilian TRICARE providers. With the demands and 

uncertainties to providers in regards to health care reform’s added requirements 

and expenses along with looming Medicare reimbursement rate changes, we are concerned about providers’ long-term willingness to remain in the TRICARE network 

and about the contractors’ ability to recruit new providers. Thus, the combination 

of factors may result in a decreased access to care for military families. 

National Guard and Reserve Member Family Access to Care 

We remain especially concerned about access to care for National Guard and Reserve families. These families also need increased education about the multiple 

types of TRICARE health care benefits in which they are eligible to participate. We 

recommend Congress request a report to assess the coordination and continuity of 

health care services for National Guard and Reserve families as they frequently 

move from activated TRICARE Prime coverage to non-activated status and 

TRICARE Reserve Select (TRS) or their employer civilian health care insurance 

plans. We also believe that paying a stipend to a mobilized National Guard or Reserve member for their family’s coverage under their employer-sponsored insurance 

115 

plan while the servicemember is mobilized may work out better for many families 

in areas where the TRICARE network may not be robust. 

TRICARE Reimbursement 

Our Association is concerned that continuing pressure to lower Medicare reimbursement rates will create a hollow benefit for TRICARE beneficiaries. We are appreciative Congress passed the Medicare and Medicaid Extenders Act of 2010 (P.L. 

111–309), which provided a 1-year extension of current Medicare physician payment 

rates until December 31, 2011. As the 112th Congress takes up Medicare legislation 

this year, we ask you to consider how this legislation will impact military health 

care, especially our most vulnerable populations, our families living in rural communities, and those needing access to mental health services. 

While we have been impressed with the strides TMA and the TRICARE contractors are making in adding providers, especially mental health providers to the networks, we believe more must be done to persuade health care and mental health 

care providers to participate and remain in the TRICARE system, even if that 

means DOD must raise reimbursement rates. We frequently hear from providers 

who will not participate in TRICARE because of what they believe are time-consuming requirements and low reimbursement rates. National provider shortages in 

the mental health field, especially in child and adolescent psychology, are exacerbated in many cases by low TRICARE reimbursement rates, TRICARE rules, or 

military-unique geographic challenges, such as large military beneficiary populations in rural or traditionally-underserved areas. Many mental health providers 

are willing to see military beneficiaries on a voluntary status. We need to do more 

to attract mental health providers to join the TRICARE network. Increasing reimbursement rates is just one way of enticing them. 

We recommend Congress require a DOD report on the impact on beneficiaries of 

the MHS referral process. 

We ask Congress also to require a report assessing the coordination and continuity of health care services for National Guard and Reserve families as they transition from one TRICARE status to another. 

Lastly, we ask for a legislative change to allow Reserve component families to be 

given the choice of a stipend to continue their employer-provided care during the 

deployment of the servicemember. 

Pharmacy 

For several years now, our Association has cautioned about DOD generalizing 

findings of certain civilian beneficiary pharmacy behaviors and automatically applying them to the military population. As part of the President’s fiscal year 2011 budget proposal, DOD recently announced it would adjust certain pharmacy co-payments. DOD’s intent is to drive beneficiaries away from retail pharmacies and toward TRICARE Mail Order Pharmacy (TMOP) utilization, which should lower government costs and increase DOD savings. Our Association has long championed a 

zero co-payment for generic Tier 1 medications in TMOP and we applaud DOD’s 

proposal to implement this as one of their cost-saving measures. While we believe 

the rationale behind the proposed changes is sound, we request that Congress require DOD to report on how these changes impact beneficiary behavior and health 

care quality outcomes. 

We do have some concerns with the proposed increase in co-payments for retail 

formulary and non-formulary medications and the impact this increase will have on 

beneficiaries who have no choice but to rely on the retail pharmacy for urgent nonmaintenance medications. For example, the young families of deployed National 

Guard or Reserve members or recruiters usually do not live close to an MTF pharmacy. When their child needs an antibiotic for an urgent medical condition, such 

as pneumonia or an ear infection, they have no other option than the retail pharmacy. Currently, they pay $3 for a course of a generic antibiotic treatment; under 

DOD’s proposal, they would pay $5. Beneficiaries who need certain medications not 

suited for TMOP because they are a narcotic or their chemical compound is not suitable for home delivery would also pay more under DOD’s proposal. 

We are also concerned about the effect of the proposed co-pay changes on our 

wounded, ill, and injured servicemembers and those already medically retired. This 

population may be adversely affected because of the frequent alteration to their 

medication protocols by their health care providers in order to achieve optimum 

medical benefits for their often-changing medical conditions. Their medications may 

appear to be a maintenance drug, but are actually intended to be a used only for 

short-term relief. Sending them to the mail order for a 90-day supply just because 

the co-payment is less may in fact cost the beneficiary and the government more 

because of frequent changes in doses. Many of the prescriptions needed by the 

116 

wounded are for newly FDA-approved medications, which will most likely place 

them in non-Formulary Tier 3 status. This may place an unfair financial burden on 

this population because they tend to utilize a higher number of medications. 

Beneficiaries who have no choice in where they must obtain their medications 

should not be subjected to co-payment increases aimed at changing the behavior of 

those who do have choices. DOD must consider the possible effects of its co-payment 

changes as it plans for implementation and may need to devise alternative co-payment adjustments to protect beneficiaries during these situations. We look forward 

to discussing potential options with Members of Congress and DOD. 

In addition to the elimination of the TMOP co-payment for generic drugs as an 

enticement for beneficiaries to switch maintenance medications from retail to 

TMOP, we believe there are additional ways DOD could experience increased pharmacy savings. These include: 

• Make all medications available through TRICARE Retail pharmacy also 

available through TRICARE Mail Order Pharmacy (TMOP) 

• Provide medications treating chronic conditions, such as asthma, diabetes, and hypertension at the lowest level of co-payment regardless of brand 

or generic status 

• Implement The Task Force on the Future of Military Health Care recommendation to include over-the-counter (OTC) drugs as a covered pharmacy benefit, thus eliminating the need for more costly pharmaceuticals 

that have the same efficacy as OTC options. 

The new T3 contract will provide TRICARE regional contractors and the pharmacy contractor with the ability to link pharmacy data with disease management. 

This will allow for better case management, increase adherence/compliance, and decrease cost, especially for beneficiaries suffering from chronic illness and multiple 

conditions. However, this valuable tool will only be available this year in the 

TRICARE North Region because the T3 contract still remains under protest in the 

remaining two Regions. 

We applaud the proposed changes to co-payments for TMOP participants as a way 

to drive more beneficiaries to TMOP to increase DOD efficiencies. We support the 

rationale behind proposed changes to the co-payments for the Retail pharmacy, but 

caution that beneficiaries should not be penalized for the purchase of urgent, nonmaintenance drugs or those drugs not available via mail order. 

National Health Care Proposal 

Our Association is cautious about the changes contained in the Patient Protection 

and Affordable Care Act (P.L. 111–148) and their potential impact on TRICARE and 

CHAMPVA. We thank Congress for including a provision in the NDAA for Fiscal 

Year 2011 to allow TRICARE to provide coverage for TRICARE eligible young adult 

beneficiaries up to the age of 26. Military families have been asking for this added 

benefit. We await its implementation and are appreciative that DOD is working 

hard to ensure TRICARE Young Adult (TYA) Standard/Extra coverage is made 

available before beneficiaries’ college age students graduate this May. We appreciate 

the inclusion of a TRICARE Young Adult Prime option by Congress and look forward to its implementation this fall, as well. We understand DOD is addressing the 

issue of access to MTFs for those eligible TYA Prime non-ID card holders. However, 

we still need congressional action to allow CHAMPVA coverage for eligible young 

adults up to the age of 26. 

Congress needs to act to provide health care coverage to young adults, up to the 

age of 26, who are eligible for CHAMPVA. 

Cost Saving Strategies in the 2012 Budget 

We appreciate DOD’s continued focus on cost savings strategies in the 2012 budget. DOD’s proposed TRICARE changes include a change in enrollment fees for 

TRICARE Prime for under age 65 retirees and a change in pharmacy co-pays. DOD 

should also incur savings through better management of health care costs. Our Association has always supported a mechanism to provide for modest increases to 

TRICARE Prime enrollment fee for retirees under age 65. TRICARE Prime, the 

managed care option for military beneficiaries, provides guaranteed access, low outof-pocket costs, additional coverage, and more continuity of care than the basic military health benefit of TRICARE Standard. The annual enrollment fee of $230 per 

year for an individual retiree or $460 for a family has not been increased since the 

start of TRICARE Prime in 1995. 

We agree that DOD’s proposed fiscal year 2012 increase of $5 per month per family and $2.50 per month per individual plan is indeed modest. We applaud DOD for 

deciding not to make any changes to the TRICARE benefit for active duty, active 

duty family members, medically retired servicemembers, and survivors of 

117 

servicemembers and for not making any changes to the TRICARE Standard and 

TRICARE for Life (TFL) benefit. 

We have some concerns regarding DOD’s selection of a civilian-based index in determining TRICARE Prime retiree enrollment fee increases after 2012. Our Association has always supported the use of COLA as a yearly index tied to TRICARE 

Prime retiree enrollment fee increases. We believe if DOD thought the rate of $230 

for individual and $460 for family was appropriate in 1995, then yearly increases 

tied to COLA would maintain that same principle. Our objection to the utilization 

of a civilian index is based on our concern that civilian health care experts cannot 

agree on an accurate index on which to base civilian health care yearly cost increases. The Task Force on the Future of Military Health Care ‘‘strongly recommended that DOD and Congress accept a method for indexing that is annual and 

automatic.’’ However, the Task Force recommended ‘‘using a civilian-only rather 

than total cost (including civilian and MTF costs for Prime beneficiaries) because 

the Task Force and DOD have greater confidence in the accuracy of the civilian care 

data and its auditability.’’ We ask Congress to adopt the Task Force’s DOD accountability recommendation and require DOD to become more accurate and establish a 

common cost accounting system across the MHS. Until it can do so, however, we 

believe increases tied to COLA are the most fair to beneficiaries and predictable for 

DOD. 

We do not support DOD’s budget proposal to change the U.S. Family Health Plan 

(USFHP) eligibility, asking newly enrolled beneficiaries to transition from USFHP 

once they become Medicare/TRICARE for Life eligible. Our Association believes 

USFHP is already providing TMA’s medical home model of care, maintaining efficiencies, capturing savings, and improving patient outcomes. Every dollar spent in 

preventative medicine is captured later when the onset of beneficiary co-morbid and 

chronic diseases are delayed. It is difficult to quantify the long-term savings not 

only in actual cost to the health care plan—and thus to the government—but to the 

improvement in the quality of life for the beneficiary. Removing beneficiaries from 

USFHP at a time when they and the system will benefit the most from their preventative and disease management programs would greatly impact the continuity 

and quality of care to our beneficiaries and only cost shift the cost of their care from 

one government agency to another. Almost all USFHP enrollees already purchase 

Medicare Part B in case they decide to leave the plan or spend long periods of time 

in warmer parts of the country. There must be another mechanism in which beneficiaries would be allowed to continue in this patient-centered program. USFHP also 

meets the Patient Protection and Accountability Care Act’s definition of an Accountable Care Organization. They certainly have the model of care desired by civilian 

health care experts and should be used by DOD as a method to test best-practices 

that can be implemented within the direct care system. 

Our Association understands the need for TRICARE to align itself with Medicare 

reimbursement payments. DOD’s proposal to implement reimbursement payment 

for Sole Community Hospitals is another example of its search for efficiencies. According to TMA, 20 hospitals that serve military beneficiaries could be affected by 

this change. We appreciate the 4-year phased-in approach. However, our Association 

recommends Congress encourage TMA to reach out to these hospitals and provide 

waivers if warranted and provide oversight to ensure beneficiaries aren’t unfairly 

impacted by this proposal. 

Our Association approves of DOD’s modest increase to TRICARE Prime enrollment fees for working age retirees. 

We recommend that future increases to TRICARE Prime enrollment fees for 

working age retirees be indexed to retired pay cost-of-living adjustments. 

We recommend that Medicare-eligible beneficiaries using the USFHP be allowed 

to remain in the program. 

We recommend Congress encourage TMA to reach out to Sole Community hospitals serving large numbers of military beneficiaries and provide waivers if warranted. 

Other Cost Saving Proposals 

We ask Congress to establish better oversight for DOD’s accountability in becoming more cost-efficient. We recommend: 

• Requiring the Comptroller General to audit MTFs on a random basis 

until all have been examined for their ability to provide quality health care 

in a cost-effective manner 

• Creating a committee, similar in nature to the Medicare Payment Advisory Commission, to provide oversight of the DOD Military Health System 

(MHS) and make annual recommendations to Congress. The Task Force on 

the Future of Military Health Care often stated it was unable to address 

118 

certain issues not within their charter or within the timeframe in which 

they were commissioned to examine the issues. This Commission would 

have the time to examine every issue in an unbiased manner. 

• Establishing a Unified ‘‘Joint’’ Medical Command structure. This was recommended by the Defense Health Board in 2006 and 2009 and included in 

the U.S. House Armed Service Committee’s NDAA for Fiscal Year 2011 proposal and passed by the House of Representatives. 

We are supportive of TMA’s movement toward a medical home model of patient 

and family-centered care within the direct and purchase care systems. An integrated 

health care model, where beneficiaries will be seen by the same health care team 

focused on well-being and prevention, is a well-known cost saver for health care expenditures. Our concern is with the individual Services’ interpretation of the medical home model and its ability to truly function as designed. Our MTFs are still 

undergoing frequent provider deployments; therefore, the model must be staffed well 

enough to absorb unexpected deployments to theater, normal staff rotation, and still 

maintain continuity of providers within the medical home. 

Our Association believes right-sizing to optimize MTF capabilities through innovating staffing methods; adopting coordination of care models, such as medical 

home; timely replacement of medical facilities utilizing ‘‘world class’’ and ‘‘unified 

construction standards;’’ and increased funding allocations, would allow more beneficiaries to be cared for in the MTFs. This would be a win-win situation because 

it increases MTF capabilities, which DOD asserts is the most cost effective. It also 

allows more families, who state they want to receive care within the MTF, the opportunity to do so. The Task Force made recommendations to make the DOD MHS 

more cost-efficient, which we support. They conclude the MHS must be appropriately sized, resourced, and stabilized and make changes in its business and 

health care practices. We encourage Congress to include the recommendations of the 

Task Force on the Future of Military Health Care in this year’s NDAA for Fiscal 

Year 2012. These include: 

• Restructuring TMA to place greater emphasis on its acquisition role • Examining and implementing strategies to ensure compliance with the 

principles of value-driven health care 

• Incorporating health information technology systems and implementing 

transparency of quality measures and pricing information throughout the 

MHS (This is also a civilian health care requirement in the recently passed 

Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.) 

• Reassessing requirements for purchased care contracts to determine 

whether more cost effective strategies can be implemented 

• Removing systemic obstacles to the use of more efficient and cost-effective 

contracting strategies. 

Behavioral Health Care 

Our Nation must help returning servicemembers and their families cope with the 

aftermath of war. DOD, the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), and State agencies must partner in order to address behavioral health issues early in the process 

and provide transitional mental health programs, especially during PCS moves. 

Partnering will also capture the National Guard and Reserve member population, 

who often straddle these agencies’ health care systems. 

Full Spectrum of Care 

As the war continues, the call from families who need a full spectrum of behavioral health services—from preventative care and stress reduction techniques, to 

counseling and medical mental health services—is growing louder. The military offers a variety of psychological health services, both preventative and treatment, 

across many agencies and programs. However, as servicemembers and families experience numerous lengthy and dangerous deployments, we believe the need for confidential, preventative psychological health services will continue to rise. More importantly, this need will remain high even after military operations scale down. 

The rise in suicides among our Active Duty and Reserve component servicemembers demonstrates the need for these mental health services are at dangerous 

levels. In the research they conducted for us, RAND found military children reported higher anxiety signs and symptoms than their civilian counterparts. A recent 

study by Gorman, et. al (2010), Wartime Military Deployment and Increased Pediatric Mental and Behavioral Health Complaints, found an 11 percent increase in 

outpatient mental health and behavioral health visits for children from the ages of 

3–8 during 2006–2007. There was an 18 percent increase in pediatric behavioral 

health and a 19 percent increase in stress disorders when a parent was deployed. 

They also found an 11 percent decrease in all other health care related visits. AddiVerDate Aug 31 2005 09:55 Jan 25, 2012 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00124 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 Y:\BORAWSKI\DOCS\68089.TXT JUNE PsN: JUNEB
119 

tional research has found an increase in mental health services by non-deployed 

spouses during deployment. A study of TRICARE claims data from 2003–2006 published last year by the New England Journal of Medicine showed an increase in 

mental health diagnoses among Army spouses, especially for those whose 

servicemembers had deployed for more than 1 year. 

Our research also found the mental health of the caregiver directly affects the 

overall well-being of the children. Therefore, we need to treat the family as a unit 

as well as individuals. Communication is key in maintaining family unit balance, 

especially during the deployment phase. Our study also found a direct correlation 

between decreased communication and an increase in child and/or caregiver issues 

during deployment. Research is beginning to validate the high level of stress and 

mental strain our military families are experiencing. 

Access to Behavioral Health Care 

The body of research focusing on the increased levels of anxiety and utilization 

of mental health services and medication causes our Association to be even more 

concerned about the overall shortage of mental health providers in TRICARE’s direct and purchased care network. DOD’s Task Force on Mental Health stated timely 

access to the proper psychological health provider remains one of the greatest barriers to quality mental health services for servicemembers and their families. The 

Army Family Action Plan identified mental health issues as their number three 

issue for 2010. 

While TMA reports significant progress by the TRICARE contractors in adding to 

the numbers of mental health providers in the networks, these numbers do not 

automatically translate into a corresponding increase in access. A recently published 

report in the March 2011 issue of Military Medicine, ‘‘Access to Mental Health Services for Active Duty and National Guard TRICARE Enrollees in Indiana,’’ found 

that only 25 percent of mental health providers listed in the TRICARE contractor’s 

provider list were accepting new TRICARE beneficiaries. Researchers stated the 

number one barrier to Active Duty and Reserve component servicemembers, and 

their families in obtaining mental health care in Indiana was the accuracy of the 

TRICARE mental health provider list. Our Association often hears from families 

about the number of times they contact network providers using the TRICARE provider list only to find the providers cannot meet access standards, are no longer taking TRICARE, or are not taking new TRICARE patients. This study validated what 

the Task Force on Mental Health heard from families during their investigation. 

Provider lists must be up-to-date in order to handle real time demands by military 

families. 

While families are pleased more military mental health providers are available in 

theater to assist their servicemembers, they are disappointed with the resulting limited access to providers at home. Families report they are being turned away from 

obtaining appointments at their MTFs and clinics and told to seek services elsewhere. The military fuels the shortage by deploying its mental health providers, 

even its child and adolescent psychology providers, to combat zones. 

Family members are a key component to a servicemember’s psychological wellbeing. They must be included in mental health counseling and treatment programs 

for servicemembers. Families want to be able to access care with a mental health 

provider who understands or is sympathetic to the issues they face. We recommend 

an extended outreach program to servicemembers, veterans, and their families of 

available mental health resources through DOD and VA with providers who inherently understand military culture. We appreciate the VA allowing family member 

access to Vet Centers; however, we encourage them to develop more family-oriented 

programs. DOD must also look beyond its own resources to increase mental health 

access by working with other government agencies, such as the Substance Abuse 

and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA), especially SAMHSA’s Military Families Strategic Initiative, and encourage State agencies to provide their already established services and programs to servicemembers, veterans, and family 

members. DOD must also educate these other agencies about military culture to 

make the providers more effective in their support. 

Frequent and lengthy deployments create a sharp need in mental health services 

by family members and servicemembers as they get ready to deploy and after their 

return. Embedding mental health providers in medical home modeled clinics will 

allow easier access for our families. There is also an increase in demand in the wake 

of natural disasters, such as hurricanes and fires. DOD must maintain a flexible 

pool of mental health providers that can increase or decrease rapidly in numbers 

depending on demand on the MHS side. Currently, Military Family Life Consultants and Military OneSource counseling are providing this type of preventative and 

entry-level service for military families. The web-based TRICARE Assistance ProVerDate Aug 31 2005 09:55 Jan 25, 2012 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00125 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 Y:\BORAWSKI\DOCS\68089.TXT JUNE PsN: JUNEB
120 

gram offers another vehicle for non-medical counseling, especially for those who live 

far from counselors. The military Services, along with military family members, 

need to be more aware of resources along the continuum of mental health support. 

Families need the flexibility of support in both the MHS and family support arenas, 

as well as coordination of support between these two entities. 

There are other barriers to access for some in our population. Many already live 

in rural areas, such as our Guard and Reserve, or they will choose to relocate to 

rural areas lacking available mental health providers. We need to address the distance issues families face in finding mental health resources and obtaining appropriate care. Isolated servicemembers, National Guard and Reserve, veterans, and 

their families do not have the benefit of the safety net of services and programs provided by MTFs, military installation based support programs, VA facilities, Community-Based Outpatient Centers, and Vet Centers. We hear the National Guard Bureau’s Psychological Health Services (PHS) has not been established in all 50 States 

and is not working as designed to address members’ mental health issues. We recommend that this program be evaluated to determine its effectiveness. We recommend the use of alternative treatment methods, such as telemental health; increasing mental health reimbursement rates for rural areas; modifying licensing requirements in order to remove geographic practice barriers that prevent mental 

health providers from participating in telemental health services; and educating civilian network mental health providers about our military culture. 

The Defense Centers of Excellence is providing a transition benefit for mental 

health services for active duty servicemembers, called in Transition. Our Association 

recommends this program be expanded to provide the same benefit to active duty 

spouses and their children. Families often complain about the lack of seamless transition of care when they PCS. This program will not only provide a warm hand-off 

between mental health providers when moving between and within Regions, but 

more importantly, enable mental health services to begin during the move, when 

families are between duty stations and most venerable. 

The Mental Health Needs of Military Children 

Our Association is concerned about the impact of deployment and/or the injury of 

the servicemember is having on our most vulnerable population, children of our 

military servicemembers and veterans. Our study on the impact of the war on caregivers and children found deployments are creating layers of stressors, which families are experiencing at different stages. Teens especially carry a burden of care they 

are reluctant to share with the non-deployed parent in order to not ‘‘rock the boat.’’ 

They are often encumbered by the feeling of trying to keep the family going, along 

with anger over changes in their schedules, increased responsibility, and fear for 

their deployed parent. Children of the National Guard and Reserve face unique 

challenges since most do not live near a military installation. Our research found 

they have more difficulty with deployments and reintegration than their active duty 

counterpart. 

Our study respondents stated their communities did not understand what it was 

like to be military, and youth reported feeling misunderstood by people in their 

schools. We hear that school systems are generally unaware of this change in focus 

within these family units and are ill prepared to spot potential problems caused by 

these deployments or when an injury occurs. 

Also vulnerable are children who have disabilities that are further complicated by 

deployment or subsequent injury of the servicemembers. Their families find stress 

can be overwhelming, but are afraid to reach out for assistance for fear of retribution to the servicemember’s career. They often choose not to seek care for themselves or their families. We appreciate the inclusion of a study on the mental health 

needs of military children in the NDAA for Fiscal Year 2010 and look forward to 

the findings. 

Suicide 

Our Association recognizes the action being taken by the Services and the VA to 

address the rising number of suicides in active duty, National Guard and Reserve 

servicemembers, and veterans. We appreciate the Army’s recent suicide report and 

the DOD Suicide Prevention Task Force report. However, we are concerned that 

military and veteran families were not included when examining suicides. We have 

no idea whether families are also experiencing a rise in suicides and outpacing their 

civilian counterparts. Therefore, we recommend Congress require a DOD report on 

the number of family members who committed suicide, made a suicide attempt, or 

reported suicidal thoughts. 

We encourage Congress to direct DOD to include a mental health screening of 

military families each time they visit their primary health care provider. Providers 

121 

should inquire about whether or not the family is experiencing a loved one’s deployment. We also recommend DOD offer a pre- and post-deployment mental health 

screening on family members (similar to the PDHA and PDHRA currently being 

done for servicemembers). 

Caregiver Burnout 

In the 10th year of war, care for the caregivers must become a priority. There are 

several levels of caregivers. Our Association hears from the senior officer and enlisted spouses who are so often called upon to be the strength for others. We hear 

from the health care providers, educators, rear detachment staff, chaplains, and 

counselors who are working long hours to assist servicemembers and their families. 

They tell us they are overburdened, burnt out, and need time to recharge so they 

can continue to serve these families. These caregivers must be afforded respite care, 

given emotional support through their command structure, and be provided effective 

family programs. DOD should also take the opportunity to gather lessons learned 

and identify effective resiliency strategies deployed by our senior leaders and their 

spouses for future applications. 

Many providers have just returned home after completing a combat tour, only to 

be overwhelmed by treating active duty members, retirees, and their families. It can 

lead to provider compassion fatigue and create burnout. Our Association would like 

to be assured DOD is allowing these providers adequate dwell time and time to reintegrate with their families before returning to work. Beneficiaries rely heavily on 

MTF providers for their care, especially mental health, and need them to be fully 

ready to care for them. Providers must also be provided the opportunity to sharpen 

their practice skills, which may have not been used while serving in a combat zone. 

If they are not adequately addressed, this situation has the potential to negatively 

impact both the provider’s ability to provide quality care and the beneficiary to receive quality care. We recommend Congress ask for a study to examine the impact 

the war is having on our MHS active duty providers and their families. 

Educating Those Who Care for Servicemembers and Families 

The families of servicemembers and veterans must be educated about the effects 

of Traumatic Brain Injury, Post-Traumatic Stress (PTS), Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD), and suicide in order to help accurately diagnose and treat the 

servicemember/veteran’s condition. These families are on the ‘‘sharp end of the 

spear’’ and are more likely to pick up on changes attributed to either condition and 

relay this information to their health care providers. Programs are being developed 

by each Service. However, they are narrow in focus targeting line leaders and health 

care providers, but not broad enough to capture our military family members and 

the communities they live in. As Services roll out suicide prevention programs, we 

need to include our families, communities, and support personnel. 

The DOD, VA, and State agencies must educate their health care and mental 

health professionals of the effects of mild Traumatic Brain Injury (mTBI) in order 

to help accurately diagnose and treat the servicemember’s condition. They must be 

able to deal with polytrauma—PTS and PTSD in combination with mTBI and multiple physical injuries. 

DOD, working with the TRICARE Managed Care Support Contractors and Service 

medical leadership, must reach out to educate civilian health care providers on how 

to identify signs and symptoms of mTBI, PTS, and PTSD. It must educate them 

about our military culture. We recommend a course on military culture be required 

in all health care and behavioral health care college curriculums and to offer a TMA 

approved military culture Continuing Education Unit for providers who have already graduated. TMA should incentivize providers to take these courses. 

Reintegration 

Reintegration programs become a key ingredient in the family’s success. Our Association believes we need to focus on treating the whole family with programs offering readjustment information, education on identifying stress, substance abuse, suicide, and traumatic brain injury, and encouraging them to seek assistance when 

having financial, relationship, legal, and occupational difficulties. We appreciate the 

inclusion in the NDAA for Fiscal Year 2010 for education programs targeting pain 

management and substance abuse for families, especially as DOD reports an increase in medication-related deaths and prescription-related substance use. We recommend Congress request DOD report on its outreach and the effectiveness of its 

educational programs in addressing this issue. 

Successful return and reunion programs will require attention over the long term, 

as well as a strong partnership at all levels between the various mental health arms 

of DOD, VA, and State agencies. DOD and VA need to provide family and individual 

counseling to address these unique issues. Opportunities for the entire family and 

122 

for the couple to reconnect and bond must also be provided. Our Association has recognized this need and established family retreats under our Operation Purple program in the National Parks, promoting family reintegration following deployment. 

Our Association is noticing a potential impact on the servicemember and their 

families during the 2 week R&R scheduled during a war related assignment. DOD’s 

intent is to provide time for the servicemember to spend quality time with their 

family away from the everyday stress of war. However, families tell us that, even 

though they appreciate the time together, they find the experience can cause increased anxiety, disrupt a family that has already developed successful coping skills 

during deployment, and make it hard for the family to readjust and regain family 

balance after the servicemember has returned to war. Families lack important support mechanisms and resources on how to prepare for before, during, and after the 

2 week R&R. Each family anticipates and handles the situation differently, but all 

say it is stressful. Our Association would like a study on the impact of the 2 week 

R&R on deployed families and the servicemember. This report will help identify 

what tools our families and servicemembers need to be better prepared and determine if the program needs to be modified. 

We recommend an extended outreach program to servicemembers, veterans, and 

their families of available psychological health resources, such as DOD, VA, and 

State agencies. 

We encourage Congress to request DOD to include families in its Psychological 

Health Support survey and perform a pre- and post-deployment mental health 

screening on family members (similar to the PDHA and PDHRA currently being 

done for servicemembers). 

Our Association recommends the ‘‘inTransition’’ program be expanded to provide 

the same benefit to active duty family members. 

We recommend the use of alternative treatment methods, such as telemental 

health; increasing mental health reimbursement rates for rural areas; modifying licensing requirements in order to remove geographic practice barriers that prevent 

mental health providers from participating in telemental health services; and educating civilian network mental health providers about our military culture. 

We recommend Congress require a DOD report on the number of family members 

who have committed or attempted suicide. 

We recommend Congress ask for a study to examine the impact the war is having 

on our MHS active duty providers and their families. 

Wounded Servicemembers Have Wounded Families 

Our Association asserts that behind every wounded servicemember and veteran 

is a wounded family. It is our belief the government, especially the DOD and VA, 

must take a more inclusive view of military and veterans’ families. Those who have 

the responsibility to care for the wounded, ill, and injured servicemember must also 

consider the needs of the spouse, children, parents of single servicemembers and 

their siblings, and the caregivers. DOD and VA need to think proactively as a team 

and one system, rather than separately; and addressing problems and implementing 

initiatives upstream while the servicemember is still on active duty status. 

Reintegration programs become a key ingredient in the family’s success. For the 

past 3 years, we have piloted our Operation Purple® Healing Adventures camp to 

help wounded, ill, and injured servicemembers and their families learn to play again 

as a family. We hear from the families who participate in this camp, as well as others dealing with the recovery of their wounded servicemembers, that, even with congressional intervention and implementation of the Services’ programs, many issues 

still create difficulties for them well into the recovery period. Families find themselves having to redefine their roles following the injury of the servicemember. They 

must learn how to parent and become a spouse/lover with an injury. Each member 

needs to understand the unique aspects the injury brings to the family unit. Parenting from a wheelchair brings a whole new challenge, especially when dealing 

with teenagers. Parents need opportunities to get together with other parents who 

are in similar situations and share their experiences and successful coping methods. 

Our Association believes all must focus on treating the whole family, with DOD and 

VA programs offering skill based training for coping, intervention, resiliency, and 

overcoming adversities. Injury interrupts the normal cycle of deployment and the reintegration process. DOD, the VA, and nongovernmental organizations must provide 

opportunities for the entire family and for the couple to reconnect and bond, especially during the rehabilitation and recovery phases. 

DOD and the VA must do more to work together both during the treatment phase 

and the wounded servicemember’s transition to ease the family’s burden. They must 

break down regulatory barriers to care and expand support through the Vet Centers 

the VA medical centers, and the community-based outpatient clinics (CBOCs). We 

123 

recommend DOD partner with the VA to allow military families access to mental 

health services throughout the VA’s entire network of care using the TRICARE benefit. Before expanding support services to families, however, VA facilities must establish a holistic, family-centered approach to care when providing mental health 

counseling and programs to the wounded, ill, and injured servicemember or veteran. 

We remain concerned about the transition of wounded, injured, and ill 

servicemembers and their families from active duty status to that of the medicallyretired. While we are grateful, DOD has proposed to exempt medically-retired 

servicemembers, survivors, and their families from the TRICARE Prime enrollment 

fee increases, we believe wounded servicemembers need even more assistance in 

their transition. We continue to recommend that a legislative change be made to 

create a 3-year transition period in which medically-retired servicemembers and 

their families would be treated as active duty family members in terms of TRICARE 

fees, benefits, and MTF access. This transition period would mirror that currently 

offered to surviving spouses and would allow the medically-retired time to adjust to 

their new status without having to adjust to a different level of TRICARE support. 

Case Management 

Our Association still finds families trying to navigate a variety of complex health 

care systems alone, trying to find the right combination of care. Our most seriously 

wounded, ill, and injured servicemembers, veterans, and their families are often assigned multiple case managers. Families often wonder which one is the ‘‘right’’ case 

manager. We believe DOD and the VA must look at whether the multiple, layered 

case managers have streamlined the processor have only aggravated it. We know 

the goal is for a seamless transition of care between DOD and the VA. However, 

we continue to hear from families, whose servicemember is still on active duty and 

meets the Federal Recovery Coordinator (FRC) requirement, who have not been told 

FRCs exist or that the family qualifies for one. We are awaiting the Government 

Accountability Office’s (GAO) FRC report to determine how that program is working 

in caring for our most seriously wounded, ill, and injured servicemembers and veterans and what can be done to improve the case management process. 

Caregivers of the Wounded 

Caregivers need to be recognized for the important role they play in the care of 

their loved one. Without them, the quality of life of the wounded servicemembers 

and veterans, such as physical, psycho-social, and mental health, would be significantly compromised. They are viewed as an invaluable resource to DOD and VA 

health care providers because they tend to the needs of the servicemembers and the 

veterans on a regular basis. Their daily involvement saves DOD, VA, and State 

agency health care dollars in the long run. Their long-term psychological care needs 

must be addressed. Caregivers of the severely wounded, ill, and injured servicemembers who are now veterans have a long road ahead of them. In order to perform 

their job well, they will require access to mental health services. 

The VA has made a strong effort in supporting veterans’ caregivers. DOD should 

follow suit and expand its definition, which still does not align with P.L. 111–163. 

We appreciate the inclusion in NDAA for Fiscal Year 2010 of compensation for 

servicemembers with assistance in everyday living and the refinement in NDAA for 

Fiscal Year 2011. The VA recently released their VA Caregiver Implementation 

Plan. Our Association had the opportunity to testify at a recent House Veterans’ Affairs Committee hearing ‘‘Implementation of Caregiver Assistance: Are we getting 

it right?’’ about our concerns related to the VA’s caregiver implementation plan. We 

believe the VA is waiting too long to provide valuable resources to caregivers of our 

wounded, ill, and injured servicemembers and veterans who had served in Operation Iraqi Freedom/Operation Enduring Freedom/Operation New Dawn (OIF/OEF/ 

OND). The intent of the law was to allow caregivers to receive value-added benefits 

in a timely manner in order to improve the caregiver’s overall quality of life and 

train them to provide quality of care to their servicemember and veteran. The VA’s 

interpretation also has the potential to impact the DOD’s Special Compensation for 

servicemembers law passed as part of NDAA for Fiscal Year 2010 and modified in 

fiscal year 2011. The one area of immediate concern is the potential gap in financial 

compensation when the servicemember transitions to veteran status. The VA’s application process and caregiver validation process appear to be very time intensive. 

The DOD compensation benefit expires at 90-days following separation from active 

duty. Other concerns include: 

• Narrower eligibility requirements than what the law intended; 

• Lack of clarity concerning whether an illness is covered, such as cancer 

from a chemical exposure; 

124 

• Delay in the caregiver’s receipt of health care benefits if currently uninsured, respite care, and training; and 

• Exclusion of non-medical care from the VA’s caregiver stipend. 

The VA’s decision to delay access to valuable training may force each Service to 

begin its own training program. Thus, each Service’s training program will vary in 

its scope and practice and may not meet VA’s training objectives. This disconnect 

could force the caregiver to undergo two different training programs in order to provide and care and receive benefits. 

Our Association also believes the current laws do not go far enough. Compensation of caregivers should be a priority for DOD and the Secretary of Homeland Security. Non-medical care should be factored into DOD’s compensation to 

servicemembers. The goal is to create a seamless transition of caregiver benefit between DOD and the VA. We ask Congress to assist in meeting that responsibility. 

The VA currently has eight caregiver assistance pilot programs to expand and improve health care education and provide needed training and resources for caregivers who assist disabled and aging veterans in their homes. DOD should evaluate 

these pilot programs to determine whether to adopt them for caregivers of 

servicemembers still on active duty. Caregivers’ responsibilities start while the 

servicemember is still on active duty. 

Relocation Allowance and Housing for Medically-Retired Single servicemembers 

Active Duty servicemembers and their spouses qualify through the DOD for military orders to move their household goods when they leave the military service. 

Medically retired servicemembers are given a final PCS move. Medically retired 

married servicemembers are allowed to move their family; however, medically retired single servicemembers only qualify for moving their own personal goods. 

Our Association suggests that legislation be passed to allow medically retired single servicemembers the opportunity to have their caregiver’s household goods moved 

as a part of the medical retired single servicemember’s PCS move. This should be 

allowed for the qualified caregiver of the wounded servicemember and the caregiver’s family (if warranted), such as a sibling who is married with children, or mom 

and dad. This would allow for the entire caregiver’s family to move, not just the 

caregiver. The reason for the move is to allow the medically retired single 

servicemember the opportunity to relocate with their caregiver to an area offering 

the best medical care, rather than the current option that only allows for the medically retired single servicemember to move their belongings to where the caregiver 

currently resides. The current option may not be ideal because the area in which 

the caregiver lives may not be able to provide all the health care services required 

for treating and caring for the medically retired servicemember. Instead of trying 

to create the services in the area, a better solution may be to allow the medically 

retired servicemember, their caregiver, and the caregiver’s family to relocate to an 

area where services already exist. 

The decision on where to relocate for optimum care should be made with the FRC 

(case manager), the servicemember’s medical physician, the servicemember, and the 

caregiver. All aspects of care for the medically retired servicemember and their caregiver shall be considered. These include a holistic examination of the medically retired servicemember, the caregiver, and the caregiver’s family for, but not limited 

to, their needs and opportunities for health care, employment, transportation, and 

education. The priority for the relocation should be where the best quality of services is readily available for the medically retired servicemember and his/her caregiver. 

The consideration for a temporary partial shipment of caregiver’s household goods 

may also be allowed, if deemed necessary by the case management team. 

We ask Congress to allow medically-retired servicemembers and their families to 

maintain the active duty family TRICARE benefit for a transition period of 3 years 

following the date of medical retirement, comparable to the benefit for surviving 

spouses. 

Servicemembers medically discharged from service and their family members 

should be allowed to continue for 1 year as active duty for TRICARE and then start 

the Continued Health Care Benefit Program if needed. 

Caregivers of the wounded, ill, and injured must be provided with opportunities 

for training, compensation and other support programs because of the important 

role they play in the successful rehabilitation and care of the servicemember and 

veteran. 

We request legislation authorizing medically retired single servicemembers to 

have their caregiver’s household goods moved as a part of their final PCS move. 

125 

Medical Power of Attorney 

We have heard from caregivers of the difficult decisions they have to make over 

their loved one’s bedside following an injury. We support the Traumatic Brain Injury Task Force recommendation for DOD to require each deploying servicemember 

to execute a Medical Power of Attorney and a Living Will. 

DOD should require each deploying servicemember to execute a Medical Power of 

Attorney and a Living Will. 

Senior Oversight Committee 

Our Association is appreciative of the provision in the NDAA for Fiscal Year 2009 

continuing the DOD and VA Senior Oversight Committee (SOC) until December 

2010. The DOD established the Office of Wounded Warrior Care and Transition Policy to take over the SOC responsibilities. The Office has seen frequent leadership 

and staff changes and a narrowing of its mission. We urge Congress to put a mechanism in place to continue to monitor this Office for its responsibilities in maintaining DOD and VA’s partnership and making sure joint initiatives create a seamless 

transition of services and benefits for our wounded, ill, and injured servicemembers, 

veterans, their families, and caregivers. 

Defense Centers of Excellence 

A recent GAO report found the Defense Centers of Excellence (DCoE) for Psychological Health and Traumatic Brain Injury has been challenged by a mission that 

lacked clarity and by time-consuming hiring practices. Other DCoE have experienced a lack of adequate funding hampering their ability to hire adequate staff and 

begin to provide care for the patient population as they were created to address. 

These include the Vision Center of Excellence, Hearing Center of Excellence, and 

the Traumatic Extremity Injury and Amputation Center of Excellence. We recommend Congress immediately fund these Centers and require DOD to provide resources to effectively establish these Centers and meet DOD’s definition of ‘‘world 

class’’ facilities. 

Our Association encourages all congressional committees with jurisdiction over 

military personnel and veterans matters to talk on these important issues. Congress, DOD, and VA can no longer continue to create policies in a vacuum and focus 

on each agency separately because our wounded, ill, and injured servicemembers 

and their families need seamless, coordinated support from each. 

III. FAMILY TRANSITIONS

Policies and programs must provide training and support for families during the 

many transitions military families experience. Quality education for spouses and 

children, financial literacy, and spouse career progression need attention. When 

families experience a life-changing event, they require a responsive system to support them. Our Nation must continue to ensure our surviving family members receive the support they deserve. 

Survivors 

The Services continue to improve their outreach to surviving families. In particular, the Army’s SOS (Survivor Outreach Services) program makes an effort to 

remind these families they are not forgotten. We most appreciate the special consideration, sensitivity, and outreach to the families whose servicemembers have committed suicide. We would like to acknowledge the work of the Tragedy Assistance 

Program for Survivors (TAPS) in this area as well. They have developed unique outreach to these families and held support conferences to help surviving family members navigate what is a very difficult time with many unanswered questions. DOD 

and the VA must work together to ensure surviving spouses and their children can 

receive the mental health services they need, through all of VA’s venues. We believe 

Congress must grant authority to allow coverage of bereavement or grief counseling 

under the TRICARE behavioral health benefit. The goal is the right care at the 

right time for optimum treatment effect. 

We thank Congress for extending the TRICARE Active Duty Dental benefit to all 

survivors for the first 3 years. Unfortunately, the TRICARE Management Activity 

has not yet fully implemented this coverage. We hope a gentle nudge from Congress 

may speed that process along. 

Our Association recommends that grief counseling be more readily available to 

survivors as a TRICARE benefit. 

We also ask that the TRICARE Management Activity implement the legislation 

that expanded eligibility for 3 years of the TRICARE Active Duty Dental Benefit 

to survivors who had not been enrolled in the TRICARE Dental Program prior to 

the servicemember’s death. 

126 

Our Association still believes the benefit change that will provide the most significant long-term advantage to the financial security of all surviving families would 

be to end the Dependency and Indemnity Compensation (DIC) offset to the Survivor 

Benefit Plan (SBP). Ending this offset would correct an inequity that has existed 

for many years. Each payment serves a different purpose. The DIC is a special indemnity (compensation or insurance) payment paid by the VA to the survivor when 

the servicemember’s service causes his or her death. The SBP annuity, paid by 

DOD, reflects the longevity of the service of the military member. It is ordinarily 

calculated at 55 percent of retired pay. Military retirees who elect SBP pay a portion of their retired pay to ensure that their family has a guaranteed income should 

the retiree die. If that retiree dies due to a service-connected disability, their survivor becomes eligible for DIC. 

Surviving active duty spouses can make several choices, dependent upon their circumstances and the ages of their children. Because SBP is offset by the DIC payment, the spouse may choose to waive this benefit and select the ‘‘child only’’ option. 

In this scenario, the spouse would receive the DIC payment and the children would 

receive the full SBP amount until each child turns 18 (23 if in college), as well as 

the individual child DIC until each child turns 18 (23 if in college). Once the children have left the house, this choice currently leaves the spouse with an annual income of $13,848, a significant drop in income from what the family had been earning while the servicemember was alive and on active duty. The percentage of loss 

is even greater for survivors whose servicemembers served longer. Those who give 

their lives for their country deserve more fair compensation for their surviving 

spouses. 

We believe several other adjustments could be made to the Survivor Benefit Plan. 

Allowing payment of the SBP benefits into a Special Needs Trust in cases of disabled beneficiaries will preserve their eligibility for income based support programs. 

The government should be able to switch SBP payments to children if a surviving 

spouse is convicted of complicity in the member’s death. 

We believe there needs to be DIC equity with other Federal survivor benefits. 

Currently, DIC is set at $1,154 monthly (43 percent of the Disabled Retirees Compensation). Survivors of Federal workers have their annuity set at 55 percent of 

their Disabled Retirees Compensation. Military survivors should receive 55 percent 

of VA Disability Compensation. We are pleased that the requirement for a report 

to assess the adequacy of DIC payments was included in the NDAA for Fiscal Year 

2009. We are awaiting the overdue report. We support raising DIC payments to 55 

percent of VA Disability Compensation. When changes are made, we ask Congress 

to ensure that DIC eligibles under the old system receive an equivalent increase. 

Imagine that you have just experienced the death of your spouse, a retired 

servicemember. In your grief, you navigate all the gates you must, fill out paperwork, notify all the offices required. Then, the overdrawn notices start showing up 

in your mailbox. Bills that you thought had been paid at the beginning of the month 

suddenly appear with ‘‘overdue’’ on them. Retirees are paid proactively, that is, they 

receive retired pay for the upcoming month i.e. on May 31, a retiree receives retired 

pay for the month of June. Presently, the government has the authority to take back 

the full month’s pay from the retiree’s checking account when that retiree dies. Payment for the number of days the retiree was alive in the month is subsequently returned to the surviving spouse. The VA, on the other hand, allows the surviving 

spouse to keep the last month of disability pay. We applaud Congressman Walter 

Jones (R–NC/3rd) for introducing H.R. 493, which would allow the surviving spouse 

or family to keep the last month of retired pay to avoid financial penalties caused 

by the decrease of funds in a checking account. 

We ask the DIC offset to SBP be eliminated to recognize the length of commitment and service of the career servicemember and spouse. We support H.R. 178 and 

S. 260, which both provide for that elimination. 

We also request that SBP benefits be allowed to be paid to a Special Needs Trust 

in cases of disabled family members. 

We ask that DIC be increased to 55 percent of VA Disability Compensation. 

We support H.R. 493, ‘‘The Military Retiree Survivor Comfort Act’’, to provide for 

forgiveness of overpayments of retired pay paid to deceased retired members of the 

Armed Forces following their death. 

Implementation of the Repeal of ‘‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’’ 

Our Association has long promoted the need for support of all families during deployments. Parents, siblings, and significant others need access to information about 

their loved ones and access to resources while they undergo their own stresses and 

worries. Many family readiness groups have opened their arms to these non-ID card 

holding family members. 

127 

We hear from families of gay and lesbian servicemembers that their loved ones 

have not sought these resources because of fear of disclosure. They deal with deployment alone without the support that military families take for granted and rely on. 

We hear from families about the children in these relationships, who many times 

can’t let anyone know that Mommy or Daddy is deployed, and may not receive the 

extra support or counseling they may need. 

We hope that the repeal of the ‘‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’’ policy will help make resources and support available to all those who support their servicemember. We understand that eligibility for many benefits, including medical care, housing, and assignment preferences will not be extended to partners of servicemembers because 

of Federal regulations. We ask that military family members be provided education 

and training to help them understand the implications of implementation and to 

help them separate fact from fiction. 

We underscore the need for military family members to be provided with education and training to help them understand how the repeal of ‘‘Don’t Ask, Don’t 

Tell’’ is being implemented and to allay any misconceptions and concerns they may 

have. 

Education of Military Children 

Military families place a high value on the quality of their children’s education. 

It is a leading factor in determining many important family decisions, such as volunteering for duty assignments, choosing to accompany the servicemember or staying behind, selecting where a family lives within their new community, deciding 

whether to spend their financial resources on private school, or considering home 

schooling options. It can even impact a families’ decision to remain in the Service. 

Military families want quality education for their children just as their civilian 

counterparts do. It is important to remember that military families define ‘‘quality 

of education’’ differently. For military families, it is not enough for children to be 

doing well in their current schools, they must also be prepared for the next location. 

Most military children will move at least twice during their high school years and 

most will attend six to nine different schools between kindergarten and 12th grade. 

Although the Interstate Compact on Educational Opportunity for Military Children 

is helping to alleviate many of the transition issues our families face when moving, 

it does not address the quality of education in our schools. Though many of our civilian schools are already doing an excellent job of educating and supporting our military children, we believe military children deserve a quality education wherever 

they may live. That is why our Association has spent over 40 years working to improve education for our military children and empowering parents to become their 

children’s best advocate. 

With more than 90 percent of military-connected students now attending civilian 

schools, our Association is pleased that DOD has completed a 90-day preliminary 

assessment of how to provide a world-class education for all of the 1.2 million 

school-aged children, not just those under the Department of Defense Education Activity’s (DODEA) purview. Our Association was invited by Dr. Clifford L. Stanley, 

Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness, to participate in the Education Review Debriefing and to offer our insights on the way ahead. We look forward to the final report and to working with DOD to support its implementation. 

We thank DOD for the educational support programs already available to military 

children, such as the tutoring program for deployed servicemember families, and 

DODEA’s virtual high schools. Our Association believes these programs are making 

a difference and would be beneficial to all military families. 

We were also pleased the President’s landmark directive, ‘‘Strengthening Our 

Military Families,’’ listed as one of its top priorities the need to ensure excellence 

in military children’s education and their development. We greatly appreciate the 

Department of Education committing to making military families one of its priorities for its discretionary grant programs and for including our Association as a military stakeholder in finding ways to strengthen military families within the Reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act. 

Our Association thanks Congress for providing additional funding to civilian 

school districts educating military children through DODEA’s Educational Partnership Grant Program. We are aware that DODEA’s expanded authority to share its 

expertise, experience, and resources to assist military children during transitions, 

to sharpen the expertise of teachers and administrators in meeting the needs of 

military children, and to provide assistance to local education agencies on deployment support for military children is set to expire in 2013. We ask Congress to extend this authority. 

We strongly urge Congress to ensure it is providing appropriate and timely funding of Impact Aid through the Department of Education. We also ask that you allow 

128 

school districts experiencing high levels of growth, due to military base realignment, 

to apply for Impact Aid funds using current student enrollment numbers rather 

than the previous year. In addition, we call on Congress to increase DOD Impact 

Aid funding for schools educating large numbers of military connected students. Our 

Association has long believed that both Impact Aid programs are critical to ensuring 

that school districts can provide quality education for our military children. 

We ask Congress to increase the DOD supplement to Impact Aid and to allow 

school districts experiencing high growth due to base realignments to apply for Impact Aid funds using current student enrollment numbers. We also ask Congress to 

extend DODEA’s expanded authority. 

Voting Support for Military Servicemembers and their Families 

Our Association thanks Congress for continuing to shine a light on the need to 

protect and improve absentee voting rights for military families. The passage of the 

Military and Overseas Voter Empowerment (MOVE) Act of 2009 was a tremendous 

victory for our military community. The recent hearing held by the Committee on 

House Administration to evaluate the effectiveness of the MOVE Act in the 2010 

elections demonstrates the ongoing commitment of Congress to upholding voting 

rights for military personnel serving overseas. Our Association greatly appreciates 

this effort. In addition, we want to stress the importance of remembering that military servicemembers and their families often vote by absentee ballot while stationed 

within the United States. It is not uncommon for military families to be living in 

one duty location with the servicemember and spouse each voting in a separate 

State, further complicating the absentee voting process. 

As a member of The Military Coalition (TMC) and the Alliance for Military and 

Overseas Voting Rights (AMOVR), our Association was instrumental in helping to 

pass the MOVE Act. It was an important step toward alleviating many of the voting 

issues faced by military families. However, individual State attempts to comply have 

not been completely effective in overcoming these difficulties. Furthermore, the 

MOVE Act did not encompass State and local elections. We are currently working 

with the Uniformed Law Commission and the DOD State Liaison Office to support 

the passage of the Uniform Military and Overseas Voters Act (UMOVA) in the 

States, to provide a State solution for military families and overseas voters. This 

legislation would assist States in meeting the statutory mandates of the MOVE Act 

and expand these important protections and benefits to cover State and local elections. Our Association is encouraging State legislatures to build on Federal efforts 

by adopting UMOVA. 

Spouse Education and Employment 

We are pleased the NDAA for Fiscal Year 2011 calls for a report on military 

spouse education programs. Our recent surveys and feedback we have received from 

military families indicates they appreciate in-State tuition and the Post-9/11 G.I. 

Bill transferability. Our Association would like to thank Congress for the enhancements made to the Post-9/11 G.I. Bill last session. We are especially pleased that 

spouses of active duty servicemembers are now eligible for the book stipend and the 

authority to grant transferability has been extended to families of the Commissioned 

Corps of NOAA and the U.S. Public Health Service. 

DOD’s most-cited program success for military spouses is the Military Spouse Career Advance Account (MyCAA)—in its original form. In October 2010, MyCAA was 

significant revised and seasoned spouses who are no longer eligible feel their education pursuits are not supported by DOD. Many military spouses delay their education to support the servicemember’s career. Since 2004, our Association has been 

fortunate to sponsor our Joanne Holbrook Patton Military Spouse Scholarship Program, with the generosity of donors who wish to help military families. Of particular 

interest, 33.5 percent of applicants from our 2011 scholarship applicant pool stated 

their education was interrupted because of the military lifestyle (frequent moves, 

TDYs, moving expenses, etc.) and 12.2 percent of those directly attributed the interruption to deployment of the servicemember. Military spouses remain committed to 

their education and need assistance from Congress to fulfill their educational pursuits. We ask Congress to push DOD to fully reinstate the MyCAA program to include all military spouses, regardless of their servicemember’s rank and to ensure 

the funding is available for this reinstatement. We also ask Congress to work with 

the appropriate Service Secretaries to extend the MyCAA program to spouses of the 

Coast Guard, the Commissioned Corps of NOAA, and the U.S. Public Health Service. 

The NDAA for Fiscal Year 2011 report on military spouse education programs 

only addresses one aspect—education. In order to determine if the education programs are working, we recommend a report on spouse employment programs. The 

129 

NDAA for Fiscal Year 2010 created a pilot program to secure internships for military spouses with Federal agencies. Funding for the program continues through fiscal year 2011. A report on military spouse employment programs should include an 

assessment of the military spouse Federal internship program. Military spouses 

want more Federal employment opportunities. Should the pilot become a permanent 

program? We urge Congress to monitor the pilot to ensure spouses are able to access 

the program and eligible spouses are able to find Federal employment after successful completion of the internship. Our Association recommends Congress requests a 

report on military spouse employment programs. 

To further spouse employment opportunities, we recommend an expansion to the 

Work Opportunity Tax Credit for employers who hire spouses of active duty and Reserve component servicemembers as proposed through the Military Spouse Employment Act, H.R. 687. This employer tax credit is one way to encourage corporate 

America to hire military spouses. 

We also recommend providing a tax credit to military spouses to offset the expense of obtaining a career license or credential when the servicemember is relocated to a new duty station. Military spouses are financially disadvantaged by government ordered moves when they are required to obtain a career license in a new 

State to practice in their profession. Many military spouses must maintain a career 

license in multiple States, costing hundreds of dollars. For example, a pharmacist 

can only reciprocate to another State from their original license, which requires a 

military spouse pharmacist to maintain a license in more than one State. When our 

Association asked military spouses to share their employment challenges with us, 

a military spouse of 26 years stated, ‘‘The very most frustrating part about the process, is that obtaining a license does not guarantee that I will find employment. I 

have been licensed in [Kentucky] for a full year and in that time have gotten ONE 

6-hour shift of work. That one shift does not even begin to recover the expense of 

obtaining my license here.’’ We recommend that Congress pass the Military Spouse 

Job Continuity Act or similar legislation to reduce the financial barrier licensed 

military spouses must overcome with each move in order to find employment. 

Our Association urges Congress to recognize the value of military spouses by fully 

funding the MyCAA program for all military spouses, expand the Work Opportunity 

Tax Credit to include military spouses, and provide a tax credit to offset State license and credential fees. 

Support for Special Needs Families 

The NDAA for Fiscal Year 2010 established the Office of Community Support for 

Military Families with Special Needs to enhance and improve DOD support around 

the world for military families with special needs, whether medical or educational. 

Our Association remains concerned that the Office has not received the proper resources to address the medical, educational, relocation, and family support resources 

our special needs families often require. This Office must address these various 

needs in a holistic manner in order to effectively implement change. The original 

intent of the legislation was to have the office reside in the office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness in order to bring together all entities 

having responsibility for the medical, educational, relocation, and family support 

needs of special needs military family member. At present, however, the office comes 

under the jurisdiction of the Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Military 

Community and Family Policy. 

Case management for military beneficiaries with special needs is not consistent 

across the Services or the TRICARE Regions because the coordination care for the 

military family is being done by a non-synergistic health care system. Beneficiaries 

try to obtain an appointment and then find themselves getting partial health care 

within the MTF, while other health care is referred out into the purchased care network. Thus, military families end up managing their own care. In congruence in the 

case management process becomes more apparent when military family members 

transfer from one TRICARE Region to another and when transferring within the 

same TRICARE Region. This in congruence is further exacerbated when a special 

needs family member is involved and they require not only medical intervention, but 

non-medical care as well. Families need a seamless transition and a warm handoff between and within TRICARE Regions and a universal case management process 

across the MHS. Each TRICARE Managed Care Support Contractor (MCSC) has 

created different case management processes. TRICARE leaders must work closely 

with their family support counterparts through the Office of Community Support for 

Military Families with Special Needs to develop a coordinated case management 

system that takes into account other military and community resources. 

We applaud the attention Congress and DOD have given to our special needs family members in the past 2 years and their desire to create robust health care, eduVerDate Aug 31 2005 09:55 Jan 25, 2012 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00135 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 Y:\BORAWSKI\DOCS\68089.TXT JUNE PsN: JUNEB
130 

cational, and family support services for special needs family members. But, these 

robust services do not follow them when they retire. We encourage the Services to 

allow these military families the opportunity to have their final duty station be in 

an area of their choice, preferably in the same State in which they plan to live after 

the servicemember retires, to enable them to begin the process of becoming eligible 

for State and local services while still on active duty. We also suggest the Extended 

Care Health Option (ECHO) be extended for 1 year after retirement for those family 

members already enrolled in ECHO prior to retirement. More importantly, our Association recommends if the ECHO program is extended, it must be for all who are 

eligible for the program because we should not create a different benefit simply 

based on medical diagnosis. 

The Office of Community Support is beginning a study on Medicaid availability 

for special needs military family members. Our Association is anxiously awaiting 

this report’s findings. We will be especially interested in the types of value-added 

services individual State Medicaid waivers offer their enrollees and whether State 

budget difficulties are making it more difficult for military families to qualify for 

and participate in waiver programs. This information will provide yet another avenue to identify additional services ECHO may include in order to help address our 

families’ frequent moves and their inability to often qualify for these additional 

value-added benefits in a timely manner. 

There has been discussion over the past several years by Congress and military 

families regarding the ECHO program. The ECHO program was originally designed 

to allow military families with special needs to receive additional services to offset 

their lack of eligibility for State or federally provided services impacted by frequent 

moves. We suggest that before making any more adjustments to the ECHO program, Congress should request a GAO report to determine if the ECHO program 

is working as it was originally designed and if it has been effective in addressing 

the needs of this population. We also hear from our ECHO eligible families that 

they could benefit from additional programs and health care services to address 

their special needs. We request a DOD pilot study to identify what additional service(s), if any, our special needs families need to improve their quality of life, such 

as cooling vests, diapers, and some nutritional supplements. We recommend families 

have access to $3,000 of additional funds to purchase self-selected items, programs, 

and/or services not already covered by ECHO. DOD would be required to authorize 

each purchase to verify the requested item, program, or service is appropriate. The 

pilot study will identify gaps in coverage and provide DOD and Congress with a list 

of possible extra ECHO benefits for special needs families. We need to make the 

right fixes so we can be assured we apply the correct solutions. Our Association believes the Medicaid waiver report, the GAO report, along with the pilot study will 

provide DOD and Congress with the valuable information needed to determine if the 

ECHO program needs to be modified in order to provide the right level of extra coverage for our special needs families. We also recommend a report examining the impact of the war on special needs military families. 

We ask Congress to request a GAO report to determine if the ECHO program is 

working as it was originally designed and if it has been effective in addressing the 

needs of this population. 

We request a DOD pilot study to identify what additional service(s), if any, our 

special needs families need to improve their quality of life. 

We also recommend a report examining the impact of the war on our special 

needs families. 

Families on the Move 

A PCS move to an overseas location can be especially stressful for our families. 

Military families are faced with the prospect of being thousands of miles from extended family and living in a foreign culture. At many overseas locations, there are 

insufficient numbers of government quarters resulting in the requirement to live on 

the local economy away from the installation. Family members in these situations 

can feel extremely isolated; for some the only connection to anything familiar is the 

local military installation. Unfortunately, current law permits the shipment of only 

one vehicle to an overseas location, including Alaska and Hawaii. Since most families today have two vehicles, they sell one of the vehicles. 

Upon arriving at the new duty station, the servicemember requires transportation 

to and from the place of duty leaving the military spouse and family members at 

home without transportation. This lack of transportation limits the ability of 

spouses to secure employment and the ability of children to participate in extracurricular activities. While the purchase of a second vehicle alleviates these issues, 

it also results in significant expense while the family is already absorbing other 

costs associated with a move. Simply permitting the shipment of a second vehicle 

131 

at government expense could alleviate this expense and acknowledge the needs of 

today’s military family. 

Travel allowances and reimbursement rates have not kept pace with the out-ofpocket costs associated with today’s moves. In a recent PCS survey conducted by our 

Association, more than 50 percent of survey respondents identified uncovered expenses related to the move as their top moving challenge. Military families are authorized 10 days for a housing hunting trip, but the cost for trip is the responsibility 

of the servicemember. Families with two vehicles may ship one vehicle and travel 

together in the second vehicle. The vehicle will be shipped at the servicemember’s 

expense and then the servicemember will be reimbursed funds not used to drive the 

second vehicle to help offset the cost of shipping it. Or, families may drive both vehicles and receive reimbursement provided by the Monetary Allowance in Lieu of 

Transportation (MALT) rate. MALT is not intended to reimburse for all costs of operating a car but is payment in lieu of transportation on a commercial carrier. Yet, 

a TDY mileage rate considers the fixed and variable costs to operate a vehicle. Travel allowances and reimbursement rates should be brought in line with the actually 

out-of-pocket costs borne by military families. 

Our Association supports the servicemembers Permanent Change of Station Relief 

Act, S. 472 and believes it will reduce some of the additional moving expenses incurred by many military families. 

Our Association requests that Congress authorize the shipment of a second vehicle to an overseas location (at least Alaska and Hawaii) on accompanied tours, and 

that Congress address the out-of-pocket expenses military families bear for government ordered moves. 

Former Spouses 

On September 10, 2001, DOD released a report containing recommendations for 

improvements to the Uniformed Services Former Spouse Protection Act (USFSPA). 

While Congress has addressed one or two of the recommendations from the report 

in the ensuing 10 years, none of them have been passed. We endorse the TMC recommendation for a hearing on this important issue. 

We have also heard from a number of spouses who have been abandoned physically and financially. There can be many reasons for this, some related to behavioral health, some to inability of the families to reintegrate after many deployments. 

We intend to pursue this issue with DOD and the Services since it appears not to 

need a legislative fix. However, we do feel it is important enough to mention as a 

symptom of how our families and marriages are suffering after 10 years of war. 

Our Association recommends that legislative action be taken to implement recommendations of the DOD Report on the USFSPA including: 

• Base the award amount to the former spouse on the grade and years of 

service of the member at time of divorce (not time of retirement); 

• Prohibit the award of imputed income while on active duty, which effectively forces active duty members into retirement; 

• Extend 20/20/20 benefits to 20/20/15 former spouses; 

• Permit the designation of multiple Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP) beneficiaries with the presumption that SBP benefits must be proportionate to 

the allocation of retired pay; 

• Eliminate the ‘‘10-year Rule’’ for the direct payment of retired pay allocations by the Defense Finance and Accounting Service (DFAS); 

• Permit SBP premiums to be withheld from the former spouse’s share of 

retired pay if directed by court order; 

• Permit a former spouse to waive SBP coverage; 

• Repeal the 1-year deemed election requirement for SBP; and 

• Assist DOD and the Services with greater outreach and expanded awareness to members and former spouses of their rights, responsibilities, and 

benefits upon divorce. 

Military Families—Our Nation’s Families 

Military families have been supporting their warriors in time of war for 10 years. 

DOD and the military Services, with the help and guidance of Congress have developed programs and policies to respond to their changing and developing needs over 

this time. Families have come to rely on this support. They appreciate the spotlight 

of recognition that has been shone on their experience by the First Lady and Dr. 

Biden. They are heartened by the new sense of cooperation between government 

agencies in coordinating support. They know that it is up to them to make use of 

the tools and programs provided to become more resilient with each deployment. 

Congress provides the authorization and funding for these tools and programs. Even 

132 

in a time of austere budgets, our Nation needs to sustain this support in order to 

maintain readiness. Our military families deserve no less. 

Senator WEBB. Okay, thank you. 

Captain Puzon, welcome. 

STATEMENT OF CAPT IKE PUZON, USN (RET.) 

Mr. PUZON. Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee, 

thank you for your strong support for all servicemembers, their 

families, and survivors. They’re serving relentlessly. 

My testimony will focus on a few Reserve component issues. 

First, making retroactive Public Law 110–181, Reserve Early Retirement Provision, is a top goal for TMC. The passage of legislation establishing September 11, 2001, as the eligibility start date 

for Guard and Reserve early retirement is very important to all our 

members and to those serving. 

Those most at risk from 2001 to 2008 were left out. Since 2001, 

more than 800,000 men and women have answered the call to Active Duty, putting themselves at the same risk as all deployed 

forces, and many of them serving multiple tours. 

Unfortunately, most of those tours of 2001–2008 will not count 

towards the early retirement provision unless steps are taken to 

retroactively recognize mobilization. I believe it can be done 

through a phased-in approach, and ask that you consider that approach. 

Also, I believe it’s clear that overseas contingency operations will 

continue as it has for the last 20 years. The Reserve component is 

an affordable, operational Reserve Force of choice and has answered the calls and provided the military and deployed to war 

zones when they have asked. 

Second, a continuum of care for Reserve components in the Individual Ready Reserve (IRR). We believe healthcare access for the 

Guard and Reserve should continue to improve with their increased 

role in our Nation’s defense. We ask that you consider legislation 

to allow these reservists that go into the IRR—and they are 

deployable—that they must have access to, at a reasonable premium—TRICARE Reserve Select, perhaps—healthcare coverage. 

Finally, Reserve components’ access to mental health professionals. We’ve heard a lot about that, for all the forces. We are all 

concerned about these increases in military suicide rate. The Reserve suicide instances have increased dramatically since 2006. 

Loss of employment, foreclosures, divorce, debts all face our Reserve components as they return from mobilization. These issues 

inflict a serious emotional toll. We ask that you support S. 325, 

Senator Murray’s bill, for embedded mental health providers and 

to provide mental health care for members of the Reserve components during their training. 

These are just some of the top issues. With DOD considering a 

new revamping of Reserve Forces to access more operational commitments from the Reserve Forces, we have to consider addressing 

these issues now. If it is vital and necessary to deploy these forces, 

then it must be essential to find the resources, within the proposed 

budget, to pay for these issues. With efficiencies, I think it can be 

done. 

133 

I’m extremely grateful for this opportunity, and I look forward to 

any questions. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Puzon follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT BY CAPT IKE PUZON, USN (RETIRED) 

SUMMARY

Mr. Chairman, The Association of the U.S. Navy (AUSN) extends our thanks to 

you and the entire subcommittee for your strong support of our Active Duty Navy, 

Navy Reserve, retired members, and veterans of the uniformed services and their 

families and survivors. Your decisions have had a significant and positive impact 

in the lives of the entire uniformed services community. 

This past year was more than arduous, with Navy servicemembers still at war 

on two separate fronts in southwest Asia, several ongoing humanitarian operations, 

the continuous vigilance against piracy, Libya operations, and the Nation slowly recovering from the recent economic crisis. Congress and the administration have had 

difficult choices to make as they attempted to stimulate the economy while facing 

recordbreaking budget deficits. 

As we enter the 10th year of intense wartime operations, and worldwide deployment of the U.S. Navy, AUSN believes that prioritization on personnel issues should 

continue for fiscal year 2012. Despite the extraordinary demands, men and women 

in the Navy and the Navy Reserve are still answering the call—thanks in no small 

measure to the subcommittee’s strong and consistent support—but only at the cost 

of ever-greater sacrifices. 

Dramatic increases in suicide rates, reported divorce rates, and unemployment 

rates reflect the long-term effects of requiring the same people to return to combat 

again and again—and yet again. 

In these times of growing political and economic pressures, AUSN relies on the 

continued good judgment of the Armed Services Committees to ensure the Nation 

allocates the required resources to sustain a strong national defense, a sustained 

National Maritime Strategy, and in particular, to properly meet the pressing needs 

of the less than 1 percent of the American population—servicemembers and their 

families—who protect the freedoms of the 99 percent. 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY OF KEY ISSUES

End strength 

A major concern and priority for AUSN is the constant budgetary cuts to manpower. Since 2001 during war time, Navy and Navy Reserve has taken unnecessary 

cuts due to budget pressure in manpower. Navy and Navy Reserve Operational requirements have not subsided and the out look for increased usage of Navy and 

Navy Reserve assets grows. We encourage Congress to not take budget driven manpower cuts and review the manpower requirements as a cost savings vice a budget 

equalizer. 

Cost-of-Living Adjustments (COLAs) 

A top AUSN priority is to guard against any discriminatory treatment of retired 

members of the uniformed services compared to other Federal COLA-eligibles and 

to ensure continued fulfillment of congressional COLA intent ‘‘to provide every military retired member the same purchasing power of the retired pay to which he was 

entitled at the time of retirement [and ensure it is] not, at any time in the future 

. . . eroded by subsequent increases in consumer prices.’’ 

Military Pay 

AUSN urges against short-sighted proposals to freeze or cap uniformed services 

pay raises below private sector pay growth, and strongly recommends a 2012 raise 

of at least 1.6 percent to match ECI growth. 

Military Retirement 

AUSN strongly opposes initiatives that would ‘‘civilianize’’ the military retirement 

system and inadequately recognize the unique and extraordinary demands and sacrifices inherent in a military career. 

Reducing incentives for serving arduous careers of 20 years or more can only undermine long-term retention and readiness, with particularly adverse effects in 

times of war. Simultaneously increasing compensation for those who leave short of 

fulfilling a career would only compound those adverse effects. 

134 

Heath Care Enrollment Fees 

In response to member feedback on the Department of Defense proposal for 

TRICARE Prime fee increases, AUSN has embraced a policy that is congruent with 

a majority of its members. 

Health care for our serving military and their families is a matter of absolute necessity to sustain a fighting force. It is an obligation of government with a constitutional basis much higher than other forms of public service. When a nation puts its 

citizens (the military) at physical risk from disease, traumatic injury and death it 

absolutely owes them health care not health insurance. The military is not a Public 

Service union looking for a benefit package and should never be so equated! An 

overwhelming majority of AUSN members believe this is where all discussion must 

start. 

By extension, as a guiding principal, a primary entitlement for undertaking a career of unique and extraordinary sacrifices that few Americans are willing to accept 

is a range of exceptional retirement benefits that a grateful Nation provides for 

those who choose to dedicate a majority of their working lives to the national interest. DOD must work in partnership with associations, stakeholders, the Department 

of Veterans Affairs (VA) and other governmental agencies to ensure that our past, 

present and future military members and families receive cost effective, high quality 

health care. Before seeking increases in enrollment fees, deductibles or co-payments, 

the DOD and the Services should pursue any and all options to constrain the 

growth of health care spending in ways that do not disadvantage military members—past, present, and future—active duty, Reserve and veteran, and provide incentives to promote healthy lifestyles. Such options should include addressing the 

duplicative overhead expense of Service unique health care programs. 

Our members—Active, retiree, veterans, Reserve, and family—strongly desire to 

do their part in controlling the fiscal debt of this country. Fiscal realities demand 

that they do. However, our members, along with other servicemembers, have already invested heavily in our Nation. They have and continue to sacrifice in ways 

not recognized by the overwhelming majority of the American population. Military 

members and veterans earn, have earned, their health care and other benefits in 

a special way every day. 

AUSN desires to negotiate realistically but we must be very careful in our terminology. Bureaucrats want to frame this conversation as a benefit package to recruit 

and retain to meet requirements. We must never forget the military and veterans 

are not civilian contractors with the right to quit if they don’t like the orders. They 

are different and Congress owes a very different debt to those citizens who can be 

ordered to potentially suffer serious losses, or die for their country. A nation that 

desires to provide guaranteed health care to all citizens and non-citizens alike surely can provide an extraordinary health care benefit to those who defend that very 

nation. The last dollar of Military Health Care should be funded before the first dollar is put into other social programs. 

Therefore, with these guiding principals, 

• AUSN membership believes the President’s fiscal year 2012 proposed enrollment fee increase can be accepted as a one time increase of 13 percent. 

However, AUSN strongly objects to any future open-indexing increases 

based on civilian health care indices in future years for any TRICARE program including TRICARE Prime for retirees. As a whole, military (Active 

and Reserve) and former military members are by nature a healthier population. 

• AUSN urges Congress to make the decisions on future increases based 

on what the cost-of-living allowances are for veterans. We are asking Congress to reject the proposal of open-ended indexing for future increases and 

to control future increases, if any—based solely on what the COLA is for 

retirees. 

WOUNDED WARRIOR CARE

DOD and VA Oversight 

AUSN urges joint hearings by the Armed Services and Veterans Affairs Committees to assess the effectiveness of current seamless transition oversight efforts and 

systems and to solicit views and recommendations from DOD, VA, the military Services, and nongovernmental organizations concerning how joint communication, cooperation, and oversight could be improved. In addition, the hearings should focus 

on implementation progress concerning: 

• Single separation physical; 

• Single disability evaluation system; 

135 

• Bi-directional electronic medical and personnel records data transfer; 

• Medical centers of excellence operations and research projects; 

• Coordination of care and treatment, including DOD–VA Federal/recovery 

care coordinator clinical and non-clinical services and case management 

programs; and 

• Consolidated government agency support services, programs, and benefits. 

Continuity of Health Care 

• Authorizing service-disabled members and their families to receive activeduty level TRICARE benefits, independent of availability of VA care for 3 

years after medical retirement to help ease their transition from DOD to 

VA. 

• Ensuring Guard and Reserve members have adequate access and treatment in the DOD and VA health systems for Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder and Traumatic Brain Injury following separation from active duty 

service in a theatre of operations. 

Caregiver/Family Support Services 

AUSN recommends: 

• Providing enhanced training of DOD and VA medical and support staff 

on the vital importance of involving and informing designated caregivers in 

treatment of and communication with severely ill and injured personnel. 

• Providing health and respite care for non-dependent caregivers (e.g., parents and siblings) who have had to sacrifice their own employment and 

health coverage while the injured member remains on active duty, commensurate with what the VA authorizes for medically retired or separated 

members’ caregivers. 

• Authorizing up to 1 year of continued residence in on-base housing facilities for medically retired, severely wounded servicemembers and their families. 

ACTIVE FORCES AND THEIR FAMILIES

End Strength 

AUSN strongly urges the subcommittee to: 

• Sustain or increase end strength as needed to sustain Navy deployments 

for war and the continuous operational requirements and ensure dwell time 

for Navy servicemembers and families. 

Family Readiness and Support 

AUSN recommends that the subcommittee: 

• Encourage DOD to assess the effectiveness of programs and support 

mechanisms designed to assist military members and their families with 

deployment readiness, responsiveness, reintegration, and health care. 

• Expand child care availability and funding to meet the needs of the total 

force uniformed services community. 

• Monitor and continue to expand family access to mental health counseling. 

• Promote expanded opportunities for military spouses to further educational and career goals, such as the My Career Advancement Account 

(MyCAA) program. 

• Promote implementation of flexible spending accounts to enable military 

families to pay health care and child care expenses with pre-tax dollars. 

• Ensure access to mental health care programs in remote areas 

RETIREE ISSUES

Concurrent Receipt 

AUSN’s continuing goal is to fully eliminate the deduction of VA disability compensation from earned military retired pay for all disabled retirees. In pursuit of 

that goal, AUSN’s immediate priorities include: 

• Phasing out the VA disability offset for all chapter 61 (disability) retirees, 

as previously endorsed by the President and the subcommittee; 

• Clarifying the law to resolve technical disparities that inadvertently 

cause underpayment of certain eligibles for Combat Related Special Compensation (CRSC); and, 

136 

• Clarifying the law to ensure a disabled retiree’s CRSC payment is not reduced when the retiree’s VA disability rating increases, until the retiree is 

afforded the opportunity to elect between CRSC and CRDP. 

Disability Severance Pay 

AUSN recommends: 

• Further expanding eligibility to include all combat-related injuries, using 

the same definition as CRSC; and ultimately 

• Expanding eligibility to include all service-connected disabilities, consistent with AUSN view that there should not be a distinction between the 

treatment of members disabled in combat vice members with non-combat, 

service-caused disabilities. 

SURVIVOR ISSUES

SBP–DIC Offset 

AUSN recommends: 

• Repeal of the SBP–DIC offset. • Reinstating SBP for survivors who previously transferred payments to 

children when the youngest child attains majority, or upon termination of 

a remarriage. 

• Allowing SBP eligibility to switch to children if a surviving spouse is convicted of complicity in the member’s death. 

HEALTH CARE

Enrollment Fees 

AUSN accepts the need to increase TRICARE Prime (for retirees 34–65) fees on 

a one time basis at 13 percent. However, AUSN objects to any future index increase 

that is solely based on civilian health care. Any increase must be controlled by Congress, and based only on the COLA for retirees. 

TRICARE Reimbursement Rates 

AUSN urges reversal of the 30 percent cut in Medicare/TRICARE payments to 

doctors scheduled for January 2012 and a permanent fix for the flawed formula that 

mandates these recurring annual threats to seniors’ and military beneficiaries’ 

health care access. 

TRICARE Cost Efficiency Options 

AUSN continues to believe strongly that DOD has not sufficiently investigated options to make TRICARE more cost-efficient without shifting costs to beneficiaries 

several GAO reports indicates that DOD can find more efficiencies. 

TRICARE Prime 

AUSN urges the subcommittee to: 

• Require reports from DOD and the managed care support contractors on 

actions being taken to improve Prime patient satisfaction, provide assured 

appointments within Prime access standards, reduce delays in 

preauthorization and referral appointments, and provide quality information to assist beneficiaries in making informed decisions. 

• Require increased DOD efforts to ensure consistency between the MTF 

and purchased care sectors in meeting Prime access standards. 

• Ensure timely notification of and support for beneficiaries affected by 

elimination of Prime service areas under the new TRICARE contracts. 

TRICARE Standard 

AUSN urges the subcommittee to: 

• Insist on immediate delivery of an adequacy threshold for provider participation, below which additional action is required to improve such participation. 

• Require a specific report on participation adequacy in the localities where 

Prime Service Areas will be discontinued under the new TRICARE contracts. 

• Oppose establishment of a TRICARE Standard enrollment fee, since 

Standard does not entail any guaranteed access to care. 

• Increase locator support to beneficiaries seeking providers who will accept 

new Standard patients, particularly for mental health specialties. 

• Seek legislation to eliminate the limit when TRICARE Standard is second 

payer to other health insurance (OHI): e.g., return to the policy where 

137 

TRICARE pays up to the amount it would have paid, had there been no 

OHI. 

• Bar any further increase in the TRICARE Standard inpatient copay for 

the foreseeable future. 

TRICARE For Life 

AUSN urges the subcommittee to: 

• Resist initiatives to establish an enrollment fee for TFL, as many beneficiaries already experience difficulties finding providers who will accept 

Medicare patients. 

• Seek ways to include TFL beneficiaries in DOD programs to incentivize 

compliance with preventive care and healthy lifestyles. 

• Resolve the discrepancy between TRICARE and Medicare treatment of 

the shingles vaccine. 

Survivors’ Coverage 

AUSN recommends restoration of TRICARE benefits to previously eligible survivors whose second or subsequent marriage ends in death or divorce. 

Pharmacy 

AUSN urges the subcommittee to: 

• Advance the use of the mail-order option by lowering or waiving copays, 

enhancing communication with beneficiaries, and using technological advances to ease initial signup. 

• Require DOD to include alternate packaging methods for pharmaceuticals 

to enable nursing home, assisted living, and hospice care beneficiaries to 

utilize the pharmacy program. Packaging options should additionally include beneficiaries living at home who would benefit from this program because of their medical condition. 

• Create incentives to hold down long-term health costs by eliminating 

copays for medications for chronic conditions, such as asthma, diabetes, and 

hypertension or keeping copays at the lowest level regardless of drug status, brand or generic. 

Health Care Fees 

AUSN believes military beneficiaries from whom America has demanded decades 

of extraordinary service and sacrifice have earned health care that is the best America has to offer, consistent with their extraordinarily high pre-paid premiums of decades of service and sacrifice. 

Congress needs to protect military beneficiaries against dramatic budget-driven 

fluctuations in this vital element of servicemembers’ career compensation incentive 

package. 

Reducing the value of TRICARE for Life by $3,000 per year ($6,000 for a couple) 

as recommended by the Deficit Commission would be inconsistent with military 

beneficiaries’ sacrifices and would undermine Congress’ intent when it authorized 

TFL in 2001—less than 10 years ago. 

Reducing military retirement benefits would be particularly ill-advised when an 

overstressed force already is at increasing retention risk despite the current downturn of the economy and current recruiting successes. 

AUSN believes: 

• All retired servicemembers earned exceptional health care by virtue of 

their service. 

• Indexing to civilian medical care and means-testing has no place in setting military health care enrollment. 

• Congress should direct DOD to pursue any and all options to constrain 

the growth of health care spending in ways that do not disadvantage beneficiaries. 

NAVY RESERVE

Operational Reserve Retention and Retirement Reform 

AUSN recommends: 

• Upgrade access—by providing ease to access the Federal Reserve in time 

of National Emergency or Contingency operations that do not impact the 

Active components, and provide the appropriate resources to do so. 

• Authorizing early retirement credit to all Guard and Reserve members 

who have served active duty tours of at least 90 days, retroactive to September 11, 2001. 

138 

• Eliminating the fiscal year limitation which effectively denies full early 

retirement credit for active duty tours that span the October 1 start date 

of a fiscal year. 

• Modernizing the Reserve retirement system to incentivize continued service beyond 20 years and provide fair recognition of increased requirements 

for active duty service. 

End Strength 

AUSN strongly urges the subcommittee to: 

• Sustain or increase end strength as needed to sustain Navy Reserve deployments for war and the continuous operational Reserve requirements 

and ensure dwell time for Navy Reserve servicemembers and families. 

Office of Chief of Naval Reserve 

AUSN strongly urges the subcommittee to: 

• To Maintain the Chief of the Naval Reserve as an 0–9 Billet as authorized by public law. 

Reserve Compensation System 

AUSN recommends: 

• Create a Single Pay System—Reserve components need a single pay system that integrates better into the Active component system 

• Crediting all inactive duty training points earned annually toward Reserve retirement. 

• Parity in special incentive pay for career enlisted/officer special aviation 

incentive pay, diving special duty pay, and pro-pay for Reserve component 

medical professionals. 

• Authorizing recalculation of retirement points after 1 year of mobilization. A recent law change allowed certain flag and general officers to recalculate retirement pay after 1 year of mobilization. AUSN believes this opportunity should be made available to all ranks. 

Health Care Access Options 

AUSN recommends: 

• Requiring DOD to justify the seven-fold increase in TRICARE rates for individual TRR premiums for reservists who immediately enroll in TRR upon retirement from the Selected Reserve and have TRS coverage until separation. 

• Seeking a GAO review of the TRR program premium rates and implementation 

• Authorizing TRICARE for early Reserve retirees who are in receipt of retired 

pay prior to age 60 

• Permitting employers to pay TRS premiums for reservist-employees as a bottom-line incentive for hiring and retaining them. 

• Authorizing an option for the government to subsidize continuation of a civilian employer’s family coverage during periods of activation, similar to FEHBP 

coverage for activated Guard-Reserve employees of Federal agencies. 

• Extending corrective dental care following return from a call-up to ensure G– 

R members meet dental readiness standards. 

• Allowing eligibility in Continued Health Care Benefits Program (CHCBP) for 

Selected reservists who are voluntarily separating and subject to disenrollment 

from TRS. 

• Allowing beneficiaries of the FEHBP who are Selected reservists the option 

of participating in TRICARE Reserve Select. 

• Reserve members must have access to proper mental health care prior to 

deployment and after deployment. Ensure access to mental health care programs in remote areas 

• Navy Reserve Member and Retirees that are in the Individual Ready Reserve—need to be recognized as honorable servicemembers and deserve to have 

access to TRR at reasonable rates or similar rates as TRS due to their being 

subjected to recall. 

Yellow Ribbon Reintegration Program 

AUSN urges the subcommittee to hold oversight hearings and direct additional 

improvements in coordination, collaboration, and consistency of Yellow Ribbon services between States and maintain this valuable program. 

Reserve Family Support Programs 

AUSN recommends: 

139 

• Ensuring programs are in place to meet the special information and support needs of families of Navy and Navy Reserve individual augmentees or 

those who are geographically dispersed. 

• Funding programs between military and community leaders to support 

servicemembers and families during all phases of deployments, especially 

demob. 

• Providing preventive counseling services for servicemembers and families 

and training so they know when to seek professional help related to their 

circumstances. 

• Authorizing and funding child care, including respite care, family readiness group meetings and drill time. 

• Improving the joint family readiness program to facilitate understanding 

and sharing of information between all family members and commands. 

MORALE, WELFARE, AND RECREATION AND QUALITY OF LIFE PROGRAMS

Consolidation of DOD Retail Operations 

AUSN supports continuing efforts to improve commissary and exchange program 

efficiency, but objects to initiatives that reduce benefit value for patrons and the associated retention value for the uniformed services. 

AUSN urges the subcommittee to: 

• Seek report updates from DOD and the Services to ensure delivery of 

needed MWR and quality of life program support at gaining and losing locations affected by BRAC and rebasing. 

• Direct DOD to report to Congress on all DOD and Service Active and Reserve component MWR Category A, B, and C Programs and Family Support/Readiness (Quality of Life (QoL) Programs), including the Yellow Ribbon Program. 

• Protect recreational and alternative therapy programs that integrate 

MWR, fitness and other quality of life programs and infrastructure to facilitate warrior treatment and care and to promote psychological health and 

welfare of troops and their families. 

MILITARY CONSTRUCTION

AUSN recommends the subcommittee: 

• Support military construction projects that modernize or replace the following 

infrastructure to meet increased personnel and operational deployment requirements: 

• child development centers (CDCs) and youth centers; 

• bachelor and family housing; and, 

• other traditional QoL program facilities. 

• Ensure MWR, Milcon, housing, and family support construction policies and 

projects improve access for persons with disabilities. 

Statement on Deficit Reduction Proposals 

The National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform and several less 

publicized deficit-reduction panels have proposed a wide range of spending cuts, including proposed cutbacks in Federal cost of living adjustments (COLAs); defense 

spending, including military pay and retirement; and Federal health care programs, 

including TRICARE and TRICARE for Life. The rapidly growing debt problem facing our country is all too real, and there is no easy fix. Solving this problem for 

the long term will involve shared pain by all Americans. 

Congress has improved retention and readiness by addressing a number of quality 

of life issues for the military community over the last decade, authorizing TRICARE 

For Life and TRICARE Senior Pharmacy coverage, establishing concurrent receipt 

for most severely disabled and combat-disabled retirees, improving pay and allowances for currently serving personnel, upgrading health coverage for the Reserve 

community who have answered the call for war. 

Now, ironically, some critics decry the growth in personnel and health care spending since 2000. Twelve years ago, military leaders were complaining of retention 

problems as decades of pay raise caps had depressed military pay nearly 14 percent 

below private sector pay. Military retirees and their spouses were being 

unceremoniously dumped from military health coverage at age 65 and all disabled 

retirees were forced to fund their own VA disability compensation from their service-earned retired pay. Survivor Benefit Program (SBP) widows suffered a 34-percent benefit cut at age 62, and GI Bill benefits had eroded dramatically, among 

many other challenges. Congress’ actions to address those problems were spurred 

140 

in no small part by national concern to protect the interests of military people 

whose severe and extended wartime sacrifices have been highlighted on every front 

page and every evening newscast for nearly a decade. 

History demonstrates that public and congressional support for protecting military people programs can fade quickly in times of strained budgets or when a period 

of extended military conflict is (or is expected to be) coming to an end. That was 

true in the 1940s, 1950s, 1970s, 1980s, and 1990s. 

As Congress assesses how to fairly allocate necessary sacrifices among the various 

segments of the population, AUSN urges that you bear in mind that: 

• No segment of the population has been called upon for more sacrifice 

than the military community. Currently serving military members have 

been asked to bear 100 percent of our Nation’s wartime sacrifice while the 

broader population was asked to contribute to the war effort by ‘‘going shopping.’’ The U.S. Navy has always been a deployed force. 

• Assertions about personnel and health cost growth since 2000 are highly 

misleading, because 2000 is not an appropriate baseline for comparison. As 

mentioned above, that was the nadir of the erosion of benefits era, when 

military pay was nearly 14 percent below private sector pay, currently serving members had suffered a major retirement cutback, older retirees and 

their families were being jettisoned from any military health coverage, disabled retirees and survivors were suffering dramatic financial penalties, 

and retention and readiness were suffering as a result. Congressional action 

(and spending) to fix those problems was a necessary thing, not a bad thing. 

• Retired servicemembers, their families, and survivors also have been no 

stranger to sacrifice. Hundreds of thousands of today’s retirees served in 

multiple wars, including Iraq and Afghanistan, Gulf War I, Vietnam, 

Korea, and WWII eras, and the multiple conflicts and cold wars in between. 

Older retirees endured years when the government provided them no military health coverage, and those under 65 already have forfeited an average 

10 percent of earned retired pay because they retired under pay tables that 

were depressed by decades of capping military pay raises below private sector pay growth. 

• There is a readiness element to military compensation and military 

health care decisions beyond the budgetary element. Regardless of good or 

bad budget times, a military career is a unique and arduous calling that 

cannot be equated to civilian employment. Sufficient numbers of high-quality personnel will choose to pursue a career in uniform only if they perceive 

that the extreme commitment demanded of them is reciprocated by a grateful nation, and the unique rewards for completing such a career are commensurate with the unique burden of sacrifice that they and their families 

are required to accept over the course of it. 

• Military members’ and families’ sacrifices must not be taken for granted 

by assuming they will continue to serve and endure regardless of significant 

changes in their career incentive package. 

• History shows clearly that there are unacceptable retention and readiness consequences for shortsighted budget decisions that cause servicemembers to believe their steadfast commitment to protecting their nation’s 

interests is poorly reciprocated. 

• The U.S. Navy has and will be a deployed force world wide. End 

strengths are critical to maintaining dwell times and deployed forces. 

WOUNDED WARRIOR CARE

AUSN urges joint hearings by the Armed Services and Veterans Affairs Committees to assess the effectiveness of current seamless transition oversight efforts and 

systems and to solicit views and recommendations from DOD, VA, the military services, and non-governmental organizations concerning how joint communication, cooperation, and oversight could be improved. 

In addition, the hearings should focus on implementation progress concerning: 

• Single separation physical; 

• Single disability evaluation system; 

• Bi-directional electronic medical and personnel records data transfer; 

• Medical centers of excellence responsibilities vs. authority, operations, 

and research projects; 

• Coordination of care and treatment, including DOD–VA Federal/recovery 

care coordinator clinical and non-clinical services and case management 

programs; and 

141 

• Consolidated government agency support services, programs, and benefits. 

Continuity of Health Care 

Transitioning between DOD and VA health care systems remains challenging and 

confusing to those trying to navigate and use these systems. Systemic, cultural, and 

bureaucratic barriers often prevent the servicemember or veteran from receiving the 

continuity of care they need to heal and have productive and a high level of quality 

of life they so desperately need and desire. 

Servicemembers and their families repeatedly tell us that DOD has done much 

to address trauma care, acute rehabilitation, and basic short-term rehabilitation. 

They are less satisfied with their transition from the military health care systems 

to longer-term care and support in military and VA medical systems. 

We hear regularly from members who have experienced significant disruptions of 

care upon separation or medical retirement from service. 

One is in the area of cognitive therapy, which is available to retired members 

under TRICARE only if it is not available through the VA. Unfortunately, members 

are caught in the middle because of differences between DOD and VA authorities 

on what constitutes cognitive therapy and the degree to which effective, evidencedbased therapy is available. 

Action is needed to further protect the wounded and disabled. The subcommittee 

has acted previously to authorize 3 years of active-duty level TRICARE coverage for 

the family members of those who die on active duty. AUSN believes we owe equal 

transition care continuity to those whose service-caused illnesses or injuries force 

their retirement from service. 

NAVY RESERVE

The Navy Reserve has always deployed in support of our Nations wars and contingency operations. Currently there are over 5,500 members serving in some capacity in OIF/OEF with another 1,500 being prepared to deploy. The Navy Reserve has 

maintained this pace since 2001. Over 91,000 Guard and Reserve service men and 

women are serving on active duty (as of January 2011). 

Since September 11, 2001, more than 793,853 Guard and Reserve servicemembers 

have been called up, including over 250,000 who have served multiple tours. There 

is no precedent in American history for this sustained reliance on citizen-soldiers 

and their families. To their credit, Guard and Reserve combat veterans continue to 

reenlist, but the ongoing pace of routine, recurring activations and deployments cannot be sustained indefinitely. 

Guard and Reserve members and families face unique challenges in their readjustment following active duty service. Unlike active duty personnel, many Guard 

and Reserve members return to employers who question their contributions in the 

civilian workplace, especially as multiple deployments have become the norm. Many 

Guard-Reserve troops return with varying degrees of combat-related injuries and 

stress disorders, and encounter additional difficulties after they return that can cost 

them their jobs, careers and families. 

Despite the continuing efforts of the Services and Congress, most Guard and Reserve families do not have access to the same level of counseling and support that 

active duty members have. In short, the Reserve components face increasing challenges virtually across the board, including major equipment shortages, endstrength requirements, wounded-warrior health care, and pre- and post-deployment 

assistance and counseling. 

AUSN strongly urges the subcommittee to: 

• Not allow SECDEF, the Secretary of the Navy, or Chief of Naval Operations to downsize the Chief of the Naval Reserve office to an 0–8 billet as 

expressed in SECDEF Memorandum—MAR14 2011—OSD 02974–11. This 

is done solely for the purpose of budgetary concerns and does not reflect the 

needs and requirements of the Navy Reserve or those that have served this 

country during the war time of 2001 to 2008. AUSN notes that no other 

Reserve Chief billet will be denigrated in opposition to Public Law that authorizes 0–9 billet for Reserve Chiefs. 

Guard and Reserve Health Care Access Options 

AUSN is very grateful for sustained progress in providing reservists’ families a 

continuum of government-sponsored health care coverage options throughout their 

military careers into retirement, but key gaps remain. 

For years, AUSN has recommended continuous government health care coverage 

options for Guard and Reserve (G–R) families. Operational Reserve policy during 

two protracted wars has only magnified that need. DOD took the first step in the 

142 

1990s by establishing a policy to pay the Federal Health Benefits Program (FEHB) 

premiums for G–R employees of the Department during periods of their active duty 

service. 

Thanks to this subcommittee’s efforts, considerable additional progress has been 

made in subsequent years to provide at least some form of military health coverage 

at each stage of a Reserve component member’s life, including: 

• TRICARE Reserve Select (TRS) for actively drilling Guard and Reserve 

families, with premiums set at 28 percent of the actual program cost. The 

2011 monthly premiums are $53.16 for individual reservists in drill status 

and $197.76 for member and family coverage. 

• TRICARE Retired Reserve (TRR) for ‘‘gray area’’ reservists who have retired from active drilling status but have not yet attained age 60, with premiums set to cover 100 percent of program cost. Rates for 2011 are $408.01 

for member-only coverage, or $1,020.05 for TRR member-and-family coverage. 

• TRICARE Standard/Prime for retired reservists with 20 or more years of 

qualifying service, once they attain age 60 and retired pay eligibility. 

• TRICARE for Life as second-payer to Medicare for career reservists with 

20 or more years of qualifying service at age 65 provided they enroll in 

Medicare Part B. 

However, as noted earlier in this statement, early Reserve retirees who are in receipt of non-regular retired pay before age 60 are ineligible for TRICARE. 

AUSN continues to support closing the remaining gaps to establish a continuum 

of health coverage for operational Reserve families, including members of the Individual Ready Reserve subject to call-up. 

AUSN recommends: 

• Requiring a GAO audit of TRR program 

• Requiring DOD to justify the seven-fold increase in TRICARE rates for 

individual TRR premiums for reservists who immediately enroll in TRR 

upon retirement from the Selected Reserve and have TRS coverage until 

separation. 

• Authorizing TRICARE for early Reserve retirees who are in receipt of retired pay prior to age 60 

• Permitting employers to pay TRS premiums for reservist-employees as a 

bottom-line incentive for hiring and retaining them. 

• Authorizing an option for the government to subsidize continuation of a 

civilian employer’s family coverage during periods of activation, similar to 

FEHBP coverage for activated Guard-Reserve employees of Federal agencies. 

• Extending corrective dental care following return from a call-up to ensure 

G–R members meet dental readiness standards. 

• Allowing eligibility in Continued Health Care Benefits Program (CHCBP) 

for Selected reservists who are voluntarily separating and subject to 

disenrollment from TRS. 

• Allowing beneficiaries of the FEHBP who are Selected reservists the option of participating in TRICARE Reserve Select. 

Yellow Ribbon Reintegration Program 

Congress has provided increased resources to support the transition of warriorcitizens back into the community. But program execution remains spotty from State 

to State and falls short for returning Federal Reserve warriors in widely dispersed 

regional commands. Military and civilian leaders at all levels must improve the coordination and delivery of services for the entire operational Reserve Force. Many 

communities are eager to provide support and do it well. But yellow ribbon efforts 

in a number of locations amount to little more than PowerPoint slides and little or 

no actual implementation. 

DOD must ensure that State-level best practices—such as those in Maryland, 

Minnesota and New Hampshire—are applied for all operational Reserve Force members and their families, and that Federal Reserve veterans have equal access to 

services and support available to National Guard veterans. Community groups, employers and service organization efforts need to be encouraged and better coordinated to supplement unit, component, Service and VA outreach and services. 

AUSN urges the subcommittee to hold oversight hearings and direct additional 

improvements in coordination, collaboration and consistency of Yellow Ribbon services between States. 

143 

Reserve Family Support Programs 

We have seen considerable progress in outreach programs and services for returning Guard-Reserve warriors and their families. Family support programs promote 

better communication with servicemembers. Specialized support and training for 

geographically separated Guard and Reserve families and volunteers are needed. 

AUSN recommends: 

• Ensuring programs are in place to meet the special information and support needs of families of individual augmentees or those who are geographically dispersed. 

• Funding programs between military and community leaders to support 

servicemembers and families during all phases of deployments. 

• Providing preventive counseling services for servicemembers and families 

and training so they know when to seek professional help related to their 

circumstances. 

• Authorizing and funding child care, including respite care, family readiness group meetings and drill time. 

• Improving the joint family readiness program to facilitate understanding 

and sharing of information between all family members. 

HEALTH CARE

TRICARE Reimbursement Rates 

Physicians consistently report that TRICARE is virtually the lowest-paying insurance plan in America. Other national plans typically pay providers 25–33 percent 

more. In some cases the difference is even higher. 

Unless Congress acts before the end of the year, current law will force a 30 percent reduction in Medicare and TRICARE payments as of January 1, 2012, which 

would cause many providers to stop seeing military beneficiaries. 

AUSN urges reversal of the 30 percent cut in Medicare/TRICARE payments 

scheduled for January 2012 and a permanent fix for the flawed formula that mandates these recurring annual threats to seniors’ and military beneficiaries’ health 

care access. 

TRICARE Cost Efficiency Options 

AUSN continues to believe strongly that DOD has not sufficiently investigated options to make TRICARE more cost-efficient without shifting costs to beneficiaries. 

AUSN has offered for several years a long list of alternative cost-saving possibilities, 

including: 

• Positive incentives to encourage beneficiaries to seek care in the most appropriate and cost effective venue; 

• Encouraging improved collaboration between the direct and purchased 

care systems and implementing best business practices and effective quality 

clinical models; 

• Focusing the military health system, health care providers, and beneficiaries on quality measured outcomes; 

• Improving MHS financial controls and avoiding overseas fraud by establishing TRICARE networks in areas fraught with fraud; 

• Promoting retention of other health insurance by making TRICARE a 

true second-payer to other insurance (far cheaper to pay another insurance’s co-pay than have the beneficiary migrate to TRICARE); 

• Encouraging DOD to effectively utilize data from their electronic health 

records to better monitor beneficiary utilization patterns to design programs which truly match beneficiaries needs; 

• Sizing and staffing military treatment facilities to reduce reliance on network providers and develop effective staffing models which support enrolled 

capacities; 

• Reducing long-term TRICARE Reserve Select (TRS) costs by allowing 

servicemembers the option of a government subsidy of civilian employer 

premiums during periods of mobilization; 

• Encouraging retirees to use lowest-cost-venue military pharmacies at no 

charge, rather than discouraging such use by limiting formularies, curtailing courier initiatives, etc. 

• Utilizing the current GAO reviews to implement changes to improve efficiencies 

TRICARE Prime 

There appears to be growing dissatisfaction among TRICARE Prime enrollees— 

which is actually higher among active duty families than among retired families. 

144 

The dissatisfaction arises from increasing difficulties experienced by beneficiaries in 

getting appointments, referrals to specialists, and sustaining continuity of care from 

specific providers. 

AUSN supports implementation of a pilot study by TMA in each of the three 

TRICARE Regions to study the efficacy of revitalizing the resource sharing program 

used prior to the implementation of the TRICARE-The Next Generation (T–NEX) 

contracts under the current Managed Care Support contract program. 

AUSN supports adoption of the ‘‘Medical Home’’ patient-centered model to help 

ease such problems. 

AUSN strongly advocates the transparency of healthcare information via the patient electronic record between both the MTF provider and network providers. Additionally, institutional and provider healthcare quality information should be available to all beneficiaries so that they can make better informed decisions. 

We are concerned about the impact on beneficiaries of the elimination of some 

Prime service areas under the new contract. This will entail a substantive change 

in health care delivery for thousands of beneficiaries, may require many to find new 

providers, and will change the support system for beneficiaries who have difficulty 

accessing care. 

AUSN urges the subcommittee to: 

• Require reports from DOD and the managed care support contractors on 

actions being taken to improve Prime patient satisfaction, provide assured 

appointments within Prime access standards, reduce delays in 

preauthorization and referral appointments, and provide quality information to assist beneficiaries in making informed decisions. 

• Require increased DOD efforts to ensure consistency between both the 

MTFs and purchased care sectors in meeting Prime access standards. 

• Ensure timely notification of and support for beneficiaries affected by 

elimination of Prime service areas. 

TRICARE Standard 

AUSN appreciates the subcommittee’s continuing interest in the specific problems 

unique to TRICARE Standard beneficiaries. TRICARE Standard beneficiaries need 

assistance in finding participating providers within a reasonable time and distance 

from their home. This is particularly important with the expansion of TRICARE Reserve Select and the upcoming change in the Prime Service Areas, which will place 

thousands more beneficiaries into TRICARE Standard. 

AUSN is concerned that DOD has not yet established benchmarks for adequacy 

of provider participation, as required by section 711(a)(2) of the NDAA for Fiscal 

Year 2008. Participation by half of the providers in a locality may suffice if there 

is not a large Standard beneficiary population, but could severely constrain access 

in other areas with higher beneficiary density. AUSN hopes to see an objective participation standard (perhaps based on the number of beneficiaries per provider) that 

would help shed more light on which locations have participation shortfalls of Primary Care Managers and Specialists that require positive action. 

AUSN continues to oppose initiatives that would establish an enrollment fee for 

TRICARE Standard. If a beneficiary is to be required to pay an enrollment fee, the 

beneficiary should gain some additional benefit from enrollment. TRICARE Prime 

features an enrollment fee, but in return offers guaranteed access to care. In contrast, Standard offers no such guaranteed access, and beneficiaries typically are on 

their own in finding a participating provider who is accepting new patients. 

A source of recurring concern is the TRICARE Standard inpatient copay for re- tired members, which now stands at $535 per day. For each of the last several 

years, Congress has had to insert a special provision in the National Defense Authorization Act to preclude increasing that by another $115 per day or more. AUSN 

believes the $535 per day amount already is excessive, and should be capped at that 

rate for the foreseeable future. 

AUSN urges the subcommittee to: 

• Insist on immediate delivery of an adequacy threshold for provider participation, below which additional action is required to improve such participation. 

• Require a specific report on participation adequacy in the localities where 

Prime Service Areas will be discontinued under the new TRICARE contracts. 

• Oppose establishment of a TRICARE Standard enrollment fee, since 

Standard does not entail any guaranteed access to care. 

• Increase locator support to TRICARE Standard beneficiaries seeking providers who will accept new Standard patients, particularly for mental 

health specialties. 

145 

• Seek legislation to eliminate the limit when TRICARE Standard is second 

payer to other health insurance (OHI): e.g., return to the policy where 

TRICARE pays up to the amount it would have paid, had there been no 

OHI. 

• Bar any further increase in the TRICARE Standard inpatient copay for 

the foreseeable future. 

TRICARE For Life (TFL) 

When Congress enacted TFL in 2000, it explicitly recognized that this coverage 

was fully earned by career servicemembers’ decades of sacrifice, and that the Medicare Part B premium would serve as the cash portion of the beneficiary premium 

payment. AUSN believes that this remains true today. 

Some have proposed establishing an enrollment fee for TFL. AUSN believes this 

is inappropriate, since beneficiaries have no guarantee of access to Medicare-participating providers. 

AUSN is aware of the challenges imposed by Congress’ mandatory spending rules, 

and appreciates the subcommittee’s efforts to include TFL-eligibles in the preventive 

care pilot programs included in the NDAA for Fiscal Year 2009. We believe their 

inclusion would, in fact, save the government money and hope the subcommittee 

will be able to find a more certain way to include them than the current discretionary authority, which DOD has declined to implement. 

AUSN also hopes the subcommittee can find a way to resolve the discrepancy between Medicare and TRICARE treatment of medications such as the shingles vaccine, which Medicare covers under pharmacy benefits and TRICARE covers under 

doctor visits. This mismatch, which requires TFL patients to absorb the cost in a 

TRICARE deductible or purchase duplicative Part D coverage, deters beneficiaries 

from seeking this preventive medication. 

AUSN urges the subcommittee to: 

• Resist initiatives to establish an enrollment fee for TFL, given that many 

beneficiaries already experience difficulties finding providers who will accept Medicare patients. 

• Seek ways to include TFL beneficiaries in DOD programs to incentivize 

compliance with preventive care and healthy lifestyles. 

• Resolve the discrepancy between TRICARE and Medicare treatment of 

the shingles vaccine. 

Survivors’ Coverage 

When a TRICARE-eligible widow/widower remarries, he/she loses TRICARE benefits. When that individual’s second marriage ends in death or divorce, the individual 

has eligibility restored for military ID card benefits, including SBP coverage, commissary/exchange privileges, etc.—with the sole exception that TRICARE eligibility 

is not restored. This is out of line with other Federal health program practices, such 

as the restoration of CHAMPVA eligibility for survivors of veterans who died of 

service-connected causes. In those cases, VA survivor benefits and health care are 

restored upon termination of the remarriage. Remarried surviving spouses deserve 

equal treatment. 

AUSN recommends restoration of TRICARE benefits to previously eligible survivors whose second or subsequent marriage ends in death or divorce. 

Pharmacy 

AUSN supports a strong TRICARE pharmacy benefit which is affordable and continues to meet the pharmaceutical needs of millions of eligible beneficiaries through 

proper education and trust. The AUSN will oppose any degradation of current pharmacy benefits, including any effort to charge fees or copayments for use of military 

treatment facilities. 

AUSN urges the subcommittee to: 

• Advance the use of the mail-order option by lowering or waiving copays, 

enhancing communication with beneficiaries, and using technological advances to ease initial signup. 

• Require DOD to include alternate packaging methods for pharmaceuticals 

to enable nursing home, assisted living, and hospice care beneficiaries to 

utilize the pharmacy program. Packaging options should additionally include beneficiaries living at home who would benefit from this program because of their medical condition (for example beginning stages of Alzheimer’s). 

• Create incentives to hold down long-term health costs by eliminating 

copays for medications for chronic conditions, such as asthma, diabetes, and 

146 

hypertension or keeping copays at the lowest level regardless of drug status, brand or generic. 

‘‘A Veteran—AD, Reserve, NG, or Retired is someone who, at one point in their 

life, wrote a blank check made payable to ‘‘The United States of America,’’ for an 

amount of ‘‘up to and including my life.’’ 

Senator WEBB. Thank you very much, Captain Puzon. 

Ms. Roth-Douquet, welcome. 

STATEMENT OF KATHY ROTH-DOUQUET, CHAIRMAN, BLUE 

STAR FAMILIES 

Ms. ROTH-DOUQUET. Thank you, Senator Webb. 

This is my first time testifying, so it’s—I’m thrilled to be at this 

very large table. 

Everyone may not be familiar with Blue Star Families. We’re a 

nationwide nonprofit of military families from all ranks and Services, including Guard and Reserve. We are a chapter-based organization, about 2 years old; we have over 50 chapters, so far. This 

past year we have had over 1,000-percent growth. In addition to 

chapters, we’re very social-media and online-oriented. 

We do surveys every year of our members and of other military 

families. Our surveys have consistently shown that pay and benefits, the operational tempo, and the effects of deployment on children are top concerns for families. 

Some highlights from our survey concerning benefits are that 

military healthcare, both quality and access, rate extremely high, 

and they’re also a very high cause of concern. We take that to 

mean both that services vary widely from region to region and 

among the different Services, and whether you’re in the Guard and 

Reserve, and the perception of the quality varies, perhaps, depending on the age and experience of the people who are experiencing 

the service. So, it’s a good and a bad story. 

We’ve asked our members and military families what services 

they’re most satisfied with. Top choices are commissary and exchange. TRICARE insurance and chaplain services are the second 

most popular. We think that chaplain services are a very important 

thing and a part of some of the mental health services that we talk 

about that isn’t often discussed. DOD schools are the third most 

popular, with base housing next. 

I do want to mention that the post-9/11 GI Bill, which we thank 

you for sponsoring, is extremely popular. There is a lot of concern 

among families about maintaining transferability, and also among 

servicemembers who have served careers and for whom the education of their children is a very important benefit to them. 

What I would really like to highlight with you today, however, 

is a bit different than what we have been talking about. It’s how 

we can better help military families and better provide benefits 

outside of DOD and government funding, but with government cooperation, through public-private partnerships. Government is 

often the biggest barrier to this, and perhaps this is an area where 

you can help. 

Military families do serve and do suffer burden in this long war, 

but we also believe that the government can’t solve all ills. Groups 

like ours play a role, but to play it effectively, we have to be able 

to engage cooperatively with the DOD. Our organization started to 

147 

provide spouses on the ground, and other family members, the ability to identify and be part of solving the problems that we see in 

our communities. We feel like we’re experts and we have something 

to contribute. We listen to our members, to ourselves, to our annual 

surveys, and we use our position as military family members to ask 

for help. We work with government, when possible, to make our 

programs better and more effective, but we also go outside of government. 

For instance, we asked museums, last year, to make themselves 

free for military families. Nearly 900 signed up and 300,000 military family members went for free. We couldn’t have done it without the support of the National Endowment for the Arts and with 

the support of the First Lady, but this program didn’t cost the government or military families anything, and yet, it provided a benefit. 

The NMFA’s Operation Purple Camps are another example of 

this kind of way of providing benefits without impacting the budget. 

But, often we are prevented from the very institutions that are 

trying to help our families—by the DOD or other agencies—from 

doing this sort of thing. 

RAND issued a study showing that base libraries are underfunded. We know, from volunteering in our children’s schools, that 

many young military families don’t have any books at home. I don’t 

want DOD to spend money on books for our libraries. We go out 

to publishers and to nonprofits, and we get donations of free new 

children’s books. Our chapters bring them to base and National 

Guard locations, give them directly to kids, to the base and community schools and libraries for free. Well, on some bases, we can go 

on base and do that; and some bases, we can’t. We can do it at 

Quantico and Little Creek and Camp Lejeune, but not at Camp 

Pendleton. We’re not seeking any benefit. We’re not raising any 

money. Our membership is free, this is just a benefit. But, often 

we can’t provide it. 

Another example is suicide prevention. We know there’s a big 

problem; it’s been discussed. We know, anecdotally, that spouse 

suicide is a problem; it’s not tracked by anyone. But, last year four 

spouses, alone, at Fort Bragg committed suicide. 

We also know from our surveys that families and troops prefer 

to get their information from the popular culture and not from government channels. So, taking that experience, we went to the entertainment industry, and we asked for their help in creating a 

message that would work. We went to the Sundance and to the Oscars, and we filmed celebrities giving messages of encouragement 

and directing servicemembers and families seeking help to the 

DOD and VA Helpline. We worked with DOD and VA experts on 

developing the program and in folding it into their helpline. It’s not 

our program. It’s using the outside to get in. 

But, now we are hearing from some general counsels that they 

can’t actually use this Public Service Announcement, which we are 

willing to provide them for free, because there is some concern 

about providing an undue benefit. Well, there’s no benefit to us, 

other than the reduction of people committing suicide. Again, we’re 

not raising money for it. We raised money for it already, and again, 

148 

I think this is an instance of how we’re not being able to provide 

some of the service we need, especially in a time of budget restrictions. 

DOD can’t do it all, and nor should it. When it comes to government budget priorities, my first priority, personally, is having my 

husband properly trained and equipped. Let’s use the private and 

the nonprofit sectors intelligently and responsibly to help us meet 

some of our needs, as families. Sometimes nongovernmental organizations (NGO) have access or expertise, and can act more quickly. 

If NGO programs prove less effective or if needs shift, NGO programs are easier to end than government programs. 

I know many people in government are trying. Many of us got 

together, over a year ago, in White Oak, in a conference call to Join 

Forces for Family, including some members of your committee 

staff, and one of the most common complaints we heard from nonprofits was about DOD stovepipes, and the inability to work with 

the nonprofit sector caused concern. Doug Wilson and Rob Gordon 

were two of the co-hosts there, and they’re at the DOD now, trying 

to enhance cooperation. But, it’s a difficult thing to do. 

Many of our programs, I know many of NMFA’s programs, succeed because we leverage the power of public and private entities 

working together. Military families serve and sacrifice because we 

love our servicemembers and we love our country, but not because 

we love the Pentagon. I think it’s reasonable for us to look outside 

the Pentagon for some of these solutions, and outside of the individual Services. But, we need to coordinate with them to make sure 

that those programs are intelligent and effective. 

So, we’d like to ask for your support and leadership in helping 

us to break through some of the stovepipes and bureaucracy in 

DOD and elsewhere in government that prevent groups, such as 

ours and others who testified here today, from sharing the responsibility for supporting America’s military. 

Thank you for your time. 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Roth-Douquet follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT BY BLUE STAR FAMILIES

Thank you, Senator Webb, Senator Graham, and members of the subcommittee 

for inviting us here to speak to you today. 

Blue Star Families is a nonprofit of military families from all Services and all 

ranks, including National Guard and Reserve, as well as veterans and civilians who 

strongly support us, with a mission of strengthening military families. We support 

one another through the unique challenges of military service and ask the larger 

civilian population to help connect military families regardless of rank, branch of 

service or physical location, and empower military family members to create the 

best personal and family life possible for themselves. 

We currently have over 50 chapters nationwide and are adding more regularly. 

Our online and social media activity is equally important, we have thousands of new 

members joining on-line weekly. We have had 1,000 percent growth in our second 

year. Through outreach and involvement with national and local organizations, civilian communities and government entities, Blue Star Families works hand in hand 

to share the pride of service, promote healthier families, aid in our military readiness, and contribute to our country’s strength. 

We appreciate the opportunity to speak to the Senate Armed Services Committee 

Personnel Subcommittee on the topic of benefits. Our annual Military Family Lifestyles Survey has consistently shown that pay and benefits, the current operational 

tempo, the effects of deployments on children, spouse employment, and children’s 

education are the top concerns among military families. 

Some highlights from our survey concerning benefits: 

149 

• Health Care is both an area of high concern and high satisfaction. Almost 

39 percent of respondents said they were extremely/very satisfied with the 

quality of military health care. However, 24 percent said they were extremely/very dissatisfied. Forty-two percent said they were extremely/very 

satisfied with access to military health care, while 22 percent said they 

were extremely/very dissatisfied with it. While a majority of respondents 

(52 percent) were extremely/very satisfied with TRICARE, 18 percent were 

extremely/very dissatisfied. 

• That Military Healthcare Access & Quality have relatively high extremely/very satisfied ratings yet rank second and third as areas in need 

of improvement (Mental Health Services, with 44 percent, was the area chosen as most in need of improvement) and have solid dissatisfied percentages suggests widely varying quality across regions, services, individual installations, etc. 

• When asked which services they were most satisfied with, the top choice 

(with 50 percent) was the commissary and exchange benefit, TRICARE insurance and Chaplain services tied for second (with 40 percent), and Department of Defense Education Activity Schools came in third (36 percent). 

Base Housing came in a close fourth (with 35 percent). 

• As more and more discussion centers around the post-9/11 GI Bill, our 

membership has continued to voice their support for the option of transferability. Yet many Members of Congress, including members of this panel, 

have advocated for abolishing transferability, either directly or through the 

‘back door’ of requiring the Department of Defense (DOD) to pay for transferred benefits—a requirement DOD has already stated it can’t meet. It is 

unfair to ask those families who have sacrificed the most for the current 

conflicts to give up a key benefit that is intended to reward servicemembers 

for their dedication. It also ignores the modern reality that entire families 

are sacrificing their full potential to serve their country—and that a transferred benefit is still a benefit to the soldier, since the soldier’s income is 

often paying for the spouse’s or child’s education. 

What I would really like to highlight in with you today, however, is a bit different 

it is how we can better help military families—provide benefits—outside of DOD or 

government funding, but with government cooperation, through public-private partnerships. The government is often the largest barrier to this, and perhaps this is 

an area where you can help. 

Military families do serve, do suffer burdens during this long war. But we also 

believe that government can’t solve all ills. Groups like ours play a role, but to play 

it effectively we need to be able to engage cooperatively with the DOD. 

Our organization was started to provide the spouse and family members on the 

ground the ability to identify and be part of solving the problems they saw in their 

communities. We listen to our members, ourselves, our annual surveys, and we use 

our position as military family members to ask for help. We seek to work with government when possible to make our programs better, more effective, and more coordinated with government programs. For instance, last year we asked museums 

across the country to make themselves free for military families over the summer. 

Over 900 museums signed on, and 300,000 troops and family members took part 

last summer. We couldn’t have done it without the assistance of Rocco Landesman 

and the NEA, or the First Lady’s support. This program cost the government and 

military families nothing, and has been tremendously popular. This year our goal 

is to sign up 1,500 museums and have 500,000 family members take part. National 

Military Family Association’s Operation Purple Camps are another example of this. 

Sometimes, however, the cooperation has not been smooth, for instance, with our 

Books on Bases program. We know from experience that many young military kids 

have no books at home, maybe because of frequent moves or deployment pressures. 

A RAND survey showed that base libraries are under funded. My own at Parris Island seems to have had its heyday 40 years ago. But I don’t want the DOD to solve 

that problem. I want them doing other things. So we at BSF have gone to book publishers and to the nonprofit KIDS and have gotten donations of free new children’s 

books that our chapters can bring to give away to their kids, and to base and community schools and libraries, over 65,000 to date. The only problem is, because of 

differing expectations and requirements for nonprofits to operate on different military installations, some installations won’t permit it. So, even though our chapters 

include spouses from their installation, even though we are not raising money or 

receiving a benefit, we are only giving away books—solving a problem, we can’t have 

an event. We have given away books at Quantico, Little Creek, Camp Lejeune, and 

others, but we can’t get on Camp Pendleton. 

150 

As another example, recently we got involved with the issue of suicide prevention. 

Our surveys show that many families prefer to get their information from popular 

culture, rather than from official channels. We also know from our members that 

depression and thoughts of suicide are a problem not just for troops, but among families themselves.’’ So working with DOD and the Veterans’ Administration (VA) experts on the substance, we got the help of the entertainment industry and went to 

Sundance and the Oscars and got celebrities to film PSAs of support to help promote 

the DOD/VA approved help line. This did not cost the government anything and we 

are making it available to anyone who wants to use it for free. Many will use it, 

but we have also heard from some that the legal counsel forbids it as something 

that endorses a private program. Well, we have no program, we are just using the 

power of the popular culture to highlight the DOD/VA program. There is no competition here—this is the kind of thing we could do a better job with. 

This matters because there are tight budgets, and the DOD can’t do it all. Nor 

should it. When it comes to government budget priorities, my first concern personally is getting my husband properly trained and equipped. Let’s use the private and 

the nonprofit sectors intelligently and responsibly to help us meet some of these 

needs. Sometimes the nongovernmental players have access or expertise or can act 

more quickly. If nongovernment organization programs prove less effective or needs 

shift, nongovernment organization programs are easier to end than a government 

program. 

I know many people in government are trying. When many of us here got together 

last year, including some of your staff at the Senate Armed Services Committee, at 

White Oak to discuss ‘joining forces for military families’ across public and private 

sectors, we heard over and over from nonprofits that DOD stovepipes and inability 

to work with the nonprofit sector caused concern. Doug Wilson was one of the cohosts of that conference, as was Rob Gordon. They are both at the DOD now and 

trying to enhance cooperation, but it’s difficult for everyone. 

Most BSF programs succeed because they leverage the power of public and private entities working together to support families. Public-private partnerships are 

key to BSFs philosophy. Military families serve and sacrifice because we parents, 

spouses, and children love our servicemember, and love our country, not because we 

love the Pentagon. In fact, many families prefer not to interact with ‘official channels.’ So it is right and fitting that the responsibility for helping families falls not 

only to the Pentagon or the individual Services, but to the larger society as well. 

As one respondent said in our survey, ‘‘The most important issue I feel is community support of the servicemembers and their families. There are many families, 

more than most people realize, that need that support to know they aren’t in this 

war alone. Many do not seek support or help because of lack of availability, pride, 

or any number of reasons. Community groups, businesses, and local governments 

could work together to keep a focus on their local military families and provide special programs that might be outside of traditional DOD programs. It makes such 

a big difference to know others, besides just our military community, care that our 

loved ones are deploying over and over again and want to be part of what we are 

going through.’’ 

We’d like to ask for your support and leadership in helping us break through 

some of the stovepipes and bureaucracy at the DOD and elsewhere in government 

that prevent groups such as ours and the others who testify here today from sharing 

the responsibility of supporting America’s military families. 

Thank you for your time and for your concern for servicemembers and their families. 

Senator WEBB. Thank you very much. 

All of your recommendations and your full statements will be 

carefully considered by staff on both sides. We’ll have discussions 

about these. We’ve seen these issues, some of them, many times before, but they will all get full consideration. 

Just as a quick comment to something that you just said, Ms. 

Roth-Douquet. We have our challenges when it comes to family 

issues. At the same time, it’s amazing to me, over the course of my 

life, how much better things are for families than when I was a 

kid. 

Obviously, the first thing all of us want is for the serving member to be properly trained and to fulfill their mission and those 

sorts of things. I mean, when I was growing up, in the post-World 

151 

War II military, where the U.S. military had expanded so dramatically during World War II, and held a good bit of its size, compared 

to what it looked like previous to World War II, just basic things, 

like family housing and schools, did not exist. We went, one period, 

for 31⁄2 years, where we couldn’t live with my dad. He was either 

deployed or on bases where there was no family housing available. 

One of the great memories of my earlier life was when he would 

drive 380 miles every weekend from Scott Air Force Base, IL, up 

to Saint Joseph, MO, where we were living. No interstate. He’d get 

off Friday afternoon; he’d drive, get in Saturday morning; come in 

and raise hell for 2 days; get in the car, drive back on Sunday 

night. 

I went to one school in Vandenberg Air Force Base, when they 

first opened up Vandenberg. We went from zero people to 12,000 

people in 1 year out there. Our school was an old World War II 

hospital where they put a green chalkboard in the front of the class 

and said, ‘‘Now this is a school.’’ So, it wasn’t bad. 

But, at the same time, when I look at where we are right now, 

sometimes you have to pinch yourself to realize how much attention is paid to this, despite the challenges that we have. 

Everybody’s eyeballs are on it up here. I think, collectively, up 

here, we’re doing everything we can for the people who serve, 

which, by the way, is a little bit different than when I came up 

here on the heels of the Vietnam war, when this place was very 

divided about military service. 

I want to get all of your viewpoints, if I might, on this issue of 

medical care. I know, Colonel Strobridge, it was probably your assigned area, if there are varying thoughts on this, I really would 

like to hear them, because I personally have been struggling with 

this notion of modest increases, for the time being—but increase in 

TRICARE fees for certain retirees and, Colonel Strobridge, as you 

pointed out, to be indexed to, basically, an unknown entity. 

My immediate reaction, and my continuing reaction, has been 

the notion of a moral contract that this is—there’s nothing written 

in it, there’s nothing in the Constitution. I accept Secretary Gates’ 

observation that there’s no written guarantee. But, there is a notion of a moral contract. 

At the same time, I found what you said to be pretty interesting. 

It’s a fresh approach. I hadn’t been thinking about that. That’s why 

I want to make sure I’m getting everybody’s viewpoint here. This 

notion of providing an index that goes to the cost of living, as opposed to this unknown of a healthcare index—I mean, we can’t 

solve the healthcare problem, in DOD. If you look at the growth in 

healthcare expenditures in the country over the past 15 years, 

they’ve just been off the charts. It’s not a DOD management program. It’s what’s happened in healthcare, writ large. I do not think 

that people who served in the military should have that burden, in 

and of itself. 

So, I really would just like to hear from any of you, or all of you, 

on; what do you believe the notion is, in terms of this moral contract? What do you think about this proposed increase? 

We can start with Master Chief Barnes. 

152 

Mr. BARNES. Thank you, Senator, and thanks for your leadership 

and stand on this issue. I think you’re right on the mark with regard to your view of this as a moral contract. 

Our Association’s biggest concern is the indexing part of the 

DOD proposal. Consistent with our support of past legislation in 

the Senate, sponsored by Senator Lautenberg, we believe that the 

index should be no more than the index used to adjust military retired pay, which is the annual Consumer Price Index. We’ve repeatedly asked for clarification from the Department about how they 

arrived at the 6.2-percent assumption for the $7 to $8 billion savings over 5 years by the Department. But, that’s the area where 

we have the biggest concern, with regard to the DOD proposal. 

Again, thank you for your stand on that. I think you’re right on 

the mark, particularly with regard to those that have served in the 

past that are retired from the enlisted forces, and many were 

promised free healthcare for life, and that remains a key part of 

their vision, in looking at proposals like this, and the more drastic 

past proposals that have been introduced by the Department between 2006 and 2008. 

Senator WEBB. Thank you. 

Mr. STROBRIDGE. Sir, if can expand on my previous comments. 

Everybody agrees, I think, that there’s a moral contract. The issue 

is, exactly what does that mean? There are some people who say, 

‘‘Gee, I was promised free healthcare for life.’’ That’s true for people 

who came in service before December 1957. But, that was a long 

time ago. Most people, most of us who served, when you’re on Active Duty, you have no idea what retirees pay. When people say, 

‘‘you’ll be eligible for lifetime healthcare,’’ people’s reaction is, 

‘‘okay, that means I’ll get what I’m getting today on Active Duty.’’ 

Then when they retire, they find out, well, no. If you want to be 

in TRICARE Prime, you’ll pay that enrollment fee. When you become Medicare-eligible, you will pay Medicare Part B premiums, 

which we’ve paid for 50 years. 

So, the perspective is, what is the moral contract? To us, the 

moral contract means not that we’ll pay whatever civilians pay, but 

that we will recognize where we’re starting from, number one, and 

recognize what that means over the years. To us, if we have a fee 

today, of TRICARE Prime, and you retire today at age 42 or 52 or 

whatever, you’re going to live another 30 years or so, plus. Over 

that time, cost-of-living adjustments are going to raise your retired 

pay, depending on what inflation is, by two or three times. We 

don’t think, frankly, it’s reasonable to expect that you’re never 

going to have to pay even $1 more for your healthcare. 

So, to us, the reasonable way to both recognize the moral contract and accommodate that reasonable expectation of what will 

happen over your lifetime is that the deal will be that we won’t 

raise your fees faster than we raise your compensation. Is that better than civilians get? Yes. But, that’s because civilians don’t pay 

that upfront fee of 20 or 30 years of service and sacrifice. 

Senator WEBB. Thank you. 

Ms. Moakler? 

Ms. MOAKLER. I certainly agree with what Joe and Steve have 

said. But, I think it’s important—and to address your concern 

about breaking with the contract or raising those fees, those retirVerDate Aug 31 2005 09:55 Jan 25, 2012 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00158 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 Y:\BORAWSKI\DOCS\68089.TXT JUNE PsN: JUNEB
153 

ees who are enrolled in TRICARE Standard are not experiencing 

an increase in fees, because they don’t pay an enrollment fee. Only 

those who are enrolled in TRICARE Prime, where it’s available— 

and you need to understand that it’s not available across the entire 

country—are affected by this increase in TRICARE Prime enrollment fees. Those who use TRICARE Standard are already being 

asked to, perhaps, have a supplemental insurance; they pay higher 

cost shares and have a cap that they have to look at. So, we’re already asking those who are just using TRICARE Standard to have 

a payment, as well. It’s not as reflected—it’s not as easy to track 

as the TRICARE Prime enrollment fee. But, they are already being 

asked to pay extra. 

Our association, when the increases were first introduced, 4 or 

5 years ago, saw the increases as inevitable and something that 

needed to be done in order to keep in line with increasing health 

costs. 

Senator WEBB. Thank you. 

Captain Puzon? 

Mr. PUZON. Senator, I believe this moral contract is very strong, 

both ways, from the members and their families. They are very distrustful when you start messing around with it and mucking it up. 

Our members were very upset to find out, in the past and now recently, that we’re going to try to change the enrollment fees and 

leave it alone. They’re looking over their shoulder, what’s next? So, 

you’re actually setting a standard, here, of, ‘‘Okay, that sets it, so 

we’re going to do something different next time.’’ 

Especially if you look at the index thing, as my colleagues have 

said; most of their pay, those that are veterans, have gone down 

or not changed at all over the last 2 years, because of the situation. 

But, it remains that they want to do their part—they understand 

the deficit—but they are just not sure that, ‘‘Okay, if I do this, then 

what’s next?’’ So, our members are very upset with us that we even 

signed on to accept the modest fee, although we saw it as a way 

to make—at least meet, halfway, DOD. But, then when you see the 

indexing, as published, they’re very upset about that. 

Thank you. 

Senator WEBB. Ms. Roth-Douquet? 

Ms. ROTH-DOUQUET. We don’t hear about this from our members 

much, and we don’t ask about it much. I think, with the Active 

Duty, we’re very concerned about resiliency, about tempo, about 

separation, about children. I think it’s a sacrifice to serve, but it’s 

a privilege also, and we’re patriotic. We understand the situation 

our country’s in. I think we need to look at the budget and how 

we need to best protect our forces and move—move, going forward. 

We don’t have a policy position on this issue. But, I do want to 

emphasize that the moral duty goes both ways, to us to you, and 

from you to us. We understand we have a country we have to help 

protect budgetarily as well as security-wise. 

Senator WEBB. All right. 

Mr. STROBRIDGE. Mr. Chairman, may I make a comment about 

Captain Puzon’s concerns about the future, which we certainly 

share? I think all of us share that. 

I think the real concern is, as we said, there’s nothing in the current law that sets TRICARE fees. Our concern is, leaving it that 

154 

way leaves us increasingly vulnerable every year as the budget 

concerns rise. So, to us, we see our proposal as kind of a prophylactic measure to get these principles in the statute, even if it’s 

only as a Sense of Congress, the explicit statement that military 

people pay the bulk of their fees through service and sacrifice, and 

that’s the way we’re recognizing that is to put a limit on the fee 

increase, that is not there now. By doing that, that won’t guarantee 

that nothing else will ever be done, but it establishes a principle 

that we can then look to in the future to try to keep our commitment to that moral contract. 

Senator WEBB. That’s an interesting point, and certainly one that 

I think we’ll consider. It’s sort of a fresh approach that we haven’t 

been talking about up here. 

I thank all of you for being with us today, and for your insights. 

As I said, all of your recommendations will be examined by our 

staff. Again, thank you very much for being here. 

This hearing is adjourned. 

[Questions for the record with answers supplied follow:] 

QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY SENATOR JOHN MCCAIN

DEVELOPING LEADERS IN THE NONCOMMISSIONED OFFICER AND CHIEF PETTY OFFICER

RANKS

1. Senator MCCAIN. Master Chief West, it’s difficult it seems to go a month without some media story about abusive and failed leadership. Most recently, we heard 

about a group of chief petty officers on U.S.S. Stout who, according to the article, 

‘‘created an oppressive, feared, and hostile work environment/command climate 

aboard the ship.’’ A chief petty officer from U.S.S. George H.W. Bush was sentenced 

last week to 6 months in the brig for his cruelty and abuses. You have been working 

at this issue for some time. What do you view as the principal source of problems 

for the Navy, particularly the shipboard Navy, in developing strong chief petty officers who will lead by example? 

Master Chief Petty Officer WEST. I do not believe that Navy has a ‘‘principal 

source of problems’’ that hinders development of leaders at the senior enlisted level. 

We have outstanding development programs that produce some of the finest leaders 

in the world. While there have been some public failures of leadership within the 

chief petty officer ranks in the past year, these are isolated instances from among 

a chief petty officer community of approximately 30,000 leaders. In context, the vast 

majority of these men and women are performing an incredible span of missions in 

a highly professional manner, and in every operating environment imaginable. 

I believe that increased availability of rapid and transparent communications may 

be contributing to an inaccurate perception of increased aberrant behavior among 

leaders. Nonetheless, even a single case of misapplied or abusive authority is one 

too many and Navy leadership remains fully committed to upholding the tenets of 

responsibility, authority, and accountability. In fact, survey results suggest a slight 

upward trend over the last 2 years in response to questions about supervisors demonstrating Navy Core Values being positive role models and demonstrating ethical 

behavior. 

We have developed a continuum of training that begins during Chief Select Training, and continues with annual Chief’s Mess Training at the unit level. The senior 

master chiefs in the Navy are currently conducting waterfront leadership seminars 

among chief petty officers in fleet concentration areas supplemented by guidance 

from senior fleet commanders, identifying expectations of those serving in positions 

of authority. 

Last year, Navy produced a video on the proper way for senior enlisted to conduct 

Career Development Boards—the primary method for chief petty officers to formally 

engage subordinates, in a coaching and mentoring role, to foster professional development. To support the pinnacle of unit-level enlisted leadership, Navy has a 2- 

week Command Master Chief/Chief of the Boat course in Newport, RI, which emphasizes principle-based leadership through a wide array of seminars, case study 

discussions, self-assessment tools, and engagement with the officers in the prospective executive officer and prospective commanding officer courses. 

155 

2. Senator MCCAIN. Sergeant Major Chandler, the Army has been under great 

stress due to its rotational demands. General Chiarelli’s report last July 2010, 

‘‘Health Promotion, Risk Reduction, and Suicide Prevention in the Army,’’ portrayed 

a personnel picture that was very sobering. What’s your assessment about the state 

of the Army and its soldiers since taking over as Sergeant Major of the Army? 

Sergeant Major CHANDLER. My initial assessment is that our overall efforts to develop and maintain a healthy Force are effective. However, we are concerned by the 

growth of specific stress indicators within particular populations. The Army will 

continue to provide the best care, support and multi-disciplinary services available 

and we are committed to mitigating risk behaviors to enhance soldiers and family 

fitness. 

3. Senator MCCAIN. Sergeant Major Kent and Chief Master Sergeant Roy, what 

do you see as the key to development of noncommissioned officers (NCO) who will 

provide the leadership needed to younger troops? 

Sergeant Major KENT. Staff Noncommissioned Officers (SNCOs) empowering 

NCOs to face leadership challenges is crucial to the development of our young marines. While formal education and military professional military education provide 

an initial means of exposure to leadership skills and techniques, only through situational application will these skills be put into practice. Experience is the key. 

SNCOs must coach, teach, and mentor their NCOs during practical exercises to foster leadership learning. Perhaps more importantly, SNCOs must stand behind their 

NCOs during this process and allow NCOs to build confidence in their own leadership abilities. 

Chief Master Sergeant ROY. The Air Force takes a deliberate approach to enlisted 

force development, which includes career progression with increased levels of supervisory, leadership, and managerial responsibilities. The foundation of NCO development is our institutional competencies, which otherwise stand on the three pillars 

of experience, education and training. 

Diverse personal and professional developmental paths provide our airmen opportunities to undertake varying degrees of challenges and build problem solving and 

resiliency skills derived from new knowledge and experiences. Professional Military 

Education (PME) plays a key role in the overall development of our NCOs. PME, 

which begins just prior to earning NCO status and continues throughout their careers, is part of the enlisted continuum of education. Additionally, off-duty education 

is essential and provides development by enhancing one’s intellectual capability, capacity and critical thinking skills. 

Finally, we must develop a joint perspective early in their careers. NCOs must 

know and understand the culture, responsibilities, and the shared competencies necessary to build early interoperability for immediate success in the joint/deployed environment. 

PREDATORY LENDING PREVENTION AND FINANCIAL AFFAIRS TRAINING

4. Senator MCCAIN. Sergeant Major Chandler, Master Chief Petty Officer West, 

Sergeant Major Kent, and Chief Master Sergeant Roy, predatory lending was a big 

problem in the Services 6 or 7 years ago. Servicemembers were losing their security 

clearances as a result of financial irresponsibility. How are we doing today in this 

regard? 

Sergeant Major CHANDLER. The Army’s Central Clearance Facility, which has the 

responsibility to conduct investigations on Army personnel in order to grant security 

clearances, has no method to determine and/or verify if an individual is or claims 

to be a victim of predatory lending. However, during the past 3 fiscal years (2008– 

2010), less than 2 percent of clearance revocations or denials were for financial considerations. 

The Army, through Garrison Commanders, continues to work with on-base banks 

and credit unions to keep a close eye on financial readiness (education, predatory 

lending, and fees) issues. In addition, they work with on-base financial counselors 

who have direct communication and contact with soldiers and family members to 

address these types of concerns. Trade associations and their member banks and 

credit unions on base have also developed specialized lending products to directly 

combat predatory lending. 

Master Chief Petty Officer WEST. In fiscal year 2010, the Department of the Navy 

Central Adjudication Facility (DON CAF) adjudicated 199,378 clearances of which 

1 percent were either denied or revoked. Financial issues were cited in 77.4 percent 

of the denials/revocations rendered by DON CAF in fiscal year 2010. This is the 

trend over the past 5 years. 

156 

When an individual experiences extensive financial difficulties, an adjudicative 

decision is made primarily based on actions the person has taken to formally address and/or mitigate his/her financial situation. Should an individual become the 

victim of predatory lending practices, this would be taken into consideration when 

making an overall adjudicative determination. Typically, there are other issues involved, and, if enough evidence is presented to favorably mitigate the financial concerns as extenuating circumstances that are credibly beyond an individual’s control, 

the individual’s security clearance is not affected. 

It is important to note that an individual always has the opportunity to explain 

to DON CAF, via their command, the circumstances surrounding any financial problem or predicament. This explanation, along with steps taken by the individual to 

address the problem, is taken into account when adjudicating clearances. 

The primary reasons for clearances being denied or revoked as it pertains to financial issues include the inability or unwillingness to resolve debts; recurrent pattern of financial instability; history of not meeting financial obligations; living beyond one’s means; excessive indebtedness; high debt-to-income ratio; unexplained affluence; compulsive or addictive gambling; financial problems linked to drug abuse, 

alcoholism or gambling problems; and failure to file taxes. 

Sergeant Major KENT. In the past, predatory lending was a problem. However, 

data obtained from installation-level financial counselors indicates that of the reported cases only a small number of marines have had issues with predatory lenders. Chief Master Sergeant ROY. We are doing well. In fiscal year 2010, 554 security 

clearance related consultations were reported Air Force-wide; thus far in fiscal year 

2011, 112 have been held. Although these numbers could reflect multiple appointments for the same individual, we believe we are making headway with this issue. 

Our Airman and Family Readiness Centers provide financial counseling and referral services to airmen who need assistance due to anticipated or known security 

clearance issues related to finances. Needs of these airmen vary widely as some are 

merely anticipating problems and want to be pro-active in prevention, while others 

request help only once their clearance is nearing adjudication and/or has been suspended. In addition, financial counseling services are also publicized to all airmen 

and family members through briefings, Commander’s Calls, base websites, pamphlets and flyers. 

5. Senator MCCAIN. Sergeant Major Chandler, Master Chief Petty Officer West, 

Sergeant Major Kent, and Chief Master Sergeant Roy, are there alternative sources 

now for short-term loans needed by junior personnel, e.g., from on-base credit 

unions? 

Sergeant Major CHANDLER. Yes, Army community Services’ Financial Readiness 

programs, Army Emergency Relief, Military Banks and Defense Credit Unions have 

established programs and products designed to help junior servicemembers and 

their families resolve their financial crises, rebuild their credit ratings, and establish savings. 

Master Chief Petty Officer WEST. Yes. In 2007, the Navy-Marine Corps Relief Society created a $300 Quick Action Loan program to assist servicemembers in need 

and keep them from turning to predatory lenders. Some on-base credit unions and 

banks also now offer small loans that were previously not available, to help 

servicemembers resist using payday lenders. 

As a result of leadership focus, the number of sailors using payday loans has decreased. The 2011 Financial Health Quick Poll showed that only 2 percent of enlisted personnel used a payday loan option compared to 8 percent in 2006. 

Sergeant Major KENT. Yes. We worked with the Navy-Marine Corps Relief Society 

to establish a quick assist loan program that offers our marines a $300 interest-free 

loan for emergency basic living expense needs. In addition, our base credit unions 

offer short-term loans. 

Chief Master Sergeant ROY. Yes. The Air Force’s primary source for safe, shortterm, no-interest loans is the Falcon Loan program funded by the Air Force Aid Society and administered by an installation’s Airman and Family Readiness Center. 

In 2008, the Air Force Aid Society (AFAS) created the Falcon Loan program in 

direct response to the alarming predatory lending practices for short-term loans. 

The Falcon Loan is a $500 on-the-spot loan which can be made to airmen experiencing financial difficulties. The airman has 10 months to repay the loan which is 

typically done through regular allotments from the airman’s pay. Loan approval is 

less stringent than other types of AFAS emergency aid, however, a Falcon Loan can 

be received no more than two times in an airman’s career. The loan is intended to 

preclude airmen from seeking financial help from other, less credible sources. AFAS 

reported a 20 percent decrease in Falcon Loans issued from calendar year 2009 and 

157 

calendar year 2010. This decrease may suggest airmen are improving in their overall financial health and ability to manage their personal resources. 

6. Senator MCCAIN. Sergeant Major Chandler, Master Chief Petty Officer West, 

Sergeant Major Kent, and Chief Master Sergeant Roy, how are the programs aimed 

at developing financial knowledge working out: are they well-received and attended 

and do you have any recommendations on how to improve these programs? 

Sergeant Major CHANDLER. The Army’s Financial Readiness training enables soldiers and their families to achieve self-reliance in managing their financial responsibilities. The programs aimed at developing financial knowledge are well received 

and attended. In 2010, Army Community Service Centers provided financial readiness training to more than 60 percent of the junior enlisted population. Program improvements may be achieved through seminars conducted for soldiers and family 

members via the Virtual Resiliency Campus (VRC), a virtual environment that allows users to interact with each other and participate in individual and group activities. Basic Combat Training Installations have a program that provided Personal financial management in the first three weeks of training. 

Master Chief Petty Officer WEST. Navy has an effective personal financial management education program which appears to be well-received by sailors throughout 

their careers. Core financial management training subjects are delivered as mandatory training through a continuum of learning during a sailor’s career and transition 

back to civilian life. Both officer and enlisted receive personal and leadership financial management training. 

Personal Financial Management (PFM) training is provided at: 

• Officer and enlisted accession training sites 

• Recruit Training Command post-graduation orientation 

• General military training 

• Career options and Navy skills evaluation program (mid-career course) 

• Transition assistance program classes 

• Local commands by Command financial specialists 

• Fleet and Family Support Center (spouses invited) 

• Navy Knowledge Online 

Leadership PFM training is provided at officer accession training sites and at key 

milestones in the officer and enlisted career path. Leadership training focuses at all 

levels is to ensure that leaders understand the link between prudent personal financial management and mission readiness. A sailor’s prudent management of his or 

her personal finances is a cornerstone of personal and unit readiness. Navy leadership is also currently evaluating the following initiatives: 

• Improve family participation in the PFM program through partnerships 

with the Ombudsman, family readiness groups, child and youth program, 

and School Liaison Officers to encourage financially fit families. 

• Increase PFM programs participation in pre- and post-deployment events 

including increasing promotion of Savings Deposit Program for deploying 

Individual Augmentees (IAs) to achieve guaranteed earnings of 10 percent 

APR. 

• Promote resources and services to IA families or families of wounded, ill, 

or injured servicemembers. 

• A pilot program to use more junior sailors as Command Financial Specialists to develop a stronger peer-to-peer component in our program. 

Navy has an effective personal financial management education program which 

appears to be well-received by sailors throughout their careers. Core financial management training subjects are delivered as mandatory training through a continuum 

of learning during a sailor’s career and transition back to civilian life. Both officer 

and enlisted receive personal and leadership financial management training. 

Personal Financial Management (PFM) training is provided at: 

• Officer and enlisted accession training sites 

• Recruit Training Command post-graduation orientation 

• General military training 

• Career options and Navy skills evaluation program (mid-career course) 

• Transition assistance program classes 

• Local commands by Command financial specialists 

• Fleet and Family Support Center (spouses invited) 

• Navy Knowledge Online 

Leadership PFM training is provided at officer accession training sites and at key 

milestones in the officer and enlisted career path. Leadership training focuses at all 

levels is to ensure that leaders understand the link between prudent personal finanVerDate Aug 31 2005 09:55 Jan 25, 2012 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00163 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 Y:\BORAWSKI\DOCS\68089.TXT JUNE PsN: JUNEB
158 

cial management and mission readiness. A sailor’s prudent management of his or 

her personal finances is a cornerstone of personal and unit readiness. Navy leadership is also currently evaluating the following initiatives: 

• Improve family participation in the PFM program through partnerships 

with the Ombudsman, family readiness groups, child and youth program, 

and School Liaison Officers to encourage financially fit families. 

• Increase PFM programs participation in pre- and post-deployment events 

including increasing promotion of Savings Deposit Program for deploying 

IAs to achieve guaranteed earnings of 10 percent APR. 

• Promote resources and services to IA families or families of wounded, ill, 

or injured servicemembers. 

• A pilot program to use more junior sailors as Command Financial Specialists to develop a stronger peer-to-peer component in our program. 

Sergeant Major KENT. Marine Corps Community Services (MCCS) provides a variety of classes, workshops, and training on personal financial management. We also 

offer financial links on our Marine Corps websites, provide one-on-one counseling, 

and promote Military Saves week to assist Marines and their family members who 

are having financial difficulties. In addition, we offer classes on home-buying, home 

selling, renting, and leasing that address current national and local economic conditions. 

We are in the process of creating a new Personal Financial Management curriculum to improve the information and services we provide our marines and their 

families. This curriculum will cover over 20 major topics, such as: managing income/ 

expenses/savings/credit; credit and debt management; saving and investing; consumer awareness; banking and financial services; taxes/insurance/legal issues related to personal finances; raising financially-fit children; the time value of money; 

and financial planning for events such as family separation/reunions, transition, retirement, education costs, large purchases, and other major life events. 

Since our personal financial management program classes are not mandatory, attendance varies, depending on the installation. However, we are in the process of 

creating a quarterly reporting system to track attendance for marines and their 

family members. 

In September 2011, we will conduct our third Financial Health Quick Poll (FHQP) 

to determine the level of financial stress among marines and their families as a result of recent economic changes and refine our programs in order to help marines 

and their families cope with financial stress. 

Chief Master Sergeant ROY. We believe they are working out very well. The Air 

Force financial education program is designed to make airmen aware of their responsibility in maintaining their personal financial matters and offer education and 

training at key points in their career. Newly inducted airmen receive mandatory financial training at two points: basic training and their first duty station. 

While at Basic Military Training, all trainees receive 3 hours of financial awareness training to assist them in making sound financial decisions early. This training 

focuses on the basics of financial management including personal responsibility, 

budgeting, sound spending habits, savings, debt strategies, credit reports, financial 

institutions, insurance, investing and consumer awareness, to include predatory 

lending. 

At their first duty station, both officers and enlisted airmen receive financial 

training within 90 days of their arrival. This training is mandatory and standardized across the Air Force. The purpose of the training is to increase understanding 

of pay, entitlements and allotments and to increase understanding of banking for 

both checking and savings. Personal financial education and training is also available throughout a member’s career targeted for members and families to develop 

skills in budgeting and saving, insurance, credit management, car buying, relocation 

moves, investment tools, available counseling or assistance, and preparing for life 

after the military. 

PROGRESS IN IMPLEMENTATION OF DON’T ASK, DON’T TELL REPEAL

7. Senator MCCAIN. Sergeant Major Chandler, Master Chief Petty Officer West, 

Sergeant Major Kent, and Chief Master Sergeant Roy, training for Repeal Day is 

currently underway in each of your Services that will pave the way for gay and lesbian individuals to serve openly in the Armed Forces. What is your assessment of 

the effectiveness of the training for your Service thus far? 

Sergeant Major CHANDLER. The Army’s Chain Teach method has been very effective in educating the force on the policy changes that will result from implementation of the repeal of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell (DADT). It puts direct responsibility on 

159 

commanders/leaders for their units’ complete education, allowing them to personally 

engage their soldiers, civilians, and interested family members on this important 

policy change and to explain its impact and our expectations of them. Feedback to 

date continues to confirm that Army commanders and senior NCOs are fully capable 

of providing the strong leadership, clear instruction and proactive education that are 

key to successful implementation of DADT repeal. 

Master Chief Petty Officer WEST. Navy continues to assess the effectiveness of 

training. Current efforts focus on the Tier 2 leaders who are tasked with delivering 

Tier 3 training to our sailors and include pre and post training assessments. After 

analyzing assessment results, feedback is provided to the Master Mobile Training 

Teams on areas needing additional emphasis. Current feedback on the training remains positive. Additionally, Navy’s DADT website received over 100,000 hits to 

date where sailor questions are addressed. Over the past 2 weeks, the number of 

questions has dropped dramatically possibly indicating that member concerns are 

being adequately addressed. Based on these assessment tools, Navy is confident the 

training has been effective. 

Sergeant Major KENT. Feedback from the Force indicates our training has been 

effective. Marines indicate an understanding of the policy change and what is expected of them upon repeal. The face-to-face training allows marines to engage their 

leadership and ask those questions that are most important to the individual marine. The time allotted to prepare and train for the repeal provides the opportunity 

for marines to really consider potential impacts and ensure they are aware of the 

change in policy. 

Chief Master Sergeant ROY. The Air Force is delivering the OSD standardized 

tiered DADT repeal training. As of 6 May, the Air Force has trained 49 percent of 

the total force. 

In order to assess the effectiveness of training, we are soliciting subjective feedback from our Major Commands (MAJCOMs) on a bi-monthly basis. These reports 

include feedback in the following areas: policy, readiness, effectiveness, unit cohesion, retention, repeal related incidents, and barriers to repeal 

To date, the subjective reports from MAJCOMs are positive. MAJCOMs are indicating the training is clear, on-target, and effective. The standardized slides and 

script are ensuring a consistent, accurate message is provided throughout the force. 

There has been no significant issues regarding policy, effectiveness, unit cohesion, 

retention, repeal related incident, and barriers to repeal. We have addressed only 

minor concerns in readiness with respect to bed down and privacy in deployed locations. 

8. Senator MCCAIN. Sergeant Major Chandler, Master Chief Petty Officer West, 

Sergeant Major Kent, and Chief Master Sergeant Roy, the ground combat forces— 

soldiers and marines, as well as the Special Forces for all Services—registered the 

greatest concern about the effects on readiness and unit cohesion of repealing the 

DADT policy. What problems do you anticipate on ships and in the field when the 

repeal takes effect? 

Sergeant Major CHANDLER. I do not anticipate significant or systematic problems 

from the repeal of DADT. Feedback from the field across all units is that this is 

not a significant issue to the soldiers. We will deal with this issue with the same 

professionalism that has marked our conduct of current operations and has been a 

hallmark of this institution for 236 years. Soldiers are expected to treat all others 

with dignity and respect, consistent with the core values that already exist within 

the Army. Harassment, bullying, or victimizing of any kind will not be tolerated. 

The Army is a force of over 1.1 million soldiers, and there will likely be inappropriate conduct by a few. Commanders and supervisors at all levels have the authority and responsibility to maintain good order, discipline and morale within their 

units; they should use existing tools (to include counseling, non-judicial punishment 

and court-martial) to deal with misconduct. Leaders will be educated on how to handle certain situations, and support will be provided as needed to ensure decisions 

are lawful, impartial, and promote unit cohesion. 

The Army Guiding Principles for Implementation of the Repeal of DADT include: 

standards of conduct apply to every soldier; treat each other with dignity and respect; emphasize our role as professional soldiers; and good order and discipline will 

be maintained at all times. The clear message is that respecting each other’s rights 

is critical to maintaining good order and discipline. Standards of conduct apply 

equally to all soldiers and inappropriate conduct should be corrected appropriately. 

Master Chief Petty Officer WEST. Navy has seen no adverse effects associated 

with repeal training to date, and there are no significant problems anticipated on 

ships or in the field. 

160 

Sergeant Major KENT. We do not anticipate any post-repeal problems that engaged leadership will not be able to successfully address. I expect that your marines 

will faithfully abide by the laws of this Nation and conduct themselves in accordance with their core values of honor, courage, and commitment. Any issues that may 

arise post-repeal will be immediately addressed upon identification. 

Chief Master Sergeant ROY. Although we cannot completely predict the future, we 

do not anticipate any major concerns or issues. To date, we have received only minor 

issues/concerns regarding bed down and privacy in deployed locations. However, the 

tiered DADT training clearly addresses these concerns and we anticipate that as 

more and more folks are trained, there will be fewer concerns and questions regarding these issues. Commanders and senior enlisted leaders continue to be key players 

in addressing these concerns and integral to ensuring a successful implementation. 

9. Senator MCCAIN. Sergeant Major Chandler, Master Chief Petty Officer West, 

Sergeant Major Kent, and Chief Master Sergeant Roy, what are you hearing from 

your senior NCOs and Chief Petty Officers? 

Sergeant Major CHANDLER. Feedback to date continues to confirm confidence that 

Army commanders and senior NCOs are fully capable of providing strong leadership, a clear message and proactive education, which are key to successful implementation of DADT repeal. The Army’s program encourages thoughtful, constructive 

dialogue on the subject between leaders and soldiers. Currently, there are no visible 

impacts on unit readiness, cohesion, or effectiveness. The most frequently raised 

questions concern whether and how implementation of DADT repeal might affect 

Army policy concerning public displays of affection, sharing of billeting and showering/bathing facilities, and off-duty clothing policies. 

Master Chief Petty Officer WEST. I have received extremely positive feedback from 

Navy senior enlisted sailors on the progress of our DADT training and implementation. The training has produced effective two-way dialogue at every level, and provided confidence among the force that leadership is taking the correct, methodical 

approach to implementing this change. Senior enlisted sailors recognize they will 

play an important role in the successful execution, and take that responsibility very 

seriously. As with all our training, DADT training is designed to make us a more 

proficient and cohesive fighting force; one that recognizes and respects the dedication and sacrifice of all men and women who serve our Nation. I’m confident we will 

continue to see the same proactive, informed engagement throughout the implementation process. 

Sergeant Major KENT. We are progressing well towards our program training 

goals. 

Chief Master Sergeant ROY. The overall feedback from the field is the training 

has been very well received. Our airmen indicate the standardized slides and script 

are ensuring a consistent, accurate message is provided throughout the force. There 

has been no significant issues regarding policy, effectiveness, unit cohesion, retention, repeal related incident, and barriers to repeal. We have addressed only minor 

concerns regarding bed down and privacy. 

INTEGRATION OF WOMEN

10. Senator MCCAIN. Sergeant Major Chandler, opportunities for women in the 

Armed Forces have increased significantly during your Active Duty service. Some 

have called for elimination of all constraints by gender, including service in infantry 

and Special Forces units. Do you think the current Army restrictions on service by 

women in deployed Army units should be changed? 

Sergeant Major CHANDLER. We are conducting a review of our current assignment 

policies and regulations to ensure they are relevant and meet the needs of the 

Army. We also want to ensure all soldiers, regardless of gender, are provided opportunities to reach their highest potential. Once the review is complete, we will be 

briefed on the proposed changes and I will be in a better position to provide an informed opinion. 

11. Senator MCCAIN. Master Chief West, you are a veteran submariner. Do you 

support service by women in ballistic missile submarines? 

Master Chief Petty Officer WEST. Yes, I enthusiastically support the integration 

of women on board our ballistic missile submarines. There are extremely capable 

women who have the motivation, talent and desire to succeed in the Submarine 

Force. Those were the same attributes I expected of the submariners when I was 

a Chief of the Boat, and the same ones that will dictate our success in the future— 

regardless of which gender the sailors happen to be. Drawing from a broader pool 

161 

of talent increases our ability to maintain the world’s best Submarine Force, just 

as it has done in other warfare communities. 

12. Senator MCCAIN. Master Chief West, what about service by women in the 

smaller attack boats? 

Master Chief Petty Officer WEST. As we have done with ballistic missile submarines, we will need to study all the factors to understand the best approach for 

our readiness and quality of service for the crew on our fast attack submarines. 

There’s no question that the professional expertise and motivation of women across 

the Fleet would make them a valuable asset to any type of platform as long as we 

take the necessary steps to prepare them for long-term success, and implement the 

change with due diligence. 

13. Senator MCCAIN. Sergeant Major Kent, do you think women marines have 

been denied opportunities or promotions in the Marine Corps because of constraints 

on assignments? 

Sergeant Major KENT. Analysis of the past 3 fiscal years promotion statistics for 

in-zone officers to the grades of O4 through O6, and all SNCO boards, indicate that, 

on average, female marines were selected at a rate equal to or greater than their 

male counterparts. The Marine Corps’ overarching selection criteria is ‘‘best and 

fully qualified’’ and expectations of future potential at the next higher grade. Additionally, Marine Corps promotion selection boards use a ‘‘bloom where planted’’ philosophy that focuses on performance of duty in a billet rather than the assignment 

itself. Specific guidance, in the form of a precept, from the Secretary of the Navy 

for officer boards and the Commandant of the Marine Corps for Staff Noncommissioned Officer boards, is provided to each promotion board. Precepts specifically address career patterns, utilization policies, and equal opportunity. These precepts direct board members to ensure the performance of duty of those affected by assignment or utilization policies is given the same weight as that given to duty equally 

performed by officers (marines) who were not affected by such policies or practices. 

Additionally, female marines continue to do great things both in combat and in garrison. After speaking with numerous female marines, and hearing how they do not 

think it is a good idea for females to serve in combat elements, I agree with them 

and do not concur with assigning female marines to combat elements. 

14. Senator MCCAIN. Chief Master Sergeant Roy, what are your views about opening up additional career fields for female airmen? 

Chief Master Sergeant ROY. 97 percent of Air Force Specialty Codes (AFSCs) are 

open to women. The few remaining AFSCs closed are due to the Secretary of Defense 13 Jan 1994 memorandum defining direct ground combat. Due to this Secretary of Defense policy, a select few AFSCs are closed and/or restricted. 

The Secretary of Defense 13 Jan 94 memo states, ‘‘women shall be excluded from 

assignment to units below the brigade level whose primary mission is to engage in 

direct combat on the ground, as defined below. Direct ground combat is engaging 

an enemy on the ground with individual or crew served weapons, while being exposed to hostile fire and to a high probability of direct physical contact with the hostile forces’ personnel. Direct ground combat takes place well forward on the battlefield while locating and closing with the enemy to defeat them by fire, maneuver, 

or shock effect. These policies and regulations may include the following restrictions 

on the assignment of women where units are engaged in long range reconnaissance 

operations and Special Operations Forces missions.’’ 

Currently, OSD has the Women in the Service Review Working Group examining 

this issue in accordance with the NDAA for Fiscal Year 2011, section 535, requiring 

the Secretary of Defense to have military Services review their policies and regulations restricting the utilization of female servicemembers. 

OSD’s final report is due to Congress NLT October 2011. 

PRIORITIZING QUALITY OF LIFE DOLLARS

15. Senator MCCAIN. Sergeant Major Chandler, Master Chief Petty Officer West, 

Sergeant Major Kent, and Chief Master Sergeant Roy, every year Congress authorizes modernization and construction of new facilities intended to improve the quality 

of military life for members and their families. Clearly, the improvements in quality 

of life for servicemembers and their families are a factor in the historically high retention being seen. What do you consider to be the highest priorities for modernization and construction of new facilities—barracks, child care centers, family housing, 

medical clinics, or schools? 

162 

Sergeant Major CHANDLER. The Army places high priority on facilities that support soldiers and families. Accordingly, we fund barracks, child care centers, family 

housing, and medical facilities required to support Army missions identified in its 

five pillars: Grow the Army (GTA)/Global Defense Posture and Realignment 

(GDPR); Transformation; Modernization; Training Support; and Strategic Readiness. 

As for schools, which are primarily a State and local responsibility, we have relied 

on local education agencies (LEAs) to fund school maintenance and construction. 

However, the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness recognized 

there are facility and capacity deficiencies in many public schools, and surveyed all 

public schools on military installations across the United States in an effort to quantify the deficiencies and assist LEAs. 

Master Chief Petty Officer WEST. The highest priority for modernization and construction of new facilities to increase the quality of life for members and their families is to invest in unaccompanied housing and government owned family housing 

overseas. This includes our Homeport Ashore program to provide single junior sailors stationed on ships with quality housing when they are in port. 

Our sailors continue to serve the Nation in front-line operations and deserve suitable accommodations when returning ashore all across the country. Likewise, investment in family housing, primarily, provides suitable, affordable and safe homes 

for families stationed in foreign and overseas locations. 

Sergeant Major KENT. Thanks to the strong support we have received from Congress, we have made significant strides in providing more and better quality barracks, child development centers, and family housing. 

Since fiscal year 2008, over $2.6 billion has been invested in barracks, providing 

nearly 25,000 barracks spaces. In that same time frame, over $154 million has been 

spent on 3,100 child care spaces. Finally, through our private/public ventures, over 

24,000 homes have been privatized and are providing the highest quality housing 

that Marine families have ever enjoyed. Combined, these three elements have significantly improved the quality of life for both married and single Marines. 

We are working with the DOD Educational Authority and Tri-Service Management Activity (TMA) to provide new and modernized schools and hospitals/clinics. 

A new hospital at Camp Pendleton and a modernized and expanded hospital at 

Camp Lejeune have been funded in recent years. Likewise, school improvements at 

Camp Lejeune and the construction of a consolidated elementary school at Marine 

Corps Base, Quantico, are currently in process. 

Chief Master Sergeant ROY. All quality of life-type facilities that support our airmen and their families are high priorities for the Air Force. But as we live in a 

fund-constrained environment, we have had to prioritize and focus our efforts. One 

Quality of Life emphasis is dormitories . . . getting our youngest airmen into the best 

housing we can. In fiscal year 2011, for example, we requested $213 million in dormitories, and in fiscal year 2012 we’re requesting $484 million (which includes $193 

million for our joint-base other Service partners). This represents a significantly 

large proportion of our $1.4 billion fiscal year 2012 President’s budget request. Family housing improvement is another significant Quality of Life effort. The fiscal year 

2012 budget includes $405 million in family housing operations and maintenance 

and $85 million in overseas housing military construction. By early 2012, 100 percent of the continental U.S. (CONUS) housing inventory will be privatized, representing another significant milestone in improving the quality of life for our airmen and their families. 

OPERATION JOINING FORCES

16. Senator MCCAIN. Mr. Strobridge, Mr. Barnes, Ms. Moakler, Mr. Puzon, and 

Ms. Roth-Douquet, the White House recently announced a national initiative that 

focuses on the employment, education, and wellness of military personnel and their 

families. First lady Michelle Obama and Second Lady Jill Biden announced the 

Joining Forces initiative, which pulls together a variety of U.S. Government agencies, businesses, nonprofit groups, and media organizations in an effort to improve 

the lives of military families. General Stanley McChrystal will lead the effort. What 

role do you anticipate for The Military Coalition in this effort and what priority 

areas do you think General McChrystal should focus his attention? 

Mr. STROBRIDGE. The Military Officers Association of America (MOAA) (and we 

believe other members of The Military Coalition) hopes to be an active partner in 

the Joining Forces initiative to assist in General McChrystal’s efforts to rally U.S. 

Government agencies and non-governmental agencies to work collectively to improve 

the lives of military families. 

163 

MOAA believes that General McChrystal should consider several recommendations from the recent Department of Defense (DOD) and U.S. Department of Agriculture Family Resilience Conference Senior Enlisted Advisors (SEA) townhall. 

When asked what they see as the top three military family resilience issues, the 

SEA responses covered the gamut of challenges that military families have and continue to face, such as post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), quality childcare availability, quality education for military children, military spouse career options, access 

to care and quality care under TRICARE, exceptional family member advocacy and 

support, and clear and concise communication to access services that are currently 

available. 

MOAA believes it will be important for the Joining Forces Initiative to work with 

each of the Services and the DOD Military Family Readiness Council to identify 

critical gaps in service. In working with nongovernmental organizations, agencies, 

and communities, it will be important to identify where those organizations, agencies, and communities can assist in filling the gaps, while educating them about the 

service and sacrifice of the All-Volunteer Force and the families supporting the 

force. 

The First Lady’s tagline about Joining Forces is that everyone can do something. 

MOAA believes many nongovernmental organizations, agencies, and communities 

are willing and ready to step up to offer support to military families. Creating and 

sustaining partnerships between DOD and these organizations, agencies, and communities will benefit the military family community, and is a fiscally responsible approach to service and support. 

Mr. BARNES. The Military Coalition (TMC) believes Operation Joining Forces 

(OJF) is an important initiative to expand awareness and support of military families and complement the work of individual member organizations in providing support and assistance to these families. Each TMC organization communicates regularly with its members and can help increase support for OJF via these channels— 

in some cases as an adjunct or extension of other initiatives such as Employer Support of the Guard and Reserve (ESGR). FRA participated in the May 18, 2011 teleconference on OJF which focused on support from religious and community organizations. In addition, I believe Gen. McCrystal should recognize that many organizations are working toward the same goal(s) as OJF and focus on establishing contact 

with TMC organizations and provide information and periodic updates on OJF for 

dissemination to these groups. 

Ms. MOAKLER. As a member of The Military Coalition, which is composed of primarily membership organizations with local roots, we understand the importance of 

community support for military families. The individual organizations of the TMC 

are already helping to educate community leaders and organizations about military 

families through the work of their chapters, through articles in their national publications and through their websites. The National Military Family Association has 

recently published ‘‘Finding Common Ground: A Toolkit for Communities Supporting Military Families’’ that dovetails nicely with the Joining Forces initiative, 

offering simple, easy to put into practice ways that different community groups can 

support military families. It can be found at http://www.militaryfamily.org/publications/community-toolkit/. The site will also show how communities are supporting 

military families by highlighting best practices as they surface to us. 

The three areas highlighted by the Joining Forces initiative are all important, 

however, the wellness of military families should be paramount. Our Association 

has long promoted well-being as a foundation for resilience. We stress how access 

to behavioral health care is essential to aid military families in coping with the 

many challenges they face with deployments. It is easy to tie the other two priority 

areas of employment and education into resilience as well. Whether it is a Reserve 

component servicemember who is hoping that his/her job is there when returning 

from deployment or a military spouse who is trying to create a portable and fulfilling career, the civilian community needs to be aware of the exceptional employee 

that is available to them. The support of the entire education community of teachers, counselors and administrators for our military children is essential—the community just needs the tools and resources to help them help our military children 

deal with the challenges they face. 

Mr. PUZON. The Military Coalition—could and will play a supportive role through: 

(1) Getting the word out to all our members through our newsletters, magazines, 

and electronic means. 

(2) We have a reach to Veterans and serving military members and their families—especially in the Reserve community. 

To improve the lives of military families the priority effort needs to be: 

(1) Parity in pay 

164 

(2) In family programs that actually do reach the mass of military families; 1.3 

million active duty, and 1.2 million Guard and Reserve members that are currently serving—not to mention the veterans of wars that have needs with 

their families. Needs to be a partnership with NGOs, VSOs, MSOs, and media 

to reach people in remote areas. 

Ms. ROTH-DOUQUET. Our 2010 Military Family Lifestyle Survey, which has been 

quoted in the Presidential Directive, Strengthening our Military Families, indicated 

that the top five areas of concern for military families are pay/benefits, OPTEMPO, 

Spouse Employment and Children—both with regard to their ability to get a quality 

education and the effects of deployment. The Joining Forces Initiative largely aligns 

with these areas of concern through the emphasis on wellness, education, and employment. 

Based on feedback heard at the recent DOD ‘‘Forging Partnerships’’ conference, 

we believe priority should be placed on designating personnel who would have a robust boundary-spanning role into the community at each post. Many service groups 

that have existing programs that could benefit the lives of military families are having issues getting beyond the bureaucracies that are different at each installation. 

Consistent policies coupled with dedicated personnel who can maintain and grow 

programmatic community ties may be a good start to opening up new channels of 

cooperation. 

DISABILITY EVALUATION SYSTEM

17. Senator MCCAIN. Mr. Strobridge, Mr. Barnes, Ms. Moakler, Mr. Puzon, and 

Ms. Roth-Douquet, after almost 10 years of war, the number of individuals who are 

not deployable and who most likely will be evaluated for disabilities and discharge 

are very high and growing. While improvements have been made in the system, 

there simply are not enough medical officers, processors, and Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) personnel to meet the demand for evaluative services. From the 

perspective of the Coalition, what are the most serious shortfalls in the Disability 

Evaluation System that need to be addressed by the Services, DOD, and Congress? 

Mr. STROBRIDGE. In a recent interview, the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness, Dr. Clifford Stanley, stated that he and the Army’s Surgeon 

General are in agreement that the Integrated Disability Evaluation System (IDES) 

‘‘remains complex and adversarial.’’ 

The new IDES was intended to streamline the disability process making it more 

understandable and consistent by providing a single physical exam used by both 

DOD and the VA to produce the disability rating. 

In one regard, eliminating the Service-unique rating tables and requiring the two 

Departments to use the VA Schedule for Rating Disabilities has created a much 

more consistent rating platform. 

However, the reality remains that DOD and the VA still render separate ratings: 

VA rates all service-connected disabilities/medical conditions while DOD rates only 

those conditions that are considered ‘‘unfitting.’’ 

This practice perpetuates two separate and distinct ratings by DOD and VA, with 

the DOD rating being typically lower. MOAA believes this dual-rating process 

counters Congressional intent for the IDES. 

Another practice that remains unchanged from the legacy DES continues to allow 

the Services to subjectively eliminate service-connected medical conditions from consideration in the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) process, thus creating even greater rating inconsistencies in different Services’ ratings awards for servicemembers 

having the same medical conditions. 

Even when DOD provides clear guidance to the Services to eliminate rating inconsistencies, the Department often does not exercise sufficient oversight to ensure the 

guidance is, in fact, consistently applied by each Service. Unfortunately, the Services seem to interpret the lack of active oversight as tacit acceptance of their different interpretations. 

All of these practices lead to confusion and distrust by the wounded, ill, and injured servicemembers going through the IDES (as well as the legacy DES)—probably the IDES’s most serious shortfall. 

Addressing this shortfall is imperative. Servicemembers cannot understand why 

their medical conditions that are aggravated or incurred during their service are 

rated by the VA as ‘‘service-connected’’ are subsequently dismissed by the Service’s 

Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) and not included in their final rating disposition. 

They—and we—also cannot understand how different Services are allowed to apply 

different rules and award different disability ratings to servicemembers who have 

the same medical condition. 

165 

Providing a single disability rating for servicemembers found unfit for duty that 

includes all service-connected disabilities/medical conditions—used by both DOD 

and VA—would eliminate confusion and provide much more consistent ratings between the parent-Services. 

Another significant shortfall is the system’s gap when it comes to National Guard 

and Reserve members. We have received several reports that identify problems for 

Guard and Reserve members who were called to active duty and subsequently demobilized, and then had a medical condition that manifests or worsens after demobilization. 

In many cases, the Guard and Reserve and their parent Services have failed to 

provide their Guardsmen and reservists due process by affording them the opportunity to have their disabling conditions reviewed by a Medical Evaluation Board 

and subsequent PEB. 

Too often, the disconnect begins while the Guard and Reserve member is still on 

active duty and told to have any medical ‘‘problems’’ taken care of by the VA and 

discouraging them from applying for disability before separating. 

Call it a failure of leadership or a shortfall of the Disability Evaluation System, 

but either way this is a significant problem that needs to be addressed. 

Mr. BARNES. The most serious shortfalls in the disability evaluation system are: 

(1) Despite significant additional resources and manpower authorized and funded 

in recent years, the backlog of disability claims continues to increase. The solution not only requires adequate staffing and resources, it also involves more 

automation of a streamlined disability rating system to address this challenge. 

(2) There is a continuing need to improve collaborative efforts between DOD and 

VA, including strengthening the Senior Oversight Committee (SOC) efforts. 

Despite some progress toward the goal of a truly ‘‘seamless transition’’ process 

for transitioning personnel instituted since the 2007 Walter Reed Army Medical Center revelations, significant challenges remain. There is strong bi-partisan support to reform the system and Members of Congress have made clear 

that they want to eliminate delays and improve the antiquated paper claims 

process to eliminate bureaucratic disputes and ensure more uniformity between branches of the military and the VA in how they rate disabilities. 

The Integrated Disability Evaluation System (IDES) is a major part of the claims 

process and the recently streamlined process which initially involved a pilot program in a limited number of sites has been established as a standardized program. 

The IDES requires only one physical exam and only one rating, is currently deployed at 73 sites and is scheduled to be fully deployed in September 2011. Along 

with Deputy Secretary of Defense William J. Lynn III, Deputy VA Secretary W. 

Scott Gould reported on IDES, SOC and other issues during a May 18, 2011 Senate 

Veterans Affairs Committee hearing and noted that the pilot program was extended 

to more sites and officially ended in March 2010 and was then renamed as IDES. 

Over 5,800 servicemembers have completely transitioned from referral, to IDES to 

veteran status, and as of April 30, 2011 there were 13,762 active cases in the IDES 

process. Prior to IDES, it took an average of 540 days for the VA and DOD processes to be completed and the goal under IDES is to complete the process within 

295 days, while simultaneously shortening the period until delivery of VA disability 

benefits after separation from approximately 166 days to 30 days. 

Despite this progress, problems remain including certifying each site’s operational 

capabilities and other issues detailed in the December 2010 GAO Report citing staffing shortages, and inadequate IT solutions. There has been a noticeable improvement over the previous processes since only one physical exam is required and there 

is only one rating. The IDES also continues to allow the claimant to receive pay and 

other benefits and has reduced processing time. That said, continuing Congressional 

oversight is essential to this program along with improved coordination between 

DOD and VA bureaucracies. 

There is also strong TMC support for the administration’s efforts to create a joint 

Virtual Lifetime Electronic Record (VLER). A VLER for every servicemember would 

be a major step toward the goal of a truly seamless transition from military to veteran status for all servicemembers and would permit a DOD, VA, or private health 

care provider immediate access to a veteran’s health data. There is some sharing 

now between DOD and VA, but information in the private sector is invisible to VA. 

The VLER strategy would utilize secure messaging standards, similar to that which 

is used for email, to securely relay information between sources. 

Ms. MOAKLER. The caring of our wounded warriors is an integral part of the cost 

of war. We can no longer make them languish for months as a disability claim 

works its way through the process. This problem is especially acute for members 

of the Reserve component who are often separated from their families during the 

166 

process. While we know that several measures have been adopted to speed the process including the hiring of extra claims adjusters and the implementation of the Integrated Disability Evaluation System (IDES), claims backlogs still exist. 

As an Association focused on military families, we are not experts in the Disability Evaluation System. We join with other members of the Military Coalition in 

supporting efforts to create a Joint VLER for every servicemember. We also agree 

on the need for using the most modern technology, combined with adequate resources and staffing. While there have been great strides, the VA and DOD still 

need to improve cooperation between the departments, working with Congressional 

oversight. 

Mr. PUZON. There is disparity between DOD and VA on disability evaluation— 

that can be solved through serious legislation that mandates it to be the same. 

There seems to be no coordination between DOD and VA. There is no coordination 

on disability evaluation of Reserve components! This does need to be addressed now. 

The problems are not necessarily the need for more hires—but, the policy of Reserve 

components vs Active Duty—case in point: Fort Lewis—fiasco on approach to returning Guard and Reserve. This also is the case in some Navy approach to Navy 

Reserve members returning. There needs to be standardization between DOD, VA, 

and the Services especially for the Reserve components. 

Ms. ROTH-DOUQUET. We haven’t specifically polled our membership on this issue. 

Anecdotally, some of the things we hear are that female veterans are concerned 

about their healthcare at veterans facilities. In fact, a Veterans Administration Office of Inspector General report recently issued found that female military members 

returning from Iraq and Afghanistan are more likely to be diagnosed with mentalhealth conditions than their male counterparts. The report also found that women 

are much more likely to suffer from major depression and to have a harder time 

transitioning back to civilian life after combat service than men. Finally, the report 

found that payment for PTSD claims is denied at a higher rate for women than for 

men, and denies a higher rate of male veterans’ claims for mental health conditions 

other than PTSD. Blue Star Families was involved in creating awareness about 

women veteran issues in meetings with Senator Mark Warner and were glad to see 

an official study undertaken. Now is the time to follow through on these findings 

to make sure our female veterans are getting the best care we can provide them 

with. 

EDUCATION OF SCHOOL AGED MILITARY CHILDREN

18. Senator MCCAIN. Mr. Strobridge, Mr. Barnes, Ms. Moakler, Mr. Puzon, and 

Ms. Roth-Douquet, last year, we received testimony from DOD witnesses that more 

than half of the 300 local educational agencies serving military children were not 

meeting academic standards in reading/language, arts, and/or math. Are you aware 

that a DOD grant program, which provided grants to improve learning opportunities 

for military kids at 284 local schools, was cut in the DOD efficiencies initiatives? 

Mr. STROBRIDGE. The MOAA is not aware that either of the DOD grant programs 

was cut in the DOD efficiencies initiatives. 

Mr. BARNES. I was not aware that the $58 million DOD grant program was reduced as part of the department’s efficiencies initiatives affecting 284 schools beginning in fiscal year 2012. In addition, I learned that other TMC organization were 

likewise unaware of the reductions. 

I strongly agree that providing access to quality education for military children 

is very important to the All-Volunteer Force and is a key aspect of issues and programs associated with family readiness and support. As noted in TMC’s 2010 statement to both the HASC and SASC, quality education is a top priority to military 

families and questions about the caliber of schools in new duty stations are among 

the first asked upon receipt of PCS orders. In a recent FRA survey of legislative 

priorities (early 2011), quality of schools for dependent children was ranked as ‘‘very 

important’’ by 58 percent of active duty respondents and came in sixth out of 13 

priorities. And related to this issue is the importance of adequately funding of the 

Impact Aid program via the Department of Education along with supplemental 

funding for the program via the annual NDAA and Defense Appropriations legislation. 

The best ways to enhance options to ensure that all military dependent children 

receive high quality educations regardless of the locale are to: 

(1) Support expansion of the number of States (currently 39 with the latest being 

Vermont) participating in the Military Interstate Children’s Compact Commission to help provide for the consistent treatment of military children transferVerDate Aug 31 2005 09:55 Jan 25, 2012 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00172 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 Y:\BORAWSKI\DOCS\68089.TXT JUNE PsN: JUNEB
167 

ring between school districts and States in conjunction with frequent moves 

associated with permanent change-of-duty station (PCS) moves. 

(2) Ensure adequate support for schools educating military children via supplemental Impact Aid funding addressed in the annual defense authorization and 

appropriations bills. 

(3) Sustain support for DOD schools via the Department of Defense Education Activity (DODEA) which currently provides education to 84,000 military and civilian children in 194 schools. 

Ms. MOAKLER. Our Association was unaware that DOD grant program was cut 

in the DOD efficiencies initiative. We were advocates of the grant program which 

allowed DODEA to award $58 million to 44 school districts serving approximately 

77,000 military-connected students in over 284 schools in fiscal year 2009. We are 

pleased to learn that there will be no impact to the 3 year grants awarded to date 

since the efficiencies do not take effect until fiscal year 2012 but are disappointed 

that the program has been cut. 

Mr. PUZON. I was not aware that the DOD grant program was cut in efficiencies 

initiatives. First—the DOD efficiencies that are identified are some times just ‘paper 

money’ cuts—and, never really achieve efficiencies as recently reported in press reports. The Senator Grassley report shows that DOD can not ‘police’ itself—and 

achieve efficiencies. Therefore cutting people programs—across the board—is the 

only way DOD can realistically say it is cutting. Cutting inefficient programs is a 

good thing. However, as our educational system seems to decline—yearly, it seems 

counter productive to cut any educational program that assist our youth. 

Ms. ROTH-DOUQUET. We were not aware of this grant program. 

19. Senator MCCAIN. Mr. Strobridge, Mr. Barnes, Ms. Moakler, Mr. Puzon, and 

Ms. Roth-Douquet, do you agree that providing access to a quality education for our 

kids is a readiness requirement for the All-Volunteer Force? 

Mr. STROBRIDGE. The MOAA wholeheartedly believes that providing access to a 

quality education for military dependents is a key readiness requirement for the AllVolunteer Force. According to the Department of Defense State Liaison Office, military dependents attend 6–9 different schools over the course of a parent’s military 

career. Given increased operational tempo and deployments, military children are 

often facing additional stressors associated with the absence of one or, in some 

cases, both parents throughout the school year. 

MOAA is pleased that 36 States have signed on to the Interstate Compact on 

Educational Opportunity for Military Children. We have found, however, that due 

to budget restraints in many States, military families, who are changing duty stations, are experiencing a lack of quality education and educational services due to 

inconsistent standards and budget shortfalls State by State. The reality remains 

that there are States which do not have the financial means to provide comparable 

course placement and educational services. The amount of Impact Aid received by 

schools with high concentrations of military children has become a critical source 

of funding, and we are concerned that delaying Impact Aid payments and/or lowering Impact Aid amounts will have a very adverse impact for many military children in public school settings. Additionally, in some instances, we are aware that 

military families have made the difficult decision to intentionally separate the family from the servicemember’s place of duty to allow their children to remain in a 

quality educational environment rather than have the family accompany the 

servicemember to a new duty station. MOAA believes that is not a choice that any 

military family should have to make. 

Mr. BARNES. See answer to question #18. 

Ms. MOAKLER. Our Association has long held the belief that providing access to 

a quality education for our military children is a critical readiness issue. As we have 

stated in testimony, our military families place a high value on the quality of their 

children’s education. It is a leading factor in determining many important family decisions, such as volunteering for duty assignments, choosing to accompany the 

servicemember or staying behind, selecting where a family lives within their new 

community, deciding whether to spend their financial resources on private school, 

or considering homeschooling options. It can even impact a family’s decision to remain in the Service. 

In addition to providing a quality education for our children, schools are an integral component of family readiness. Since they are the one constant in a military 

family’s life, they often serve as a safety net for families who may need assistance. 

This support has been critical for our military families who have endured tremendous stress, multiple deployments, and extended separations during these past 10 

years of war. 

168 

Mr. PUZON. I agree providing quality education is a National Security issue and 

is a readiness requirement—however, I do not agree that it is going to happen solely 

through our public education as it is today. I support charter schools and voucher 

systems—nationally, since the public education system has declined rapidly in the 

last 20 years. If we agree it is a National Security issue and readiness issue—then, 

we need to do something different than we have done in the last 30 years. It is not 

keep assisting the public schools to fail. 

Ms. ROTH-DOUQUET. We absolutely do. Our 2010 Military Family Lifestyle Survey 

showed military child education to be one of the top five areas of concern for our 

military families. Twenty-six percent of respondents listed children’s education as 

one of their top three concerns Between frequent moves and servicemember time 

away from home, many parents worry about their children getting a good education. 

A full 34 percent were ‘‘least or not confident’’ that their children’s school is responsive to the unique military family life. 

Based on the survey, most spouses are confident that they can make decisions regarding their child’s future, education and extracurricular school activities during 

the absence of a military parent, yet still 71 percent indicated that they would like 

more support for their children during a deployment. 

Additionally, there was a high saturation of references to transitions and school 

related topics. For example, for the questions relating to military children, including 

open ended questions, ‘‘school’’ was mentioned 1,008 times and transitions or moving was mentioned 1,458 times. Academics, grades, extra-curricular, classes, teachers, and education were all prevalent concerns. 

These concerns are well founded. On average, a military student transfers to different school divisions more than twice during high school. Most military children 

attend schools in six to nine different school divisions from kindergarten to 12th 

grade. A need for standardization across the States was a common theme in openended questions. Many parents expressed sadness, concern and anger that their 

military children could be penalized or delayed in achieving their educational goals 

because of inflexible and conflicting curricula from State to State. 

20. Senator MCCAIN. Mr. Strobridge, Mr. Barnes, Ms. Moakler, Mr. Puzon, and 

Ms. Roth-Douquet, what are the best ways to go about enhancing the options to ensure that all military dependent children receive highest quality educations, regardless of where they are stationed? 

Mr. STROBRIDGE. According to a recent Government Accountability Office (GAO) 

study, Impact Aid played a necessary role for most public schools supporting military dependent children. However, delays in delivering Impact Aid payments make 

it extremely burdensome for local school districts in planning for and preparing annual budgets. MOAA supports reviewing the process of distribution of Impact Aid 

to significantly reduce payment delays and establish reasonable timelines for delivery. MOAA also concurs with the GAO recommendation urging the Secretary of 

Education, in partnership with the Secretary of Defense, to highly consider requiring school districts to identify military dependent students as a reportable subgroup 

on their academic outcomes, to include test scores and high school graduation rates. 

A critical component to ensuring military dependent children receive the highest 

quality education is through a continued partnership between the Department of 

Education and DOD. Persistent and effective oversight to the 13 objectives established in the Memorandum of Understanding between the Department of Education 

and DOD will ensure this partnership is sustained for the highest quality of education, not only for military dependent children, but for all school-age children. 

The Domestic Dependent Elementary and Secondary Schools (DDESS) operated at 

16 military installations continue to play an important role for over 26,000 military 

dependent students. The DDESS provide standardized curriculum, allowing for continuity for military dependent children who are DODEA students. One venue for ensuring high quality of education would be to evaluate public schools aboard installations, and those which do not meet or exceed DDESS standards should be transferred to the authority of the DODEA and fall under the jurisdiction of the Secretary of Defense as provided under Public Law 97–35. 

In some instances, MOAA is aware the public school system is not equipped to 

handle the influx of dependent military children brought on by Base Realignment 

and Closure (BRAC). MCB Camp Lejeune, NC is an example of a military installation that has six DODEA schools aboard the installation, with approval for one additional DODEA school to open in the fall of 2011. Two public elementary schools 

have also opened in Onslow County, NC, in the last 3 years to accommodate the 

growing population of dependent military children. MOAA believes it is imperative 

that all circumstances surrounding the continued existence and establishment of 

DODEA schools are reviewed before reducing or eliminating funding, and/or transVerDate Aug 31 2005 09:55 Jan 25, 2012 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00174 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 Y:\BORAWSKI\DOCS\68089.TXT JUNE PsN: JUNEB
169 

ferring authority of the installation schools over to the State’s public school system. 

Additionally, MOAA noted that funding was authorized but not appropriated for fiscal years 2008, 2009, and 2010 for BRAC (GAO report on Impact Aid). Inconsistent 

funding for BRAC continues to have a negative impact on the communities involved 

in the force structure changes, including the education community. 

Another recommendation to help ensure high quality education regardless of duty 

station is to open the DODEA Virtual School program to all military dependent children (high-school age) who do not reside aboard installations. The Virtual School 

Program was designed to ease transition requirements, allowing students to enroll 

in courses they need and filling gaps regardless of their location. MOAA supports 

extending the DODEA Virtual School program to all military dependent children enrolled in high school. 

Mr. BARNES. See answer to question #18. 

Ms. MOAKLER. Ensuring that all military dependent children receive a quality 

education regardless of where they are stationed is one of our Association’s top priorities. We consistently advocate for appropriate and timely funding of Impact Aid 

through the Department of Education. We also believe that school districts experiencing high levels of growth, due to military base realignment, should be able to 

apply for Impact Aid funds using current student enrollment numbers rather than 

the previous year. We continue to be a consistent voice on increasing DOD Supplemental funding for schools educating large numbers of military connected students. 

Our Association has long believed that both Impact Aid and the DOD Supplemental 

funding are critical to ensuring that school districts can provide quality education 

for our military children. 

In addition to Impact Aid, State support of the Interstate Compact on Educational 

Opportunity for Military Children has helped ease many of the transition issues facing military families. Although the Compact does not specifically address the quality 

of education our children receive, it greatly impacts military children’s educational 

experience overall. Our Association continues to advocate for its passage in all 50 

States, territories, and the District of Columbia to ensure that all military children 

will be covered by the Compact. 

Our Association was also pleased that the President’s recent landmark directive, 

‘‘Strengthening Our Military Families,’’ listed as one of its top priorities the need 

to ensure excellence in military children’s education and their development. We appreciate the Department of Education committing to making military families one 

of its priorities for its discretionary grant programs and for finding ways to 

strengthen military families within the Reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act. The Department is also seeking new ways to collect and report data pertaining to military connected children. We believe that including military children as a reportable subgroup will help determine where they attend 

school, enable additional support, and ultimately strengthen the education they receive. 

With more than 90 percent of military-connected students now attending civilian 

schools, our Association is pleased that DOD has completed a 90-day preliminary 

assessment of how to provide a world-class education for all of the 1.2 million 

school-aged children, not just those under the DODEA’s purview. We appreciate the 

educational support programs already available to military children through DOD, 

such as the tutoring program for deployed servicemember families, and DODEA’s 

virtual high schools. Our Association believes these programs are making a difference and would be beneficial to all military families. 

Mr. PUZON. I do agree that Congress does need to address military dependent 

children quality education needs. Where they are stationed—does make a difference. 

Ms. ROTH-DOUQUET. The Council of State Governments (CSG), in cooperation 

with DOD, worked with a variety of stakeholders and drafted a model compact, The 

Interstate Compact on Educational Opportunity for Military Children. We strongly 

support our peer military community organizations in efforts to provide standardization and ease of transfer of our military children. 

However, in order for this agreement to have a meaningful and lasting impact on 

our local schools, we need strong support from the Federal Government to encourage 

local districts to educate themselves and to implement the Compact. 

In spite of the fact that many States have adopted the Compact, due to the local 

nature of education, many military parents are still being thrust into the role of individually advocating for their children by educating local school officials regarding 

the rights of their children and the purpose of the Compact. 

170 

QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY SENATOR SCOTT P. BROWN

BASIC ALLOWANCE FOR HOUSING

21. Senator BROWN. Sergeant Major Chandler, according to recent policy guidance 

provided by the Army G–1, activated Guard soldiers mobilized for deployment collect Basic Allowance for Housing (BAH) based upon their Primary Duty Station 

(PDS), rather than their Primary Home of Record (PHOR). Upon mobilization to deploy, these Guardsmen are issued orders releasing them from their Title 32, Active 

Duty status and provided orders calling them to Active Duty status under Title 10. 

These orders call them to duty from their PHOR, rather than their PDS from which 

they commute on a regular basis for training. As a result, these soldiers stand to 

lose, in some cases, thousands of dollars. Army National Guard (AGR) soldiers on 

Active Duty under Title 32, receive BAH based on their PDS for the purposes of 

a permanent change of station, however, not their PHOR, including shipment of 

household goods and movement of their dependents. These soldiers and their families made financial plans based on the higher BAH. Please provide clarification on 

the rational for the change in policy, the possibility of providing an exception to policy for the soldiers who were issued mobilization orders under the promise of a higher BAH, and the Army’s way ahead? 

Sergeant Major CHANDLER. Statute and the Joint Federal Travel Regulation 

(JFTR) provide that the BAH rate for Reserve component soldiers will be based on 

the soldier’s primary residence rather than the PDS when called/ordered to active 

duty from their primary residence in support of a contingency operation. The Defense Travel Management Office, the proponent for the JFTR, directed the Army to 

amend and clarify the BAH paragraph in the Army’s Personnel Policy Guidance 

(PPG) to be consistent with the statute and the JFTR. 

OSD has advised the Army that neither the law nor the JFTR provides the authority to grant an exception to policy to allow Active Guard and Reserve (AGR) soldiers mobilized in support of a contingency operation from their primary residence 

to receive BAH based on their PDS rather than their primary residence. 

The National Guard Bureau with the support of the Army G–1 and Assistant Secretary of the Army (Manpower and Reserve Affairs) submitted a Continuum of Service legislative proposal for the upcoming cycle that will allow continuation of benefits for AGR soldiers, to include BAH, when ARNG AGR soldiers change status from 

Title 32 to Title 10. 

UNEMPLOYMENT ISSUES

22. Senator BROWN. Sergeant Major Chandler, Master Chief Petty Officer West, 

and Chief Master Sergeant Roy, the Department of Labor’s Veterans Employment 

and Training Service runs a 2-day Transition Assistance Program for out-processing 

servicemembers and their spouses to help prepare them for the civilian job market. 

Currently this program is mandatory for marines. With veteran unemployment 

above the National average, do you think this training should be mandatory for all 

out-processing soldiers, sailors, and airmen? 

Sergeant Major CHANDLER. More than 60 percent of soldiers separating take advantage of the Transition Assistance Program. However, the Army does not intend 

to make the requirement mandatory at this time. The Army will monitor and evaluate the Marine Corps model and if warranted make adjustments. 

Master Chief Petty Officer WEST. Yes. I do believe the Department of Labor’s 2- 

day Transition Assistance Program should be mandatory. Currently, we strongly encourage all out-processing sailors to take advantage of the Department of Labor’s 

Veterans Employment and Training Service 2-day program. 

Additionally, Navy sponsors a robust transition assistance program (TAP), which 

is required by Federal law to be available prior to retirement or separation for all 

servicemembers to help them to transition smoothly from military to civilian life. 

Their families are also invited to attend. TAP provides a variety of transition services including counseling, information on education options, computerized job banks, 

resume writing assistance, and help with the employment interviewing process. 

Chief Master Sergeant ROY. Air Force has a mandatory pre-separation counseling 

provided by our installation Airman and Family Readiness Center staffs. We also 

have an outstanding Transition Assistance Program. This two and half day Department of Labor Employment Seminar is voluntary but well attended. In 2010, participation rate for the seminar was a robust 97.5 percent of separating/retiring airmen. 

171 

23. Senator BROWN. Sergeant Major Chandler, I am particularly concerned about 

soldiers leaving the Army. During the next 2 years, the Army will off-ramp its temporary end-strength increase of 22,000 soldiers. Most of these soldiers will be junior 

soldiers. During General Dempsey’s confirmation hearing, he stated that almost 30 

percent of young soldiers are unemployed after leaving the Service. What is the 

Army doing to ensure these soldiers are prepared for jobs in the civilian sector? 

Sergeant Major CHANDLER. The Army Career and Alumni Program (ACAP) has 

counselors world-wide to ensure that separating soldiers and their families are informed about employment assistance, effects of a career change, relocation assistance, education and training, health and life insurance, finances, Reserve affiliation, 

veteran benefits, and continuation of service. This information is provided through 

a series of workshops over a period of days. Specific to preparing a soldier for employment in the civilian sector, ACAP provides Federal Resumes and Application 

Seminar, Interview Preparation and training in Advance Resume Writing. 

24. Senator BROWN. Sergeant Major Kent, in your prepared testimony you discuss 

new initiatives that the Marine Corps has started to help marines transition from 

the Marine Corps to the private sector. Can you share some of these improvements 

and their effectiveness in preparing marines for employment in the civilian workforce? 

Sergeant Major KENT. In his 2010 Planning Guidance, our Commandant directed 

the Marine Corps to conduct a ‘‘bottom-up’’ assessment of the Transition Assistance 

Management Program (TAMP) and Personal & Professional Development programs 

and services to revolutionize the process, embrace best practices, and ensure we are 

providing the right educational and career assistance to Marines leaving the Corps. 

In response, we have established a goal to make the Marine Corps’ TAMP more 

value-added for our Marines. We will transform the current 2–3 day workshop from 

an event-driven to a process-driven program and support service. TAMP will have 

four ‘‘military-to-civilian’’ pathways: Employment; Career/Technical Education; College/University; and Entrepreneurial. 

We have developed a plan which will inventory and assess critical components of 

TAMP, based on the following phases: 

• Phase I will focus on 180 days pre/post EAS. This phase will include an 

inventory of capabilities; an assessment of current operations for 

redundancies and gaps; a requirement that our TAP Workshop core curriculum and electives be standardized (with well-defined learning objectives 

and exit outcomes); and an adoption of best practices. 

• Phase II and III are still in development. These phases will be based 

upon metrics of effectiveness that will be adopted, used, and assessed by 

Headquarters Marine Corps and all installations to continuously improve 

TAPs and other services. 

GUARD AND RESERVE MENTAL HEALTH ISSUES

25. Senator BROWN. Sergeant Major Chandler, Master Chief Petty Officer West, 

Sergeant Major Kent, and Chief Master Sergeant Roy, in 2010 Active Duty suicides 

went down, while National Guard and Reserve suicides doubled. The Active Army 

has implemented the Comprehensive Soldier Fitness (CSF) program to combat the 

mental health issues facing the Army, with success. What plans do each of your 

Services have to implement these types of programs into the Guard and Reserve 

training to create a more resilient Reserve Force? 

Sergeant Major CHANDLER. The current focus for Army National Guard (ARNG) 

and Reserve component (RC) soldiers for resilience, risk reduction and suicide prevention includes the application of the Army’s CSF program. Both components are 

utilizing Master Resilience Trainers (MRTs) and Resilience Trainer Assistants 

(RTAs) to increase assets available to commanders to improve soldier resiliency and 

unit readiness. To date, the ARNG has trained 295 MRTs and 326 RTAs; the RC 

has trained 309 MRTs. 

A component of the resilience training is the Global Assessment Tool (GAT) which 

each soldier can take to receive an assessment of their strength dimensions (emotional, familial, social and spiritual). Over 234,948 ARNG and 172,800 RC soldiers 

have taken the GAT. Additionally, there are various comprehensive resilience modules (CRMs) to help improve or enhance their resilience areas based upon their results of the GAT. Family members have access to the GAT and also family specific 

CRMs as well. 

Master Chief Petty Officer WEST. We continue to build a culture of support for 

psychological health and suicide prevention while working to overcome the stigma 

172 

associated with seeking needed care for the Total Force, including reservists and 

their families. 

Enabling a continuum of service, Reserve commands have trained Combat/Operational Stress Control (C/OSC) caregivers to provide suicide and sexual assault prevention training regularly at all levels and to destigmatize and normalize buddycare and help-seeking behavior to address mental health or any other readiness 

issues as early as possible. Reserve Psychological Health Outreach Program (PHOP) 

teams, consisting of licensed mental health providers, are embedded in Navy Reserve communities regionally. They support Commanders in identifying reservists 

and family members who may be at risk for stress injuries following deployments 

or other transitions and provide outreach, support, mental health screenings, referrals and follow-up to local mental health resources to assist with problem resolution, 

build psychological resilience and promote growth. They also participate in assessment and training during demobilization and pre-deployment unit activities. Along 

with mental health referrals, many successful referrals by the PHOP teams involve 

helping reservists and their families with financial, health, employment and other 

concerns that can affect psychological health and impact performance and unit, individual and family readiness. Experts in finding resources for the unique needs of 

individual reservists and their families, both governmental (DOD, VA, other Federal 

and State services) and within the local communities where reservists live, these 

providers make outreach contacts with all demobilizing reservists and are available 

for consultation as needed, including providing after hours on-call coverage. Another 

effective tool is the Returning Warrior Workshops (RWW), a two day weekend program designed specifically to support the reintegration of returning reservists and 

their families following mobilization. PHOP teams serve as facilitators at Yellow 

Ribbon Reintegration Program (YRRP) signature events that provide support as 

needed and build resilience and promote post-traumatic growth. In addition, the 

DOD Joint Family Assistance Program (JFSAP) is available to support geographically isolated reservists and Commands with financial and mental health counseling. Families OverComing Under Stress (FOCUS), a family-centered resilience 

training program based on evidence-based interventions that enhance understanding of combat and operational stress, psychological health and developmental 

outcomes for highly stressed children and families, is available for reservists serving 

in areas with a high active duty fleet concentration. 

Sergeant Major KENT. By direction of the Commandant, the Marine Corps has developed a resiliency model featuring identified vulnerabilities (social, physical, psychological, and spiritual), interdependencies (Marine, Unit, Family, and Installation/ 

Community), cohesion requirements, and an analytical framework that prescribes 

necessary actions/planning areas to enhance or grow resiliency including: (1) 

strengthen; (2) mitigate; (3) identify, (4) treat; and (5) return. With the model complete, we have begun action to inventory current capabilities, assess effectiveness 

and future operations utility, and identify gaps/redundancies. We have brought the 

key entities charged with resilience programming together to leverage our existing 

assets in institutionalizing resilience training and program offerings across the 

Corps. Marine and Family Programs is currently developing a resiliency measurement that will allow individuals, units and the Corps to assess resiliency and, based 

on that assessment, intervene to improve psychological resilience. 

Additionally, the Marine Corps has implemented the following programs to create 

a more resilient total force, which includes our reserves: 

• The Never Leave a Marine Behind suicide prevention and awareness education series trains Active and Reserve marines to recognize the warning 

signs for suicide, to foster personal and unit resiliency, to know where to 

go for behavioral health care, to engage helping services early, and in the 

case of senior leaders, how to manage command climate to reduce the risk 

of suicide. 

• The Operational Stress Control and Readiness (OSCAR) program is being 

implemented at the Battalion/Squadron level, training Marines and medical 

and religious ministry personnel to prevent, identify, and manage stress 

problems as early as possible. These unit OSCAR team members are easily 

accessible, known to the unit members, and know the unit members. They 

can quickly recognize unusual changes in behavior, and increase the likelihood marines will talk about stress. 

• A communication skills program, developed by the Army, is being pilottested to help families identify strengths they bring to deployment, prepare 

for experiences they and their marines may have during the deployment, 

and manage stress reactions after deployment. 

• The Marine Corps is currently piloting a 24–7 by marine-for-marine counseling line, available to all marines, whether Active, Reserve, or veteran, 

173 

and their loved ones. The DSTRESS Line is being piloted in the Western 

United States. 

• The Marine Corps Behavioral Health Information Network (BHIN) is a 

web-based clearinghouse for the latest information and tools for Active and 

Reserve marines on prevention and other resources concerning behavioral 

health. These free educational materials are excellent tools that will assist 

units and installation support services in their efforts to educate the military community about building resiliency, recognizing reactions and determining the need for help. The materials, which are available in print and 

media form, include brochures, wallet cards, posters, workbooks, Quick Series, and DVDs. 

• In addition, Marine Forces Reserve (MARFORRES) has implemented the 

Psychological Health Outreach Program (PHOP) which provides Psychological Health professionals at six regional MARFORRES sites to screen 

and refer Selected Marine Corps Reserve (SMCR) personnel for behavioral 

health services. Marines who are referred to the program can be screened 

for behavioral health issues, medically referred, and provided a road to recovery. Outreach members will follow each referred reservist through to the 

resolution of that member’s case, whether it is return to active reserve status, or resolution through the Disability Evaluation System. 

Chief Master Sergeant ROY. The Air Force recently implemented the Comprehensive Airman Fitness program. The goal of this program is to help our total force and 

family members better cope with the stresses of military life. One of the core components is to incorporate ‘‘resilience’’ principles into all of our training platforms such 

as accessions, PME, and technical training. Reserve and Guard members go through 

the same accession points as active duty, so everyone will have the same initial exposure to resilience. Like their active duty counterparts, our Guard and Reserve 

members will receive additional resilience training as they progress through their 

career but it will be tailored to their unique situation; geographically dispersed with 

extremely constrained drill time. 

Air Reserve component (ARC) is in the planning stages of an Air Force Smart Operation for the 21st century event, ‘‘ARC Access to Community Services for Psychological Well-Being.’’ The scope of this event is to effectively provide a mechanism 

to refer and connect Reserve and Guard airmen and their families to appropriate 

mental health and resiliency resources, and monitor progress in an effort to better 

achieve positive outcomes. We will be considering all possibilities in the current resource-limited environment, including regional teams, wing-level, ARC-dedicated 

personnel, and expansion of the role of the ARC liaison at Medical Treatment Facilities. Once approved, we will press forward with this event. 

We also have a Wingman Day, currently planned twice a year, in which Comprehensive Airman Fitness and Resilience is taught and practiced. The goal of 

Wingman Day is to build resilient airmen, through activities emphasizing awareness, accountability, team building, and communication utilizing interactive discussion. 

26. Senator BROWN. Sergeant Major Chandler, Master Chief Petty Officer West, 

Sergeant Major Kent, and Chief Master Sergeant Roy, the military has dedicated 

a lot of time and resources improving the quality of life for military families. Reserve and Guard families face the unique situation of not being collocated on military bases and near other military families. Families become the watchdogs that the 

command structure is for the Active Duty soldiers. While their soldier is mobilized, 

what is being done to educate Guard and Reserve families on the signs and symptoms of PTSD and suicide? 

Sergeant Major CHANDLER. The Army National Guard (ARNG) and the Reserve 

component (RC) have a number of programs to educate family members about PTSD 

and suicide prevention. 

The ARNG has Family Assistance Centers (FACs) and Family Readiness Groups 

(FRGs) which host several events during pre-deployment, deployment and redeployment with guest speakers and trainers presenting information on suicide prevention, behavioral health, PTSD, mild Traumatic Brain Injury (mTBI), resiliency 

training, coping skills, and parenting. The ARNG has FACs located in each State 

and territory to minimize the impact that the geographic dispersed families have 

in accessing service providers. There are currently 381 FACs serving military Families. 

The RC recognizes that any solution to assuring our soldiers can confidently seek 

treatment for PTSD and depression must include their Families. The RC has included training for Army Reserve Families on identifying signs of PTSD and suicide 

at various Yellow Ribbon events. Recently the Army approved 53 Health Promotion, 

174 

Risk Reduction and Suicide Prevention civilian positions that will be geographically 

dispersed throughout the continental United States in support of Army Reserve soldiers and their families. 

Master Chief Petty Officer WEST. When our sailors deploy, families are their foothold. Family readiness is force readiness and the physical, mental, emotional, spiritual health and fitness of each individual is critical to maintaining an effective 

fighting force. A vital aspect of caring for our servicemembers is also caring for their 

families. FOCUS is a family-centered resiliency training program based on evidenced-based interventions that enhances understanding, psychological health and 

developmental outcomes for highly stressed children and families. FOCUS has been 

adapted for military families facing multiple deployments, combat operational 

stress, and physical injuries in a family member. The program provides community 

outreach and education, resiliency skill building workshops and at the center of the 

program an 8-week, skill-based, trainer-led intervention that addresses difficulties 

which families may have when facing the challenges of multiple deployments and 

parental combat related psychological and physical health problems. It has demonstrated that a strength-based approach to building child and family resiliency 

skills is well received by servicemembers and their family members. Notably, program participation has resulted in statistically significant increases in family and 

child positive coping and significant reductions in parent and child distress over 

time, suggesting longer-term benefits for military family wellness. To date over 

200,000 servicemembers, families, and community providers have received FOCUS 

services. 

In addition to FOCUS, Navy Reserve Psychological Health Outreach Program 

(PHOP) teams provide training on signs and symptoms and Combat and Operational Stress and suicide prevention for Navy reservists and their families at 

predeployment and postdeployment events. They provide outreach to returning reservists who may be at risk for stress injuries, and provide mental health screening 

and support and resources to assist with problem resolution and to build psychological resilience and promote growth. Experts in finding local resources for any 

needs, they make outreach contacts, and are available as needed, including after 

hours on call. Another effective tool is the Returning Warrior Workshop (RWW), a 

2-day weekend program designed specifically to support the reintegration of returning reservists and their families following mobilization. It reviews signs and symptoms of stress injuries and suicide risk and makes available counselors and Chaplains. PHOP team members facilitate at RWWs and provide screening and training 

to families at other YRRPs and Command predeployment events to educate family 

members about combat/operational stress and signs and symptoms of suicide risk. 

Sergeant Major KENT. The Marine Corps is implementing the following programs 

to educate Guard and Reserve families on the signs and symptoms of post traumatic 

stress disorder (PTSD) and suicide: 

• We are piloting a 24–7 by marine-for-marine counseling line, available to all 

marines, whether Active, Reserve, or veteran, and their loved ones. The 

DSTRESS Line, which is currently being piloted in the Western United States, 

provides access to counselors who can help family members identify the warning 

signs for suicide, and how to intervene to save a life. 

• The YRRP is a DOD-wide effort that calls for informational events and activities for National Guard and Reserve servicemembers and their families to facilitate access to services supporting their health and well-being throughout the deployment cycle. The informational events and activities, known as Yellow Ribbon Events, take place during all phases of the deployment cycle with post-deployment events conducted at the 30, 60, and 90 day points after the 

servicemember returns home. 

• Yellow Ribbon Events provide interactive and informative seminars on 

communication; stress management; post-military career opportunities; 

money management; health education; parental skills; suicide prevention; 

resiliency training; and other life-skills training. 

• In addition to these seminars, YRRP provides access or referrals, through 

our relationships with other federal and non-Federal entities, to support 

services for issues concerning mental health and substance use disorder; 

traumatic brain injury; housing stabilization; and family support. 

• YRRP also offers access to employment resources and career counseling 

to support those servicemembers facing unemployment/underemployment or 

who have career concerns after being demobilized/redeployed. 

• The Marine Corps Behavioral Health Information Network (BHIN) is a webbased clearinghouse for the latest information and tools for marines, families 

and professionals on prevention and other resources concerning behavioral 

175 

health. These free educational materials are excellent tools that will assist units 

and installation support services in their efforts to educate the military community about building resiliency, recognizing reactions, and determining the need 

for help. These materials, which are available in print and media form, include 

brochures, wallet cards, posters, workbooks, Quick Series, and DVDs. 

• The Marine Corps also delivers Deployment Cycle Training on the normal 

and expected emotional responses to each phase of the deployment cycle and 

present an opportunity for family members to have their questions answered. 

In the post-deployment workshop, family members learn about the Combat 

Operational Stress Continuum. Examples are given of normal stressors, which 

are expected to resolve on their own. Examples are also given of more serious 

stress responses, attitudes and behaviors, which are more severe or persistent, 

along with suggestions of appropriate resources. Signs and symptoms of PTSD 

are described in the continuum, along with instruction on how and when to take 

action. 

Chief Master Sergeant ROY. First and foremost, the ARC provides education and 

resources for families on deployment related conditions through unit leadership. Air 

Force regulations specifically direct unit commanders and first sergeants to 

proactively contact and provide support for family members of deploying ARC members. The unit commander also tasks various support agencies, including Airman 

and Family Readiness, to ensure that families are contacted and provided for. The 

Yellow Ribbon Program offers resources on PTSD and suicide mitigation and is offered to ARC members and their families pre-deployment, during deployment, and 

30 and 60 days post deployment. 

The Air National Guard (ANG) assigns an individual to more than half its wings 

(with plans to eventually cover all wings) to provide education on PTSD and suicide 

prevention through Yellow Ribbon events. This individual is available to answer any 

questions the ANG member or family member may have related to PTSD, suicide 

mitigation, or other psychological health related questions or resource availability. 

Family Program Managers also work with ANG family members during a spouse’s 

deployment, providing access to information on PTSD and suicide awareness. 

The Air Force Reserve Command (AFRC) employs three regional teams to locate 

resources and provide case facilitation for AFRC members and their families for psychological health issues, including PTSD and suicide. AFRC also has the Wingman 

Project (www.AFRC.WingmanToolkit.org) that provides education about suicide prevention. The Wingman Toolkit has been targeted and distributed to Air Force Reserve members. 

Finally, Military OneSource and the Military Family Life Consultant Program are 

both available to family members and can provide information and guidance on 

PTSD and suicide. The unit commander is responsible for educating families about 

these services. 

DIVERSITY ROADMAP

27. Senator BROWN. Chief Master Sergeant Roy, in your prepared statement you 

discuss the Diversity Roadmap that the Air Force published last fall. Please provide 

some of the initiatives the Air Force is implementing to address the issue of diversity within the force. 

Chief Master Sergeant ROY. In a nation where about only 25 percent of our youth 

are eligible or able to serve in an all-volunteer military and a defense department 

striving to remain connected to the Nation we serve, it is necessary to maintain a 

diverse Air Force to overcome today’s increasingly complex challenges. 

In the fall of 2010, we published strategic guidance including a policy directive 

and Air Force Diversity Strategic Roadmap, which provides priorities, goals and specific actions for implementation of diversity initiatives. Formalizing the Roadmap 

into an Air Force Instruction will provide the Total Force its final piece of strategic 

guidance. Woven into the instruction will be vetted recommendations of the Military 

Leadership Diversity Commission. We anticipate completion of the instruction by 

the end of September 2011. 

We furthered the institutionalization of diversity by holding the inaugural Diversity Senior Working Group in October 2010. Showcasing senior leader commitment, 

the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, Secretary and Chief of the Air Force along with 

60 vice commanders from the major commands and senior leaders from the Pentagon participated. Participants were given five things they could do to promote diversity within their sphere of influence. These include making diversity a personal 

commitment by participating in two outreach events per year, adding a diversity 

message in speeches, identifying key positions and implementing hiring practices 

176 

with a diversity lens, analyzing mentoring programs and determining how to resource diversity within the major commands and wings. 

Finally, to advocate equity, diversity and inclusion at the U.S. Air Force Academy, 

a Chief Diversity Officer position was created and filled in December 2010. Charged 

with working with Congress on diversity issues, promoting institutional and classroom diversity and uniting diversity efforts around the Academy to increase various 

agencies’ effectiveness, the Chief Diversity Officer serves as the strategic leader, diversity advocate and principal adviser to Academy leaders. 

FAMILY PROGRAMS

28. Senator BROWN. Sergeant Major Chandler, from fiscal year 2007 to fiscal year 

2010, the Army has more than doubled its investment into family programs. Undoubtedly, families are an integral part of a successful military. American Psychologist recently highlighted the Army’s success in family programs in its special issue 

on CSF. One of the issues and recommendation was that ‘‘many programs for military children and families are not evaluated at all.’’ What is being done to identify 

the most effective family programs, so as to avoid duplicative programs? 

Sergeant Major CHANDLER. The Army has longstanding annual assessment tools 

that measure the quality and cost of family support services, programs, and facilities. The Installation Status Report and the Common Levels of Support assessment 

processes monitor program quality, quantity, and applied resources against well-defined standards. 

The Army conducts a host of surveys and also benefits from surveys conducted 

by DOD. The Survey of Army Families monitors and assesses soldier and family use 

of and satisfaction with support services and programs. Families who use these 

services tell us they are helpful, appreciated, and positively impact their lives. Other 

surveys, such as the Sample Survey of Military Personnel, portray positive correlations between soldiers’ use of support services and their desire to stay in the Army, 

unit esprit de corps, and satisfaction with Army life. A 2009 Army-wide assessment 

of officers and NCOs depicted increasing satisfaction with Army life, increasing ability of leaders to balance their career and family life, and increasing satisfaction with 

the Army’s support for soldiers and families. Overall, these tools inform us that 

Army family programs positively influence job satisfaction, family life, resiliency, 

and readiness. 

The Army recently conducted a ‘‘Holistic Review’’ of the Army Family Covenant 

to ensure efficient delivery of programs and services to those who need them most. 

As a result, the Army is transforming Army Community Service (ACS) with the goal 

of ACS becoming the key integrator for installation-wide support services. 

Additionally, the Army’s 2010 Health Promotion, Risk Reduction, and Suicide Prevention Report provided a roadmap to conduct a new evaluation of support services. 

The goal of this analysis is to determine the right mix of Army programs to ease 

soldier and family transitions, strengthen resiliency and coping skills, increase helpseeking behavior, and reduce the stigma of seeking help. 

Army family programs ensure soldiers and family members continue to be strong 

and resilient. The Army continually evaluates the quality, cost, and value of these 

programs. Our efforts ensure a balanced portfolio of services that are fiscally sustainable to strengthen soldier and family programs for the long term. 

QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY SENATOR KELLY AYOTTE

FAMILY PROGRAMS

29. Senator AYOTTE. Sergeant Major Chandler, Master Chief Petty Officer West, 

Sergeant Major Kent, and Chief Master Sergeant Roy, in your written statements, 

I was struck by the quantity of programs that each Service has created to serve 

troops and their families. These programs represent good faith efforts to maintain 

the readiness of the All-Volunteer Force and to help our troops and their families 

cope with the accumulated strain of a decade at war. To what degree are the Services methodically and objectively measuring the performance of these programs? 

Sergeant Major CHANDLER. The Survey of Army Families (SAF) is an Army-wide 

survey conducted every 4 to 5 years by the Family and Morale, Welfare and Recreation Command (FMWRC). It provides data on the attitudes and behaviors of nonmilitary spouses of Active Duty soldiers about the quality of life in the Army, identifies emerging family issues, assesses progress in resolving Army Family Action Plan 

issues, and supplements other studies on Army families. Additionally, the SAF provides data on the effectiveness of family programs including Family Readiness 

177 

Groups, services assisting spouses and Families in preparing for a soldier’s return, 

Army Child, Youth & School Services, recreation programs, Army Community Service (ACS) programs and services and other programs designed to enhance the quality of life for soldiers and Families. 

In collaboration with the Family Life Development Center at Cornell University, 

FMWRC has developed logic models and outcome measures for each core Family 

Program area. Monthly data to support outcome measures is collected through a 

centralized online database system, the Central Tracking System. In addition, ACS 

centers are accredited tri-annually to ensure compliance with legislative and regulatory requirements. As part of the accreditation process, ACS centers survey soldiers and their Families regarding their satisfaction level with services available to 

them which provides a unique opportunity to look at the relevance and importance 

of individual programs and services to soldiers and family members. 

The Installation Status Report is a performance measurement tool used by installation leaders and managers to provide a standardized reporting process, view critical planning and management data, serve as a baseline of data used at all levels 

from the installation to Army staff to justify funding, assist in the management of 

installations, and identify critical areas in need of attention. 

Master Chief Petty Officer WEST. Recurring performance measurement of Family 

Readiness Programs is a high priority within the Navy. Program performance of 

Child Development Centers, Child Development Homes, and School Age Care programs is accomplished through national accreditation and annual inspection by 

Navy inspectors. Peer-review and certification of Navy Fleet and Family Support 

Programs occurs every 3 years, with mid-cycle review of installation programs provided by regional Fleet and Family Support Program staff. Detailed performance 

standards for both Navy Child and Youth Programs (CYP) and Fleet and Family 

Support Programs (FFSP) are in place, with installation programs reporting their 

performance against these standards on a quarterly basis. Joint Base supported and 

supporting commands report quarterly on family readiness program performance 

against Joint Base Common Output Level Standards. Detailed output data is collected for both Navy CYP and FFSP and analyzed on a recurring basis to validate 

installation performance. 

A senior level customer survey is conducted annually by Navy Installations Command, including senior level satisfaction with the performance of Navy CYP and 

FFSP. Needs assessment and customer satisfaction data is collected at least annually by installation CYP and FFSP managers. A web-based, Navy-wide CYP and 

FFSP customer survey has been administered for the past 2 years. A quarterly Tone 

of the Force Report is provided to the Chief of Naval Operations that includes key 

sailor and family readiness metrics. Additionally, questions regarding use of and 

satisfaction with family readiness programs are included in personnel surveys conducted by the Bureau of Naval Personnel. 

Among the most accurate measurements of performance in my estimation, is simply talking with sailors to gauge their satisfaction. They deliver positive feedback 

when programs are effective, and provide unvarnished honesty when programs miss 

the mark. It is a continuous and evolving dialogue among Navy leadership and the 

Fleet because both groups understand the importance of quality-of-service efforts 

and constantly seek. 

Sergeant Major KENT. In his 2010 Planning Guidance, our Commandant directed 

us to: ‘‘Review and Improve Family Readiness—Evaluate all Marine Corps Family 

Team Building Programs and make recommendations on optimum span of control, 

where we require further assistance to our families, and where we should streamline to erase redundancy.’’ To respond to the Commandant’s concerns, we have developed a deliberate process which will, in effect, objectively measure the effectiveness our programs and services by marines and families who utilize them. As part 

of this process, we are taking the following actions: 

• Conducting focus groups with unit commanders, associated sergeants 

major, and respective spouses to obtain their insights on the effectiveness 

of Marine Corps Family programs; identify unmet needs of marines and 

families; and acquire recommendations to fix identified deficiencies. A follow-on web-based survey will reach all unit commanders and Sergeants 

Major who could not participate in the focus groups. This survey will be extended to NCOs to obtain their perspectives as well. 

• Initiating operational planning teams to review the structure of the Unit, 

Personal and Family Readiness and Marine Corps Family Team Building 

Programs to redefine staffing requirements. 

• Launching a web-based program prioritization tool that will be sent to 

Active and Reserve unit commanders and sergeants major to ask them to 

178 

prioritize the utility of our Marine Corps Family Programs based on their 

contribution to unit and family readiness. 

Chief Master Sergeant ROY. The Air Force uses web-based management information systems to track all airmen, family readiness, child and youth programs, and 

services offered to airmen and their families. This system also includes participation 

rates. The data provided by these tools is visible to leadership at the installation, 

major commands and Headquarters Air Force levels. The captured data is used to 

conduct trend analysis and provide a vector on focusing our resources where they 

may have the greatest positive impact on airmen and their families. Air Force-wide 

assessments and surveys are also conducted to objectively measure performance. 

The Air Force Community Assessment is conducted every 2 years and is designed 

to assist installation helping agencies better meet the needs of servicemembers and 

their families. Topics covered in the survey include personal and family adjustment, 

individual and family adaptation, community well-being, deployment, resilience, 

post-traumatic stress and help-seeking stigma. This assessment provides a means 

to ensure community interventions are timely, focused and data-driven and has 

been instrumental in determining the strengths and needs of Air Force communities 

and tailoring programs at the installation, major command and Air Force levels. 

Previous survey results are credited with expanding financial counseling programs 

to members and their families, developing a user-friendly support network for Air 

Force single parents and setting up marriage-support seminars for junior enlisted 

members and their spouses. 

The Caring for People Survey objectively measures the relationship between services provided and readiness and retention to effectively allocate our resources. The 

survey was conducted in 2008 and 2010 and allowed total-force airmen, civilians, 

retirees, and spouses an opportunity to tell Air Force leaders how they can better 

address services within health and wellness, airmen and family support, education 

and development, and housing and communities. Insights from the 2008 survey and 

subsequent focus groups spurred the development of several initiatives for improving fitness facilities, dining operations, housing and allocating funds to target single 

airmen. 

The robust trend analysis and Air Force community-wide surveys we conduct 

serve to gauge the well-being of airmen and their families and measures the success 

of meeting their needs through the programs and services offered. 

30. Senator AYOTTE. Sergeant Major Chandler, Master Chief Petty Officer West, 

Sergeant Major Kent, and Chief Master Sergeant Roy, to what degree do the programs in one Service benefit from the lessons learned from programs in another 

Service? 

Sergeant Major CHANDLER. The Services benefit from sharing lessons learned 

through two primary joint Services meetings. One is the Chairman of the Joint 

Chiefs of Staff (CJCS) Family Support Meeting and the second is the Military Family Readiness Council. 

The CJCS meets regularly with Service Vice Chiefs, Senior Enlisted Advisors, and 

select spouses to address concerns and share best practices that will strengthen and 

enhance servicemember and family programs. The meetings cover five major topics: 

• Child Care 

• Employment and Empowerment of the Military Spouse 

• Educational and Developmental Excellence 

• Family/Community Strategic Communication 

• Medical 

The Military Family Readiness Council reviews and makes recommendations to 

the Secretary of Defense regarding family readiness policy and plans, monitors requirements for support of family readiness, evaluates and assesses the effectiveness 

of family readiness programs and activities, and submits reports on family readiness 

to the Secretary of Defense. 

Other venues the Services utilize for sharing lessons learned include program 

manager meetings and various training and conference opportunities. 

Master Chief Petty Officer WEST. Services participate in monthly or quarterly in 

various Joint Family Readiness Working Groups to share best practices and lessons 

learned. The Navy Personal Financial Management, Ombudsman and Family Readiness Program initiatives are the most current examples of best practices that have 

been shared with or implemented by DOD and the other services. Child and Youth 

Program managers across DOD meet monthly in all functional areas to share lessons learned and to air challenges for possible best practice solutions. Another example where sharing information among the services provided ease in establishing 

new processes was with the Exceptional Family Member Program (EFMP). Navy 

179 

benefited by reviewing Marine Corps’ EFMP program practices prior to implementing the Navy EFMP Liaison program. Spouse employment is another area 

where lessons learned from another branch of Service have been implemented DODWide (Military Spouse Employment Partnership Program). 

Sergeant Major KENT. In his 2010 Planning Guidance, the Commandant directed 

us to institutionalize resiliency across the Marine Corps to better prepare our marines for the inevitable stress of combat operations and enable them to cope with 

the challenges and rigor of life as a marine, both deployed and in garrison. To do 

this, we have taken lessons learned from the Army Comprehensive Soldier Fitness 

program and applied key principles that fit with the Marine Corps’ values and 

ethos. We have also leveraged existing practices occurring within the Air Force and 

capitalized on their work in the resiliency field. Moving forward, we are in the process of leveraging existing assets in a collaborative process that will combine the 

‘‘best practices’’ of physical, psychological, spiritual, and social fitness and instill in 

our marines the resiliency needed to endure the stressors of combat and enhance 

their ability to perform effectively across the range of military operations. This program will ultimately provide our marines and their leaders with the best available 

skills and tools to increase individual resiliency training throughout the unit forming, training, deployment, and post-deployment phases. We will continue to consider 

other Services’ programs and benefit from lessons learned to enhance our own overall capability. 

Chief Master Sergeant ROY. The Child, Youth and Family Programs representatives from each of the Services headquarters benefit from regular forums and working groups intended to benchmark programs and share lessons learned. The Office 

of the Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense, Military Community and Family Policy hosts a monthly working group for Child and Youth Program Managers from 

each Service, in addition to a monthly working group for Military and Family Support Program Managers from each Service. These forums are used to work challenges collectively, share successes and discuss emerging policy. Examples of other 

shared forums include the Joint Transition Assistance Program Managers forum, 

the Joint Spouse Employment forum, the Personal and Family Readiness forum, the 

Military Connected Students and Student Liaison Services forum, the Exceptional 

Family Member Program working group, and the Childhood Obesity working group. 

Several programs have been developed as a result of these joint forums. One example is the military child care subsidy program administered through the National 

Association for Child Care Resource and Referral Agencies. This program provides 

child care subsidies to quality civilian child care programs for military members 

who cannot access on-installation child care programs. Another program, currently 

in development, is a joint military child care waiting list which will improve consistency and efficiency in our military child care programs. The Services also work 

jointly on partnerships with the USDA/4–H and the Boys and Girls Clubs of America to provide enhanced programming and expanded opportunities for military 

youth. 

Another example is the Military Spouse Employment Program which is being 

adapted from an Army initiative and will be officially launched shortly to serve all 

military spouses. The goal of this ‘‘purple’’ program is to ‘‘develop partnerships with 

firms in the private sector to enhance employment opportunities for spouses of 

members of the armed forces and to improve job portability.’’ 

In 2010, the Headquarters Child and Youth Program Managers from the Air 

Force and the Navy partnered to conduct and fund a joint training conference for 

their installation child development and youth programs. Over 350 child and youth 

program managers attended the joint event. 

The 2011 DOD/USDA Family Resilience Conference titled ‘‘Forging the Partnership’’ was another large scale venue which brought together members from every 

Service for opportunities to share lessons learned. Installation staff members presented and attended workshops on current and emerging practices and participated 

in interactive sessions. 

31. Senator AYOTTE. Sergeant Major Chandler, Master Chief Petty Officer West, 

Sergeant Major Kent, and Chief Master Sergeant Roy, to what degree do the Services share overhead and resources in order to reduce the costs of these programs? 

Sergeant Major CHANDLER. The Services benefit from sharing lessons learned 

through two primary joint Services meetings. One is the Chairman of the Joint 

Chiefs of Staff Family Support Meetings and the second is the Military Family 

Readiness Council. By sharing the lessons learned, the Services are able to identify 

and implement cost savings and gain efficiencies. However, the Services do not generally share overhead and resources. 

180 

Master Chief Petty Officer WEST. Fleet Readiness Programs are funded, for the 

most part, through the Services’ Operation and Maintenance budgets, with each 

service responsible for providing family readiness programs and services for all military members and their families within their geographic areas of responsibility. Duplication or overlap is relatively low both within and outside the United States. In 

areas where there is overlap between the services at the local level or installations 

with co-located sister service tenant organizations, Navy fleet readiness program 

managers coordinate with their counterparts from other services to maximize resources and ensure military members and their families are well-served. On programs or initiatives of benefit to all the Services, Service and DOD fleet readiness 

program managers coordinate efforts, sharing overhead and resources to develop 

and implement initiatives, thereby reducing cost. For example, the Services and 

DOD are currently coordinating efforts to develop a web-based tool for families 

across DOD to request childcare services through the installation nearest to their 

preferred location, regardless of branch of service. Additionally Navy, Army and Marine Corps utilize DLA Troop Support Prime Vendor Program for essential food 

services. 

Sergeant Major KENT. Since our program is still in the development phase, we 

have not had an opportunity to share overhead and resources with other Services 

to reduce the costs, but we will look for ways to do so in the future. 

Chief Master Sergeant ROY. All family programs located on an Air Force installation support any eligible DOD user. Conversely, family programming offered by 

other Services can also be accessed by airmen and their families. Base Realignment 

and Closure (BRAC) and Joint Basing have formalized this approach and all Services are working to ensure programs, information, and resources are shared and applicable to all Services. Additionally, Air Force family support and child and youth 

program managers meet, as a minimum, quarterly with their Sister Service counterparts. These meetings allow the cross flow of information and sharing of resources 

and awareness of the total range of services available to members and families. The 

Services also share best practices and Office of the Secretary of Defense—Military 

Community and Family Policy resources. 

We have had many examples of opportunities where we have shared resources 

and overhead. One is a series of joint planning sessions to create a more comprehensive Exceptional Family Member Program across DOD. Another is the Joint Services Military Spouse Employment Partnership under development. We are taking an 

existing Army initiative and contract which is being expanded to enhance employment opportunities for Air Force, Navy and Marine spouses, with shared cost for 

overhead and program operations. We have also partnered with the Navy to cosponsor Child/Youth Program training which reduced overall training costs. Joint 

Family Support Assistance Centers, funded through OSD, provide outreach and support that augments the installation family centers and the National Association of 

Child Care Referral and Resource Agency contracts shared with the Navy help reduce costs for civilian community child care. The Services also share 4–H grants 

that promote youth development and leadership skills. All of the separating and retiring members and their families share Transition Assistance Services. And as 

mentioned, BRAC and Joint Basing are creating more opportunities to formalize 

processes for shared program costs. 

RESILIENCY PROGRAMS

32. Senator AYOTTE. Sergeant Major Chandler and Sergeant Major Kent, using 

the Army’s CSF program and the Marine Corps’ Combat and Operational Stress 

Control (COSC) resiliency training as an example, what metrics do you use to measure resiliency and what do those metrics tell you about the performance of these 

two resiliency programs? 

Sergeant Major CHANDLER. The program of record for resilience development 

within the Army community is the CSF program. The metric that the Army uses 

to measure resilience is the Global Assessment Tool (GAT), a 105 item questionnaire 

required to be completed annually by all soldiers, from Private to General. To date, 

the GAT has been completed over 1.2 million times. An ongoing program evaluation 

will give us an idea of the performance of the CSF program, and we anticipate having initial results in the next 4–6 months. 

Sergeant Major KENT. The COSC utilizes metrics from external evaluations, such 

as the Joint-Mental Health Advisory Team (JMHAT). These metrics include unit 

factors (small-unit leadership, cohesion and readiness), stigma, barriers to care, 

training, and positive impact of deployment. 

181 

The most recent JMHAT, due for public release in May 2011, reports that unit 

cohesion, perceptions of unit readiness, and NCO leadership are significantly improved from previous assessments. Significant increases in the adequacy of and access to training for suicide prevention and stress have reduced stigma and perceived 

barriers to care. 

We believe these indicators show that the COSC program, as well as other behavioral health integrated efforts, is having a positive influence on resiliency. 

33. Senator AYOTTE. Sergeant Major Chandler and Sergeant Major Kent, to what 

degree do your two resiliency programs share overhead and resources to reduce 

costs? 

Sergeant Major CHANDLER. The Army’s CSF program does not share overhead 

with the Marine Corps. However, CSF has allowed several marines and sailors to 

attend the MRT course at the University of Pennsylvania on a non-reimbursable 

basis. Additionally, CSF has a memorandum of agreement with the Air Force’s Air 

Combat Command to train five airmen per month at the MRT course at the University of Pennsylvania. 

Sergeant Major KENT. The COSC program utilizes materials from the Army’s 

Comprehensive Soldier Fitness program as well as other Services’ best practices and 

resources. The COSC program is utilizing the family resiliency training components 

from Comprehensive Solider Fitness program and will be pilot-testing these training 

components next month at Camp Lejeune, NC. 

In April 2011, over 100 Explosive Ordnance Disposal Marines attended the Air 

Force Deployment Transition Center as they returned from Operation Enduring 

Freedom. These marines received critical reintegration and decompression time 

after a difficult deployment. 

Partnerships such as these have significantly reduced costs associated with program development, implementation, and sustainment and we will continue to do so 

in the future. 

34. Senator AYOTTE. Sergeant Major Chandler and Sergeant Major Kent, are lessons learned shared between resiliency programs? 

Sergeant Major CHANDLER. Yes, lessons learned are shared. Specifically, CSF has 

provided lessons learned to other Services when those Services began marshalling 

resources for their own programs. 

Sergeant Major KENT. Yes. Working with the Defense Centers of Excellence 

(DCOE) for Psychological Health and Traumatic Brain Injury, all Services assist in 

our resiliency efforts. Over the past year, DCOE has held quarterly meetings which 

have allowed the Services’ resiliency program managers to discuss Service-specific 

program activities, lessons learned, and best practices. These meetings are valuable 

and are utilized heavily in our resiliency efforts. 

35. Senator AYOTTE. Sergeant Major Chandler and Sergeant Major Kent, can you 

provide a specific example where a resiliency program changed based on input from 

another Service? 

Sergeant Major CHANDLER. The Army’s CSF program has not changed based on 

input from other military Services. 

Sergeant Major KENT. We are utilizing lessons learned from the Army’s Comprehensive Soldier Fitness program and are currently pilot-testing family resiliency 

training modules for implementation. The Navy and the Marine Corps resiliency 

programs are very similar and now share a common doctrine which was released 

in December 2010. This shared doctrine allows the Marine Corps and Navy to better 

integrated efforts. The Marine Corps also recently partnered with the Air Force’s 

Deployment Transition Center at Ramstein Air Force Base to support reintegration 

and decompression efforts for marines returning from Afghanistan. 

36. Senator AYOTTE. Sergeant Major Kent, are you aware of the Army’s Master 

Resiliency Trainer Program at the University of Pennsylvania, and if so, do you 

know if the Marine Corps has sent any marines to this training? 

Sergeant Major KENT. Yes, we are aware of the Army’s Master Resiliency Trainer 

program. In fact, our COSC program just received five spaces and we plan to send 

our Operational Stress Control and Readiness (OSCAR) Master Trainers to attend 

this training within the next few months. Although we believe our OSCAR training 

and the Army’s Master Resiliency Training are similar, we are excited about the opportunity to attend this training and have the goal of implementing best practices 

and lessons learned from this course. 

182 

CONSOLIDATING MEDICAL COMMAND STRUCTURES

37. Senator AYOTTE. Sergeant Major Chandler, Master Chief Petty Officer West, 

Sergeant Major Kent, and Chief Master Sergeant Roy, in March 2011, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) released a report titled, ‘‘Opportunities to Reduce 

Potential Duplication in Government Programs, Save Tax Dollars, and Enhance 

Revenue.’’ In this report, GAO estimated that realigning DOD’s military medical 

command structures and consolidating common functions could increase efficiency 

and result in projected savings ranging from $281 million to $460 million annually. 

Do you support realigning DOD’s military medical command structures and consolidating common functions? 

Sergeant Major CHANDLER. No, not until DOD has reviewed the desirability of establishing a unified medical command. 

Master Chief Petty Officer WEST. I am privileged to have the opportunity to see 

firsthand the outstanding health care being provided by our Navy medical personnel 

to servicemembers, their families and retirees and their families. At sea, in theatre 

and in medical treatment facilities, I know our sailors, as well as all 

servicemembers, are receiving the quality health care they need and deserve. Regarding the organizational construct of the Military Health System and evaluation 

of the Government Accountability Office assessment, I defer to DOD. 

Sergeant Major KENT. I see firsthand the outstanding health care being provided 

by our Navy medical personnel to servicemembers, retirees, and their families. At 

sea, in theater, and in medical treatment facilities, I know our marines and sailors, 

as well as all servicemembers, are receiving the quality health care they need and 

deserve. Regarding the organizational construct of the Military Health System and 

evaluation of the Government Accountability Office assessment, I defer to DOD. 

Chief Master Sergeant ROY. We do not favor the establishment of a unified military medical command. 

The Air Force Medical Service is fully integrated with the Line of the Air Force, 

and medical personnel are key members of the Wing commander’s team to accomplish the Wing Mission. When Air Force units deploy, their medics deploy with 

them. The unified medical command would sever that close relationship at the expense of our existing effective organizational structure. We can drive unity of effort 

within current authorities without the expense of establishing a unified medical 

command and disrupting the effective alignment of medics to Service oversight. The 

synergy created by close alignment of Air Force medics to our operational mission 

should not be put at risk in a new unified command structure. 

Today’s Service oversight of medical assets created the most effective system for 

treatment of casualties in the history of warfare. Modular and highly capable medical units such as Expeditionary Medical Support (EMEDS) and highly efficient air 

evacuation operations would not exist without the close alignment of our medics to 

Air Force operational missions. Deployed to our theater hospitals and supporting 

our air evacuation system, Air Force medics have safely returned over 86,000 U.S. 

casualties to their families from Operations Enduring Freedom and Iraqi Freedom. 

Every day our medics are saving lives of soldiers, sailors, marines, airmen, civilians, 

coalition forces, friend and foe alike under the watchful eye of Air Force commanders. 

38. Senator AYOTTE. Sergeant Major Chandler, Master Chief Petty Officer West, 

Sergeant Major Kent, and Chief Master Sergeant Roy, would consolidation of these 

medical command structures streamline operations, eliminate duplication, and 

achieve cost savings? 

Sergeant Major CHANDLER. Without a thorough review by DOD regarding Serviceunique medical command structures, it is unknown if consolidation will streamline 

operations, eliminate duplication, or achieve cost savings. 

Master Chief Petty Officer WEST. I am privileged to have the opportunity to see 

firsthand the outstanding health care being provided by our Navy medical personnel 

to servicemembers, their families and retirees and their families. At sea, in theatre 

and in medical treatment facilities, I know our sailors, as well as all 

servicemembers, are receiving the quality health care they need and deserve. Regarding the organizational construct of the Military Health System, I defer to DOD. 

Sergeant Major KENT. I see firsthand the outstanding health care being provided 

by our Navy medical personnel to servicemembers, retirees, and their families. At 

sea, in theater, and in medical treatment facilities, I know our marines and sailors, 

as well as all servicemembers, are receiving the quality health care they need and 

deserve. Regarding the organizational construct of the Military Health System and 

evaluation of the Government Accountability Office assessment, I defer to DOD. 

183 

Chief Master Sergeant ROY. The Air Force does not support establishment of a 

unified military medical command among the military departments because of concerns that it would not streamline operations, eliminate duplication, and achieve 

cost savings. 

We believe a more effective and efficient joint medical solution can be attained 

without the expense of establishing a unified medical command. Changes to doctrine 

can be made within current authorities and do not require a new unified medical 

command. Service specific and joint medical doctrine must be improved to assure 

Service capabilities are fully interoperable and interdependent to bolster unity of effort. The Services should continue integrating common medical platforms to reduce 

redundancy and lower costs. 

A unified medical command may not achieve the intended synergy or unity of effort. All models of the unified medical command to date do not include medical 

forces intrinsic (line funded vs. Defense Health Program funded manpower authorizations) to Service line units. A unified medical command would not oversee medical forces serving in these line units. Air Force line funded medics represent 5 percent of Air Force medical personnel; Navy shipboard assets represent 25 percent of 

medical personnel; and Army line Tables of Organization and Equipment (TOE) 

funded medics represent 48 percent of Army active duty medics. The Air Force ability to meet operational medical requirements would be disproportionately compromised in current models for unified medical command. 

Any new unified medical command will require new systems and structure to 

oversee component headquarters and assigned forces. This will drive even higher 

costs. If a unified medical command follows the example of the current Joint Task 

Force, National Capitol Region Medical (JTF CAPMED), it is highly unlikely there 

will be cost savings. There is no need for a fourth military Service and establishing 

such in the form of a unified medical command, without the discipline and historical 

rule sets that govern existing Services, will likely drive costs much higher. Even 

more critical, a unified medical command may not be as responsive to the needs of 

Service warfighters as is the current oversight by the Services. 

BRAC 2005 created many opportunities for joint oversight of medics. Given time 

to mature, these initiatives along with the Service Surgeon Generals’ efforts to consolidate oversight of common support functions (information management, contracting, military health facility construction and financial management) in the new 

co-located medical headquarters will reduce redundancies. Adoption of a single Service accounting system to allocate Defense Health Program dollars and improve accountability would do more to reduce costs than a unified medical command. 

39. Senator AYOTTE. Sergeant Major Chandler, Master Chief Petty Officer West, 

Sergeant Major Kent, and Chief Master Sergeant Roy, was the consolidation of medical command functions considered during the development of the efficiencies initiatives? 

Sergeant Major CHANDLER. Consolidation of Services for medical command functions was not a part of the Army’s efficiencies initiatives. 

Master Chief Petty Officer WEST. The health care efficiency initiatives were developed by DOD. I would necessarily defer questions regarding specific considerations 

contained in the proposals to DOD. 

Sergeant Major KENT. The health care efficiency initiatives were developed by 

DOD. I would necessarily defer questions regarding specific considerations contained in the proposals to DOD. 

Chief Master Sergeant ROY. The consolidation of medical command functions were 

not considered during the development of the efficiencies initiatives. However, the 

Air Force has taken considerable steps to provide synergy of effort with our sister 

Services, as well as internally to the Air Force Medical Service which maintains Air 

Force unique capabilities in-line with Title 10 responsibilities. 

The Air Force accomplished a major transformation initiative under the Secretary 

of the Air Force and Air Force Chief of Staff Program Action Directive 07–13. This 

mandated a consolidation of management headquarters activities that eliminated redundancy across the Air Force, and consolidated all management activities related 

to clinical activities to a single ‘‘reach-back’’ agency. The establishment of the Air 

Force Medical Operations Agency in San Antonio provides the savings in this effort 

to fully fund direct war-fighting support, eliminate redundancy across the Major 

Command Surgeons Offices, and provides capabilities to the Major Commands and 

Numbered Air Forces. 

In addition, our BRAC-directed co-located headquarters efforts have resulted in a 

Defense Health Headquarters campus of like-type headquarters functions that will 

ensure enhanced cross-talk and synergy across the Services medical functions. As 

184 

a result, the Defense Health Headquarters will position joint venture activities for 

greater success and efficiency in the Military Health System. 

INDIVIDUAL AUGMENTEES

40. Senator AYOTTE. Sergeant Major Chandler, Master Chief Petty Officer West, 

Sergeant Major Kent, and Chief Master Sergeant Roy, each of the Services has developed a variety of personnel programs to help troops and their families cope with 

the stress of repeated deployments. Many of these programs focus on the deployment of large u. However, every year the Services deploy thousands of individual 

soldier, sailors, airmen, and marines as IAs. These individuals deploy by themselves 

or in small groups to and from theater. Can you discuss the challenge that IAs 

present and describe how your Service has attempted to ensure these individuals 

also receive the pre- and post-deployment training and services they need? 

Sergeant Major CHANDLER. Many of the challenges that existed in the war’s early 

years have been mitigated through more effective communication early in the process between the deployed individual and the Continental U.S. Reception Center 

(CRC) Battalion. The CRC established liaisons within each of the major commands 

and defense contracting companies operating in theater to ensure the deployed individual received the necessary information regarding pre- and post-deployment requirements. Additionally, the CRC Family Readiness outreach ensures family support regardless of geographic location. 

Master Chief Petty Officer WEST. IAs 2A are an integral part of Navy’s ongoing 

efforts to support Overseas Contingency Operations. The primary challenges of 

achieving mission proficiency and unit cohesion are accomplished through training. 

All IAs attend NMPS/ECRC (Navy Mobilization Processing Site/Expeditionary 

Combat Readiness Center) for 5 days for medical, admin and uniforms. They also 

process through NMPS during post-deployment. 

IAs deploying to CENTCOM AOR receive additional training at Navy Individual 

Augmentee Combat Training (NIACT), or an equivalent extended combat skills curriculum depending on the requirement, for skills in shooting and driving, for a final 

medical record review, and for weapon issue. 

Additional mission specific training may be required as dictated by the capability 

requested. 

In addition, IAs process through the Warrior Transition Center in Kuwait, between post-deployment and final out-processing at NMPS, to provide combat stress 

control services and final in-theater administrative support. 

Finally, all IAs are afforded the opportunity to attend Returning Warrior Workshops at some point following their deployment to participate in group discussions 

about their experiences. The Returning Warrior Workshops are conducted in various 

locations around the country, and cost for attendance is borne by the member’s command. 

Sergeant Major KENT. The most challenging aspect of IAs is the ability to provide 

the same level of support for deployment education as an Active Duty marine. Since 

IAs mobilize individually, they do not have the opportunity to attend pre/post-education classes with their entire unit and must be given one-on-one training or connected with the Gaining Force Command (GFC) predeployment training. In addition, since there is no set ‘‘pre-deployment’’ workup timeline for those accepting IA 

volunteer billets, providing the pre-deployment training is challenging. 

To address these challenges, the Marine Corps provides support through the local 

Family Readiness Officers (FROs) and/or unit in the area and through our Unit, 

Personal and Family Readiness Program’s YRRP. Together with the GFC, FROs 

serve as a resource for IA marines and their families that assist them with accessing appropriate YRRP courses covering the entire spectrum of pre- to post-deployment education support. 

Chief Master Sergeant ROY. We have worked hard to ensure our augmentees are 

cared for before, during, and after their deployment. Services for airmen and their 

families across the four phases of the deployment cycle (pre-deployment, deployment, re-deployment and post deployment) have been standardized to ensure continuity across the Air Force. Deployment is addressed as a process, not an event. 

Programs and services for deployed single and married airmen and their families 

are designed to meet their needs and allow the airmen to keep their minds on the 

mission. These services are provided to those who deploy as units, in small groups, 

or individually. Tasked airmen are identified to Airman and Family Readiness Center staff by their unit deployment managers and the members are contacted and 

briefed. Sustainment assistance, information and referral resources are made availVerDate Aug 31 2005 09:55 Jan 25, 2012 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00190 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 Y:\BORAWSKI\DOCS\68089.TXT JUNE PsN: JUNEB
185 

able to families while the member is deployed and follow-up is provided during redeployment and reintegration. 

[Whereupon, at 3:08 p.m., the subcommittee adjourned.] 

(187) 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION 

FOR APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 

2012 AND THE FUTURE YEARS DEFENSE 

PROGRAM 

WEDNESDAY, MAY 4, 2011 

U.S. SENATE, 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON PERSONNEL, 

COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES, 

Washington, DC. 

CONTINUATION OF TESTIMONY ON THE ACTIVE, 

GUARD, RESERVE, AND CIVILIAN PERSONNEL PROGRAMS 

The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:03 p.m. in room 

SR–222, Russell Senate Office Building, Senator Jim Webb (chairman of the subcommittee) presiding. 

Committee members present: Senators Webb, Hagan, 

Blumenthal, Graham, Chambliss, Brown, and Ayotte. 

Committee staff member present: Leah C. Brewer, nominations 

and hearings clerk. 

Majority staff members present: Jonathan D. Clark, counsel; 

Gabriella E. Fahrer, counsel; and Gerald J. Leeling, counsel. 

Minority staff members present: Diana G. Tabler, professional 

staff member; and Richard F. Walsh, minority counsel. 

Staff assistants present: Jennifer R. Knowles and Christine G. 

Lang. 

Committee members’ assistants present: Juliet Beyler and Gordon Peterson, assistants to Senator Webb; William Chapman, assistant to Senator McCaskill; Tressa Guenov, assistant to Senator 

McCaskill; Roger Pena, assistant to Senator Hagan; Jeremy Bratt, 

assistant to Senator Blumenthal; Clyde Taylor IV, assistant to Senator Chambliss; Charles Prosch, assistant to Senator Brown; Brad 

Bowman, assistant to Senator Ayotte; and Taylor Andreae and Sergio Sarkany, assistants to Senator Graham. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR JIM WEBB, CHAIRMAN 

Senator WEBB. The subcommittee will come to order. 

I’m informed that Senator Graham is running about 15 minutes 

late this afternoon, so I’m going to go ahead and get my opening 

statement on the record and begin the testimony from our guests 

today. Then when Senator Graham comes, I’ll stop and see if he 

wants to say a few words at that time. 

188 

We’re meeting today to receive testimony from the Department 

of Defense (DOD) on the Active, Guard, Reserve, and civilian personnel programs contained in the administration’s National Defense Authorization Request for Fiscal Year 2012 and Future Years 

Defense Program. 

With us today are senior DOD leaders, with whom we hope to 

discuss not only DOD personnel policy, but specific budget items in 

furtherance of our subcommittee’s oversight responsibilities, which 

I take very seriously. 

There is no greater responsibility for Congress and military leaders than to care and provide for our servicemembers and their families, but, in doing so, we must ensure that we are appropriately 

managing our taxpayers’ dollars. 

Our military—Active, Guard, and Reserve—is still engaged in 

the longest sustained period of major conflict in our Nation’s history. We look forward to learning what programs and priorities the 

Department has identified and implemented to make certain that 

our servicemembers, civilian personnel, retirees, and their families 

receive the support and benefits they have earned, commensurate 

with their service. 

Having grown up in a military family that has a continuing tradition of service, I’m well aware of the unique challenges facing our 

military families, both in the Active Duty and Reserve components. 

They’re dealing with high operational tempos, the stress of multiple deployments, and dwell times that still fall short of the Department’s goals for many units and significant numbers of individuals. I have a special appreciation for the obligation to see to the 

needs of our servicemembers and their families. 

The All-Volunteer service has worked well over the past quarter 

century. We must guarantee that the All-Volunteer model continues to produce the world’s best military. However, as I have said 

in the past, an All-Volunteer Force is not an all-career force, a fact 

we must not forget in planning for the future and also in taking 

care of the needs of those who still maintain a citizen soldier tradition and return to their home communities after one period of service. 

We’ve also entered a new era in the use of our Guard and Reserve Forces, who played critical roles during this period of sustained conflict, in ways not envisioned at the inception of the AllVolunteer Force. 

This subcommittee will continue to explore changes needed to 

employ our Reserve component forces as an operational force. In 

this regard, I encourage Under Secretary Stanley and Assistant 

Secretary McCarthy to elaborate on their stated views on the need 

for additional tools for force management as we draw down our Active Force levels and to obtain additional authorities to mobilize 

Reserve components in the future. 

This subcommittee faces a very clear challenge this year with respect to the need to control the increasing costs of our personnel. 

The total personnel-related base budget in the Department’s fiscal 

year 2012 request, including the cost of providing healthcare to 

servicemembers, their families, and retirees, amounts to $175 billion, or about 32 percent of the overall DOD base budget. However, 

while we must achieve savings in our Defense programs, we need 

189 

to do this in a way that does not unfairly impact military benefits 

for a force that has served us so well. To that end, I am pleased 

that we have the DOD comptroller with us today so that we can 

engage in a more detailed budget discussion. 

As I stated at our first subcommittee hearing last month, I intend to take a hard look at DOD programs, their justification, what 

they cost, and whether they are achieving their stated goals. I’ve 

also expressed my own reservations on the administration’s proposal to increase TRICARE Prime enrollment fees for retirees. 

While I have strong reservations regarding the administration’s 

proposed enrollment fee increases, based on the fact that retirees 

have earned this healthcare benefit through their years of service— 

a moral contract, in my view—I do plan to keep an open mind 

about initiatives to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of our 

military healthcare benefits. 

To ensure that the Department obtains the greatest return on investment for every dollar it spends, Congress must do its part to 

make sure that funded programs are effective and efficient, in 

keeping with our roles as stewards of the public trust and of taxpayer dollars. 

I welcome our witnesses to today’s hearings: The Honorable 

Clifford Stanley, Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and 

Readiness; The Honorable Robert Hale, Under Secretary of Defense, Comptroller, and Chief Financial Officer; The Honorable 

Dennis M. McCarthy, Assistant Secretary for Reserve Affairs; and 

The Honorable Jonathan Woodson, Assistant Secretary for Health 

Affairs, and director of the TRICARE Management Activity. 

I’d like to take a moment to recognize Secretary McCarthy, who 

will be leaving the Department this year after nearly 2 years serving as Assistant Secretary of Defense for Reserve Affairs. I’d like 

to acknowledge his many contributions, both as a civil servant and 

his long career with the Marine Corps, both Active and Reserve. 

Secretary McCarthy, we appreciate your service to your country, 

and look forward to hearing your testimony. 

General MCCARTHY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Senator WEBB. I look forward to hearing each of your testimony 

about personnel overall, and the health and budget status of our 

military. As always, I encourage you to express your views candidly 

and to tell us what is working well, and to raise any concerns and 

issues you may want to bring to this subcommittee’s attention. Let 

us know how we can best assist our servicemembers and their families to ensure that our military remains steadfast and strong. 

As I mentioned, Senator Graham will be here forthwith. At this 

point, rather than waiting for an opening statement—or for him to 

make an opening statement, we will interrupt the hearing when he 

arrives and ask that he do so. 

So, why don’t we just go ahead and begin. Under Secretary Stanley, welcome, and we look forward to hearing your testimony. 

STATEMENT OF HON. CLIFFORD L. STANLEY, UNDER 

SECRETARY OF DEFENSE FOR PERSONNEL AND READINESS 

Dr. STANLEY. Good afternoon, Senator Webb and Senator Hagan. 

I’m looking forward to talking with you this afternoon, and I thank 

you for this opportunity to testify today. 

190 

First, I respectfully request that my written statement be made 

a part of the record. 

I look forward to continuing to work with you on our total force 

of Active, National Guard, and Reserve servicemembers, as well as 

our civilian workforce, and the dedicated families that support 

them. 

Senator WEBB. I should point out that each of your full written 

statements will be entered into the record at the beginning of the 

time that you’re recognized for your testimony. Feel free to give 

whatever comments you wish. 

Dr. STANLEY. Absolutely. Thank you, Senator. 

My focus is total force readiness; it’s caring for our people and 

creating a culture of relevance, effectiveness, and efficiency. I view 

total-force readiness as a mental, physical, emotional, and spiritual 

state of preparedness and resilience. This involves enabling training, equipping, and supporting the total force when they are deployed, and ensuring that they and their families have the care and 

support they need and deserve when they’re at home. 

As we examine the total and All-Volunteer Force that first 

emerged in 1973, we intend to go beyond the scope of the Active, 

Guard, and Reserve Force. Particularly, we are looking at the roles 

of civilians—that play in serving and supporting our force, and 

most especially how families and volunteers fit into the total-force 

equation. 

We’ve placed emphasis on our civilian workforce to include civilian hiring, career and leadership development, support of our civilian expeditionary workforce, and a transition to a more systematic 

approach to fully integrate civilians in total-force planning and requirements. 

In 2010, the Department made positive and meaningful progress 

toward reforming civilian hiring practices. Nevertheless, I continue 

to push hiring reform, and I actually refer to it, more accurately, 

as ‘‘employment reform,’’ towards an aggressive reduction in the 

number of days it takes to hire a civilian employee. I’m increasing 

our emphasis on the civilian competency development framework, 

enhanced leadership development programs, and senior executive 

talent management initiatives. 

As a designated proponent of the total force for the Department, 

one of the challenges that I have confronted is to assure that I had 

the proper cognizance over the resources necessary to support our 

workforce, and most especially our warfighters and their families. 

To accomplish this, I have undertaken a number of active steps to 

ensure thorough oversight of the resources and financial management of the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel 

and Readiness level. My financial oversight, as the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness, represents nearly 

$40 billion in direct DOD resources. With responsibility for the 

management of manpower for the DOD total force, it is also critical 

that I provide effective policy direction that supports pay, allowances, and other programs that constitute nearly two-thirds of the 

overall DOD budget. 

I also cannot overemphasize how essential it is that we continue 

to work on providing a quality of life commensurate with the quality of service for our military, and most especially their families. 

191 

We’ll work to do everything possible to support our military families. It is our military families who support our servicemembers, 

who support our Nation. 

I’d like to thank the committee for all you do for our dedicated 

servicemembers and their families. I look forward to your questions. 

That concludes my statement. 

[The prepared statement of Dr. Stanley follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT BY HON. CLIFFORD L. STANLEY

Senator Webb, Senator Graham, and members of this distinguished Subcommittee, thank you for inviting us to testify before you on the Personnel Overview 

for the Department of Defense (DOD). 

It has been a year since I appeared before this subcommittee as the new Under 

Secretary of Defense (USD) for Personnel and Readiness, and it has been a year of 

building a team. We now have Dr. Jonathan Woodson as the Assistant Secretary 

of Defense for Health Affairs in place to help address the many challenges in the 

Military Health System, as well as some other new key leaders within USD Personnel and Readiness. It has also been a year of changing the culture, working on 

our critical thinking, and striving to improve timeliness and the quality of products 

that better inform decisionmaking across the Department and enhance relationships 

with Congress. During this past year, I’ve focused on honoring, protecting and improving the lives of our airmen, soldiers, sailors, marines, and their families. This 

next year will show that while my focus has not changed, I’ve refined my priorities 

to better serve our servicemembers and their loved ones. 

As the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness my focus is: Total 

Force Readiness, Caring for Our People, and creating a Culture of Relevance, Effectiveness and Efficiency. I view Total Force Readiness as a mental, physical, emotional, and spiritual state of preparedness and resilience. This involves enabling 

training, equipping and supporting the Total Force when they are deployed and ensuring that they and their families have the care and support they need and deserve 

at home. Caring for Our Total Force and their families are both a mission imperative and an ethical responsibility. Our Personnel and Readiness organization strives 

for the same sense of selfless service demonstrated by servicemembers and their 

families. To achieve a Culture of Relevance, Effectiveness and Efficiency, we need 

to prepare the force to manage risks, preserve assets and meet the challenges of a 

dynamic operational environment. We need to increase emphasis on agility, flexible 

force structures, responsive force-shaping policies, and integrated personnel management processes. We will continue to experience global competition for educated, 

skilled, and an experienced workforce. Therefore, it is more imperative than ever 

for DOD to have the right personnel policies to attract, retain, train, educate, and 

sustain the right talent. 

Our Total Force of Active and Reserve military, government civilians, and contracted private sector employees must deliver the readiness commanders expect, require, and deserve. Under any circumstance, readiness is costly, and the Department’s resources are finite. We must thoughtfully plan with the premise that our 

uniformed, All-Volunteer Force (AVF) is the implicit assumption upon which all our 

commanders’ plans are predicated. We cannot fail to provide commanders with the 

numbers and kinds of Active and Reserve personnel that they require. To that end, 

our Total Force Manpower costs must be reduced to a level that is consistent with 

both an acceptable readiness risk and the sustainment of the AVF, and we are compelled to do so by addressing the Total Force as a whole: 

• Military: While not the largest single element of Total Force costs, our ‘‘per 

capita’’ uniformed costs are typically (by skill) the greatest and, if we have uniformed members in excess of true needs, we also add unnecessarily to our 

Health Care expenses. Aside from assuring that personnel related costs, such 

as targeted compensation, yields the best return on investment, we can also ensure that: 

• Our uniformed personnel requirements are absolutely military essential; 

where appropriate, we must assign work to other elements. 

• Our Active and Reserve Force balance is well-reasoned. 

Our military pay request for fiscal year 2012 is $154.05 billion for 2,269,700 Active Duty, Guard, and Reserve. This does not, however, include other costs required 

for sustaining the AVF. 

192 

• Government Civilians: While we are not arbitrarily freezing government civilian positions in any particular area, resource constraints have prompted guidance to the Department that any increase to civilian funding levels must be 

based upon compelling need. Some increases could also be driven by the resultant net Total Force savings, such as: 

• In-sourcing services if a cost-analysis demonstrates such action would 

save the Department money. 

• The conversion of inherently governmental, but non-military essential, 

positions from uniformed to less costly civilian performance. 

Our civilian payroll for fiscal year 2012 is projected to be $69.9 billion for 783,702 

full time equivalents. 

Contracted Services: This is currently the largest cost element of the Total Force. 

The Department is committed to enhancing it understanding of what we contract 

for and why. We must also look at whether the returns justify the investments, and 

if alternative Total Force solutions are less costly. As we have seen in the last decade, expenditures on contracts have steadily increased, and as an element of the 

Total Force, must be comprehensively reviewed to ensure necessary reductions do 

not risk readiness and the delivery of critical capabilities. The congressionally-mandated Inventory of Contracts for Services must continue to be improved so that it 

can be used by managers for these purposes. 

In accordance with the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for Fiscal 

Year 2011 and recent appropriations bill, OUSD P&R is working with all DOD organizations, to move towards collecting data from the private sector firms providing 

services for the Department. Preliminary guidance is currently in coordination. In 

the past few years, we have seen the Army make judicious and highly cost-effective 

decisions regarding contracts governance by relying on both their inventory process 

and internally-developed information system. OUSD P&R is engaged to assist the 

Departments of the Navy and Air Force, to enhance their service contracting governance ability by leveraging the Army system as directed in the fiscal year 2011 

appropriations bill; and to also assist the Defense Agencies and Field Activities as 

they report their plans to collect this information. 

The components are currently compiling what will be an improved fiscal year 

2010 Inventory of Contracts for Services that is due to Congress by June 30. We 

will continue to work with Congress to make further progress in this important effort. 

The Department is expanding the procedures it uses to determine military and 

DOD civilian manpower requirements to provide a single, coherent process for determining ‘‘total force requirements’’—i.e., requirements for military and DOD civilian 

manpower and contract services. Having visibility of future total force requirements 

will enhance strategic planning throughout the Department. 

To achieve our critical missions in support of the Warfighter, I am focused on several key priorities. My top priority is the future sustainment and enhancement of 

the Military Health System and Wounded Warrior Support to ensure quality health 

care for our servicemembers, their families and retirees. In addition to the specific 

initiatives included in the Department’s fiscal year 2012 budget, I believe we need 

to do a ‘deeper dive’ into healthcare reform, to include Wounded Warrior support. 

The four azimuths for this ‘deep dive’ into healthcare reform are to assure readiness; improve population health; enhance the patient experience of care; and responsibly manage the cost of care. 

My second priority is to look at how we support our military families, with an 

emphasis on education—both for our children and spouses. Given the hardship and 

stress put on military families due to frequent moves, I believe it is imperative that 

military children and spouses have the best educational opportunities. The third priority focuses on our civilian workforce, to include civilian hiring, career and leadership development, support for our Civilian Expeditionary Workforce, and the transition to a more systematic approach to fully integrate civilians in Total Force planning and requirements. In 2010, the Department made positive and meaningful 

progress toward reforming its civilian hiring practices. Nevertheless, I continue to 

push hiring reform towards an aggressive reduction in the number of days it takes 

to hire a civilian employee. I am increasing our emphasis on a civilian competency 

development framework, enhanced leadership development programs, and senior executive talent management initiatives. Also, my efforts continue to effectively source 

expeditionary mission challenges with a ready, trained, and cleared civilian workforce. Finally, my overarching focus as the USD(P&R) is Readiness and Relevance. 

Each day I strive to work to ensure that we do all we can to gain and maintain 

readiness of the Force, while remaining the most relevant in everything we do to 

help our warfighters and their families. 

193 

As the designated proponent of the Total Force for DOD, and as I look across the 

enterprise within Personnel and Readiness, one of the challenges that I have confronted is to ensure that I have the proper cognizance over the resources necessary 

to support our workforce, and most especially our warfighters and their families. To 

accomplish this, I have undertaken a number of tangible steps to ensure thorough 

oversight of resource and financial management at the OUSD(P&R) level. My financial oversight responsibilities as the USD(P&R) represent nearly $40 billion in direct DOD resources. With responsibility for the management of manpower for the 

DOD Total Force (with associated military and civilian personnel and contracted 

services costs) I also must ensure that I provide effective policy direction that supports pay, allowances, and other programs that constitute nearly two-third of the 

overall DOD budget. 

I will address funding for separate programs under the purview of the Office of 

the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness for fiscal year 2010– 

2012 as appropriate, while allowing the Assistant Secretaries of Defense for Reserve 

Affairs and Health Affairs to address Reserve component and the Defense Health 

Program funding levels within their respective written statements. The Under Secretary of Defense for Comptroller will address the fiscal year 2012 Military Health 

Care efficiencies within his own statement. 

ACTIVE COMPONENT

Recruiting 

For the second year in a row, all active Services not only met their numerical recruiting goals, but also exceeded their recruit quality targets—with highest marks 

since 1992. Previous years were marked by a growing economy, low unemployment, 

reluctance of influencers of youth (e.g., parents and teachers) to recommend military 

service, low propensity among youth to serve in the military, and increased recruiting goals of the Army and Marine Corps to support overseas contingency operations. 

Even in that demanding recruiting environment, the All-Volunteer Force (AVF) 

proved itself successful, with the Services meeting or exceeding recruiting goals 

since 2005. 

In fiscal year 2010, the Services exceeded their recruiting goal of 165,000 by 434, 

accessing 160,601 first-term enlistees and an additional 4,833 individuals with previous military service. Thus far this year, active duty recruiting efforts show continued success. Through March, all Services met or exceeded both quantity and recruit 

quality objectives for the Active-Duty Force. The Army recruited 34,264 new soldiers, with a 33,600 recruiting goal, for a 102 percent year-to-date accomplishment 

rate (Table 1). Notably, for the third year in a row, the Army is exceeding the DOD 

Benchmark of 90 percent of new recruits being High School Diploma Graduates, 

with 100 percent of Army recruits holding that credential year to date. Additionally, 

the Navy, Marine Corps, and Air Force are each exceeding these benchmarks as 

well (Table 1.) 


504per1.eps
194 

While we have had, and continue to have, recruiting success, I do not take these 

recent successes for granted, nor do I assume the current favorable recruiting environment will continue. Already we are seeing growth in the economy and positive 

changes in the labor market, which historically present challenges to recruiting. 

There also are long-term trends that are disturbing. Although the overall youth population is large, only a relatively small proportion of American youth is qualified 

to enlist. It is an unfortunate fact that much of the contemporary youth population 

is currently ineligible to serve. Medical disqualification, with obesity a large contributing factor, removes about 35 percent, drug or alcohol abuse removes about 18 percent, and almost another 23 percent do not meet our enlistment standards for reasons including criminal misbehavior, low aptitude scores, or having more dependents than can reliably be accommodated in their early career. 

Adding to these, other factors affecting recruiting efforts are that only about 75 

percent of our young people graduate with a high school diploma; high numbers of 

youth going to college directly from high school; and continuing concerns about overseas contingency operations with its associated high operations tempo. Acknowledging and understanding these factors and the need to expand our recruiting areas 

for the Active and Reserve components, we continue to enhance DOD influence in 

underserved communities by working with local school administrators, specifically 

from Title I school districts, and implementing programs like the DOD Science and 

Technology Academies Reinforcing Basic Aviation and Space Exploration 

(STARBASE) Program that have potential long-term impacts on students’ on-time 

high school graduation; college enrollment; and interest in learning science, technology, engineering and mathematics. DOD STARBASE is an outreach and educational program that focuses on science, technology, engineering, and mathematics 

(STEM) by providing students underrepresented in the STEM areas of study and 

careers with 25 hours of instruction through an inquiry-based curriculum with 

‘‘hands-on, minds-on’’ experiential activities and exposing them to military’s technological environment to solidify their attachment to and engagement with learning. 

In addition, we are working collaboratively with State Governors by sharing resources and supporting programs like the National Guard Youth Challenge Program, to provide at risk youth—16–18 year old high school dropouts—with the values, life skills, education, and self-discipline necessary to succeed as productive citizens. 

It is important that we have a military that reflects the society it defends, both 

in the enlisted ranks and our commissioned officers. This is particularly important 

as less than 1 percent of the American public serves in uniform. To that end, we 

are pleased that some of our most prestigious colleges and universities are now rethinking their previous positions with regard to Reserve Officers Training Corps 

(ROTC) programs. This will provide more opportunities for college students to think 

about seeking commissions in the U.S. military. 

To meet these challenges, we continually review our recruiting programs to align 

funding and policies with current realities. Each of the Services has made significant adjustments to recruiting programs in light of our austere fiscal environment, 

and continues to look for additional cost savings—but we must be cautious and resist the temptation to cut too deeply and too fast. Stable and adequate investments 

in recruiting resources are necessary to maintain our long-and force management 

needs, history has shown that the time required to redeploy advertising/marketing 

campaigns and/or qualified recruiters is significant. I cannot emphasize this imperative too much. Additionally, the Department and the Services must retain the flexibility to manage their recruiting programs with the resources provided. Along with 

a core mission of providing essential market research to the Services, Joint Advertising, Market Research and Studies (JAMRS) also projects the Department-level 

message to influencers (parents, teachers, counselors, and coaches), a group that 

serves as a primary source of advice for enlistment age youth, a message that needs 

to continue. I feel that JAMRS is one of our most cost-effective recruiting programs. 

The Montgomery GI Bill (MGIB) has been a cornerstone of our active-duty military recruiting efforts since 1985, and a major contributor to the success of the AllVolunteer Force. We are now in the second year of the new Post-9/11 GI Bill, the 

most extensive restructuring of post-service education benefits since the introduction of the original World War II GI Bill. The Post-9/11 GI Bill appears to enhance 

our recruiting efforts even more. We hope that the provision in the new program 

that allows career servicemembers to transfer their unused GI Bill benefits to immediate family members, long requested by both members and their families, will mitigate negative retention impacts. Early results look favorable, with over 180,000 career servicemembers already approved to share their earned educational benefits 

195 

with their family members. We are monitoring the effects of this implementation 

very closely to gauge impact on retention, particularly first-term retention. 

As usual, we appreciate this Committee’s untiring support of our recruiting programs and look forward to working together to ensure future success. 

Military Decorations and Awards 

The Department continues to work in concert with the Services to appropriately 

recognize and laud the accomplishments, both valorous and non-valorous, of our soldiers, sailors, marines, and airmen. In today’s All-Volunteer Force, appropriately 

recognizing the accomplishments of our servicemembers, while simultaneously 

maintaining the time-honored prestige of our most revered military decorations, is 

fundamental to maintaining esprit-de-corps and a motivated force. 

The Department is committed to recognizing the valorous acts of our Service men 

and women. The President of the United States awarded the Medal of Honor to U.S. 

Army Staff Sergeant Salvatore Guinta last November for his conspicuous gallantry 

during Operation Enduring Freedom. The Department is diligently processing additional Medal of Honor nominations for the President’s consideration, including nominations for other living servicemembers. Additionally, the Department recently completed its review of the Medal of Honor award process as requested by the House 

Armed Services Committee. 

Force Management 

Of the many possible futures that could come to pass in the next 5 years, the Department may find itself faced with force management challenges that are far greater than those we have experienced since September 11. Ongoing operations in Iraq, 

Afghanistan, and elsewhere, budgetary pressures, urgent equipment reset and modernization needs, economy-driven retention fluctuations, changing acquisition schedules, and the turmoil in the Middle East will each contribute to the need for a force 

that is potentially far different from the one that exists today. Responsibly managing the required force reduction, while ensuring our warriors are properly 

transitioned to veteran status, is a responsibility taken very seriously and one which 

my organization is helping to facilitate. In this instance, more than most, the cliche ́

is appropriate; the Department must ensure we have the right people, in the right 

place, at the right time. 

As part of our ongoing efforts, DOD is examining different exit strategies to 

achieve the necessary force drawdown to realize the Secretary’s and the Services’ 

agreed upon budget reductions, while doing so with the full appreciation for the sacrifices of the soldiers, sailors, airmen, and marines on behalf of our Nation. Maintaining readiness while humanely reducing our force structure will be the major 

challenge in the years ahead. 

The Department has proven itself adept at maintaining the All-Volunteer Force 

through two major conflicts. There are significant incentives to bring in and retain 

the right force mix of personnel. The area where we could use your help is in creating a system of force management tools focused on a means to compassionately 

reduce the force as operations subside. These tools, some of which have previously 

expired in law, provide the necessary flexibilities to transition the Department from 

a fully engaged footing to one of more routine engagement around the globe. Drawdown programs and strategies provide targets to create a more balanced force and 

ensure we retain the right skills and talent to be a more productive and agile force 

able to meet emerging needs. 

DOD will need to maximize use of existing statutory authorities and potentially 

propose new authorities to surgically shape the force. Our current authorities do not 

provide the level of fidelity required to target career fields for early retirement or 

early discharge boards. This will be necessary to address future force shaping needs 

to meet dynamic changes in missions resulting from an ever-changing environment. 

Having a range of options to grow or reduce the force in specific skill areas is vital 

to the full spectrum of missions. The large standing armies of the past had an inherent ability to react to emerging threats by leveraging mass against new demands. 

This depth, which served to mitigate risk, will not be present in the future force. 

Reduced numbers equates to reduced redundancies. Accession, retention, and development decisions will need to be targeted with unprecedented fidelity in a constrained budget environment. 

The bottom line is that the Department must aggressively manage a precise, surgical drawdown of the force to ensure readiness is not impacted, our warriors and 

their families are protected, and the military departments and combatant commands are able to meet their missions in a hyper-dynamic global environment. 

196 

Retention 

Throughout this force adjustment, retention will be critical. Even during peak operations in Iraq and Afghanistan, the Department continues to be very successful 

in attaining enlisted retention goals. All Active components met or exceeded their 

respective retention goals in every measurable category. The Services and the Department anticipate continued success in the upcoming year and are already meeting or exceeding the monthly goals for early fiscal year 2011. 

Despite the overall strength of enlisted retention over the last few years, there 

remain critical shortages in many low density/high demand skills and other ‘‘hardto-retain’’ skills, such as explosive ordnance disposal specialists, linguists, intelligence and counterintelligence analysts, and pararescue operators, that justify the 

continuation and application of the statutory bonus authorities. The Selective Reenlistment Bonus (SRB) and the Critical Skills Retention Bonus (CSRB), as authorized 

by 37 U.S.C. 308 and 37 U.S.C. 355 respectively, are among the most effective as 

incentives to attract/retain qualified personnel in critical military specialties. 

The Department’s process to manage bonuses is very well defined. A skill is critical if it meets one or more of the following: (a) technical skills requiring high training and/or replacement costs; (b) skills in high demand in the civilian sector; (c) 

challenging to recruit into; (d) crucial to combat readiness or capabilities; and (e) 

low density/high demand (those skills that are in high demand for current operations yet are low density due to less requirements during peacetime). All requests 

from the Services must have substantive justification that clearly outlines the need 

for the bonus for that skill, payment amount and method, and expected retention 

results. Designations do not exceed 3 years unless provided for by congressional extension of the statutory bonus authority. The complementary authority of the CSRB 

is the Selective Reenlistment Bonus (SRB). The SRB is under the authority of the 

Service Secretaries and is not centrally managed by the Department. However, applications of the bonus authorities are reviewed at the Department level. 

Stop Loss 

As of March 18, 2011, all Services reported there are no designated specialties 

being held under the provisions of Stop Loss. There are approximately 162 soldiers 

still receiving ‘‘Stop Loss Special Pay.’’ These soldiers sustained injuries or illnesses 

while subject to Stop Loss and are currently receiving medical treatment. They are 

assigned or attached to Warrior Transition Units (WTUs). 

Two Stop Loss Special Pays have been enacted, which allow a payment of up to 

$500 per month, for members whose service (retroactive to September 11, 2001) has 

been extended by use of the Stop Loss authority. These pays were appropriated and 

authorized by Congress, and enacted by the President to recognize the significant 

sacrifices made by soldiers, sailors, airmen, and marines since September 11. The 

Department implemented both pays, active and retroactive, and appreciates the 

support of Congress to compensate members for the unique circumstances presented 

by the use of this policy, while still preserving our ability to react with discretionary 

authority as dictated by future circumstances. The Department estimated 145,000 

individuals are eligible for the Retroactive Stop Loss Special Pay Program and, as 

of April 15, 2011, we have paid approximately 90,000 personnel, totaling more than 

$325 million. The Services and the Department used the additional time Congress 

provided to continue to engage in extensive and persistent outreach initiatives. Additional interviews were conducted with the military interested press and national 


504per2.eps
197 

media. The Army sent certified direct letters to remaining veterans that did not respond to previous notification efforts. We also reached out to recipients of Post-9/ 

11 GI Bill education benefits through Veterans Benefit Administration (VBA) and 

Associate Organizations (Joint Hometown News, Guard and Reserve Public Affairs, 

and ROTC detachments). We will continue to seek media coverage opportunities to 

remind those eligible to apply. Additionally, the extensions of the 2011 budget Continuing Resolution has allowed the Department to receive more than 16,000 additional claims from our brave service men and women. The deadline for eligible 

servicemembers, veterans and their beneficiaries to apply for Retroactive Stop Loss 

Special Pay has been extended to October 21, 2011, allowing more time to those eligible apply for the benefits they’ve earned under the program guidelines. 

We thank you for your support in recognition of their sacrifices. 

End Strength Management 

Meeting end strength is a priority of the Department. The table below depicts the 

fiscal year 2010 Active Duty authorizations (prescribed and actual) and fiscal year 

2011 authorized levels which the Department intends to achieve in order to meet 

all of its current mission requirements. The Secretary of Defense has authority 

granted under the terms of the President’s National Emergency declaration to increase statutory strength levels prescribed by the NDAA if needed to meet a specific 

mission. The Services have implemented recruiting, retention, and force shaping 

policies and programs to achieve end strengths for fiscal year 2011. These end 

strengths will provide the ground forces needed to meet the strategic demands, 

eliminate the need for the use of Stop Loss, and mitigate persistent capability shortfalls which will reduce stress and demands on servicemembers and families by increasing dwell time. 

Women in Combat 

Another force management issue is Women in Combat. The Department is in the 

process of reviewing, in coordination with the military departments, the laws, policies, and regulations, including the collocation policies, which restrict the service of 

female members in the Armed Forces. The review is timely, in that the Military 

Leadership Diversity Commission’s (MLDC) final report to the President and Congress, released earlier this month, included a recommendation regarding the Department’s combat assignment policy. Additionally, the review coincides with the 

Army’s ongoing consideration of its policy that precludes collocating female soldiers 

with units below the brigade level whose primary mission is to engage in direct 

ground combat. Both will serve to help inform the Department’s judgment on this 

issue and our response to Congress. 

The Department looks forward to providing Congress with the results of the extensive review of all gender-restrictive policies upon completion, as required. Of 

course, such a comprehensive and expansive review, of such a longstanding timetested policy, especially during a period of ongoing combat operations, must be conducted deliberately and methodically, but without delay. 

Sexual Assault Prevention and Response (SAPRO) 

The Department’s position on sexual assault is clear: One sexual assault is one 

too many. 

The department-wide policy on sexual assault prevention has been in place since 

2005. In just this past year alone, we have made significant strides to prevent and 

respond to this crime. But we know we must do more. 

Since 2006, the rate of reported unwanted sexual contact has been reduced by 

one-third, dozens more investigators, field instructors, prosecutors and lab examiners have been hired; more and more victims are stepping forward to report asVerDate Aug 31 2005 09:55 Jan 25, 2012 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00203 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6621 Y:\BORAWSKI\DOCS\68089.TXT JUNE PsN: JUNEB

504per3.eps
198 

saults and the percentage of alleged sexual assault offenders facing court-martial 

proceedings has increased. Funding levels over time for SAPRO are reflected in 

Table 4, below. 

While efforts are beginning to pay off, there is still work to do to integrate and 

improve our efforts. Please know I take this issue very personally and am committed to addressing it swiftly and comprehensively. Preventing sexual assault within our military is a leadership responsibility, and we must all be held accountable 

for eliminating it from our ranks. 

Repeal Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell 

On 22 December 2010, the President signed the enactment of the repeal of 10 

U.S.C. §654, ‘‘Policy concerning Homosexuality in the Armed Forces.’’ Subsequently, 

the Secretary of Defense directed me to lead the implementation process for the Department. 

As the Secretary testified, the Department is committed to executing this change 

in a purposeful and responsible manner. By organizing a DOD Repeal Implementation Team, we have been able to synchronize the implementation of all the Services’ 

policy changes, education and training, and communication strategies. It is important that we implement this change in law at once across the Department. Directed 

by the Secretary of Defense’s Terms of Reference, the Repeal Implementation Team 

has ‘‘operationalized’’ the Comprehensive Working Group’s Support Plan for Implementation and signed policy changes on January 28, 2011, and delivered standardized training materials to all Services on February 4, 2011. The predominant form 

of training will be by commanders and leaders, but the Services will also use various forms of training including Mobile Training Teams, Chain Teaching, ComputerBased Training, Digitally Assisted Training, or combinations of these techniques. 

The Department has purposefully told the Services to take the time necessary to 

get this done right, but not 1 minute more. As a result, the Services are carefully 

executing a deliberate and thorough roll out of the necessary training. The timing 

for each will vary due to their size, operational schedules and the most efficient and 

effective methods to deliver the training. Of note is the fact that each of the Services 

has completed their review of policies and has begun delivering training. 

Rest assured, we are committed to making this historic change in a timely manner that is consistent with standards of military readiness, effectiveness, unit cohesion, and recruiting and retention of the Armed Forces. 

Compensation 

The Department continues its strong commitment to provide a secure standard of 

living and quality of life to those who serve in uniform, while at the same time balancing the demands of an All-Volunteer Force engaged in hostilities around the 

world. Our budget requests reflect this commitment. Soldiers, sailors, airmen, and 

marines continue to express healthy satisfaction with the full pay and benefits the 

Military Services provide. The generosity of current military pay and benefits has 

generated high retention across each of the Military Services. This has occurred despite the stresses and burdens associated with the high deployment tempo and partially because of the current, challenging economy. As a result, today’s military compensation compares very well with that in the private sector. 


504per4.eps
199 

Over the past decade, the Department and Congress together have faced a host 

of challenges in ensuring military compensation remains adequate to recruit and 

sustain America’s All-Volunteer Force. A little over a decade ago, the Department 

did not always meet its recruiting and retention goals. The success of our combined 

efforts in improving the competitiveness of military compensation over the past several years resulted in the current and sustained success across each of the Services 

in meeting or exceeding overall recruiting and retention goals. 

To ensure tomorrow’s military remains as ready and capable as it is today, we 

must not take for granted today’s recruiting and retention successes. Yet, at the 

same time, the Department recognizes the intense fiscal pressures the country faces 

and the need to control rising personnel costs. The Department is committed to efficient spending of the appropriation authorized for personnel. Through a comprehensive, holistic approach, the Department intends to leverage its compensation tools 

to sustain recruiting and retention success while also restraining entitlement 

growth. 

Ensuring tomorrow’s high-quality military also requires the Department to advocate for maintaining military compensation at levels competitive with the private 

sector. Highlighting this commitment to our personnel, in the fiscal year 2012 budget the Department requested an increase in military basic pay for all servicemembers of 1.6 percent, which equals the earnings increase seen in the private sector as measured by the annual change in the Employment Cost Index. 

In the search for budget cuts and efficiencies, many groups, such as the National 

Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform, the Defense Business Board, the 

Government Accountability Office, and others have compared military and private 

sector compensation, noted differences in the structure of compensation packages, 

and offered advice and suggested changes. We know the military is different from 

the private sector. Military compensation has evolved over time and is successfully 

recruiting and retaining today’s military force. In the search for efficiencies, all 

areas, including compensation, need to be continually reexamined. 

One area we are in the midst of examining is the Department’s use of Imminent 

Danger Pay. Together with the Military Services and the Joint Staff, we are reviewing all locations currently designated as eligible for the pay. As part of that review, 

we are considering alternatives to the current Imminent Danger/Hostile Fire Pay 

structure that differentiate payments based upon varying levels of danger or risk 

as well as proximity to combat. 

As you may already know, the President tasked the 11th Quadrennial Review of 

Military Compensation (11th QRMC) to review four areas: combat compensation; 

compensation and benefits for the National Guard and Reserves; compensation for 

wounded warriors, caregivers and survivors; and incentive pays for critical career 

fields, specifically mental health professionals, linguist/translators, remotely piloted 

vehicle operators and Special Operations Forces. Additionally, the QRMC is assessing where military compensation ranks compared to the private sector. 

This QRMC was given an unusually short period in which to conduct its review 

and develop recommendations. It has 1 year to complete the review (which began 

in May 2010) and is required to preview its recommendations with the White House 

prior to completing the review. 

Although some additional analysis is still required, the research institutions supporting the QRMC provided their initial assessments to the QRMC. Based on that 

research, the QRMC has developed its initial findings and preliminary recommendations, which are being sent to the White House. 

It would be premature for me to discuss possible recommendations until they have 

been delivered to the White House. But I think I can safely say that the QRMC is 

finding that improvements could be made in how we compensate those sent into 


504per5.eps
200 

combat and how we compensate the Guard and Reserve that is more consistent with 

their current and future use. Once the recommendations have been delivered to the 

White House, the QRMC plans to brief the committee’s staff on its findings and recommendations, and will be available to answer any questions. 

One area where we have noted success is in targeting special and incentive pays 

and bonuses. Unlike broad and expensive across-the-board basic pay increases, 

these pays provide us the flexibility to narrowly and efficiently target specific skills, 

occupational specialties, experience, and the quantity and quality of personnel filling 

those positions. At less than 5 percent of the military personnel budget, these efficient, targeted pays provide a significantly greater impact on the ability of the Department to meet its personnel needs. The amount spent on these pays has declined, 

especially when compared to previous expenditures. As we continue our search for 

efficiencies, we will continue to rely on the effective and efficient use of these pays. 

Overall, the state of military compensation is healthy, and it contributes mightily 

to our success in achieving our recruiting and retention goals, after almost a decade 

at war. As we look forward, the Department continues to focus on restraining the 

growth of mandatory entitlements while leveraging cost-effective discretionary pays 

and bonuses. The Department is committed to carefully managing both the compensation tools and the resources provided by Congress and continuing to search for 

efficiencies throughout the compensation system. 

Travel Simplification and Transformation 

Although the Military Services and defense agencies attempt to be good stewards 

of taxpayer dollars while meeting their mission requirements, their efforts are complicated by layers of law, appellate decisions, and regulatory oversight pertaining to 

travel. Over a period of approximately 60 years, title 37 travel authorities have become overly detailed and prescriptive, seemingly covering almost every travel situation. An unintended consequence is that new legislation is required to address new 

travel situations, such as travel authorities for those caring for wounded warriors 

or for those accompanying servicemembers to Yellow Ribbon events. 

To simplify travel, we believe that the travel authorities that exist today should 

be considered for consolidation and reform. This will allow us to streamline travel 

and to look for ways to consolidate and replicate rule sets that garner efficiencies 

for the Department. Initiatives such as elimination of receipts, simplifications of allowances, and others have the potential to provide the Department with efficiencies 

that will generate a savings without having the traveler bear the burden of the cost. 

Further, travel efficiencies can result from both a reduction of direct and indirect 

costs. Direct costs are the outlays for the conduct of travel, such as lodging and 

transportation. Indirect costs include outlays for managing the travel enterprise, 

such as the administrative costs of processing complex travel vouchers. With more 

flexible statutory authorities, the Department would be better able to leverage private sector practices. We are confident this will result in simplified travel rules for 

the traveler, reduced outlays for the Department, and increase mission flexibility for 

leaders. 

This transformational endeavor is being overseen by the Defense Travel Management Office, the single focal point for commercial travel within DOD. The DTMO 

brings visibility and coherence at the enterprise level, and partners across the government and private sector to maintain an in-depth perspective of the travel industry and to determine the best practices and standards for DOD travel. 

RESERVE COMPONENT

Envisioning the Reserve Component as Part of the Operational Force 

During a decade of sustained engagement in combat operations, the Reserve components (RC) of our Armed Forces have been transformed, from a strategic force of 

last resort to an operational Reserve Force that provides full-spectrum capability to 

the Nation in addition to its traditional role as a Strategic Reserve. Repeated combat deployments, as well as peacekeeping and humanitarian relief missions, have 

produced an operationally resilient force that fully expects to be employed on a periVerDate Aug 31 2005 09:55 Jan 25, 2012 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00206 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6621 Y:\BORAWSKI\DOCS\68089.TXT JUNE PsN: JUNEB

504per6.eps
201 

odic basis. This new force represents a 10-year investment in resourcing commitments and the personal sacrifice of servicemembers and their families. That investment can reliably provide DOD with essential operational capabilities and strategic 

agility. Good stewardship demands that we continue to capitalize on this investment 

in order to maintain Guard and Reserve readiness, relieve stress on the Active component, and provide force structure options in a resource constrained future. Representing the views of numerous stakeholders across the entire Department, the 

QDR-directed Comprehensive Review of the Future Role of the Reserve component 

provides a foundation upon which to build a cohesive execution strategy that preserves current Total Force competencies, efficiently integrates multiple capabilities, 

and leverages Reserve component value. 

1. Readiness Requirements 

The fiscal year 2012 budget request supports the Ready Reserve, including the Individual Ready Reserve, totaling about 1.1 million members, and contributing 43 

percent of the total military end strength at a cost effective level of 9 percent of the 

total base budget. To maintain the Guard and Reserve as an integral part of the 

Operational Force into the future and ensure these forces are ready and available 

when needed, we must: (1) program the training and use of the Reserve components 

into Service base budgets; (2) continue to use supplemental funding to deploy the 

Reserve component for contingencies; and (3) develop a national strategic communication plan that explains to the American people why the Guard and Reserve are 

important to the Nation and how the Department plans to use those forces in the 

future. 

2. Continuum of Service, End Strength and Readiness Management 

Meeting Reserve component end strength objectives is a priority of the Department. The table below depicts the current prescribed and actual end strengths for 

the Reserve components. The Department’s Continuum of Service efforts have contributed to the six DOD Reserve components remaining within the variance allowed 

for their congressionally-mandated end strength objective. The Services have implemented recruiting, retention, and force shaping policies and programs to achieve end 

strengths for fiscal year 2011. We appreciate the congressional support of the fiscal 

year 2011 end strength levels and the legislative initiatives that assist in recruiting 

and retaining Reserve component servicemembers. These end strengths will provide 

the Reserve components the forces necessary to meet strategic demands while maintaining a dwell consistent with Departmental policy. 

Personnel and medical readiness continue to be a priority for the Department. Of 

the end strength figures outlined above, approximately 72,000 are in the training 

pipeline for the Reserve components and are not immediately available for mobilization. Additionally, as of the first quarter of fiscal year 2011, the RC has a Fully 

Medically Ready rate of 63 percent, which is below the DOD goal of 80 percent. The 

lower RC Medically Ready rate is due to a significant number of members who are 

deemed Not Medically Ready (17 percent)—disqualifying dental condition is the 

principal factor. However, DOD is diligently working to make medical and dental 

services more available to RC members, and as of the first quarter of fiscal year 

2011, all components have met or exceeded the Dental Readiness goal of 75 percent, 

which will have a positive impact on overall medical readiness. 

3. Dwell, Stress on Force 

The RC provides an operational capability and strategic depth in support of the 

national defense strategy. It is imperative that predictability in the use of RC forces 


504per7.eps
202 

be maximized. On January 17, 2007 the Secretary of Defense established planning 

objectives for involuntary mobilization of Guard and Reserve units at 1 year mobilized to 5 years dwell time (1:5). Today’s global demands require a number of selected Guard/Reserve units to be remobilized sooner than this standard. The intention is that such exceptions will be temporary and that we move to the broad application of 1:5 as soon as possible. Exceptions to policy began at the 1:4 threshold and 

for the past 6 months 10 percent of the members involuntarily mobilized have had 

less than a 1:4 dwell. This trend has consistently improved since the policy was established. This is due in part to widespread volunteerism and Service management 

of deployment cycles. 

Training and Recruiting the Reserve Component as Part of the Operational Force 

The Regional Integrated Training Environment (RITE) Concept is a joint effort 

that identifies and matches Services’ training requirements to a vast network of 

local training facilities and resources. The purpose of the RITE initiative is to help 

sustain the total force readiness posture and surge capability as determined by service rotational readiness models while reducing overhead training costs through innovative management of facilities, training assets, advance simulators and Joint Virtual Live and Constructive (JLVC) capability, pooled, shared equipment, and coordinated through a web-based scheduling/visibility program. As the concept matures, 

collaboration will expand with key internal and external DOD stakeholders. 

Employing a Rotational Reserve as Part of the Operational Force 

Every day for the past 9 years over 20,000 Reserve component servicemembers 

have served on active duty as volunteers. These individuals have the time and life 

style situation to serve more than the 1 weekend per month and 2 weeks per year 

that have long been considered standard for Guard and Reserve personnel. The Department should adopt methods to leverage this willingness to serve in order to fulfill the part-time and temporary demands of its combatant commands, major command headquarters, and the Defense agencies. One of several options to institutionalize differentiated service in the Reserve component is for DOD to create Reserve component units staffed by personnel willing to serve more frequently or for 

longer periods of time in order to support such tasks as Theater Security Cooperation, Building Partner Capacity, HD, Defense Support to Civil Authorities, and the 

Services’ institutional support missions. Service in these units would be voluntary; 

the member would join knowing full well the conditions of service. Realizing a differential service commitment would require the development of contracts or agreements that would commit willing Guard or Reserve members to serve in units requiring higher rates of mobilization or access. This type of differential service commitment has been in use successfully in high optempo units such as aviation for 

some time, but with the Reserve component now playing a larger role in many ongoing mission areas, expanded utilization of differential service contracts would be 

beneficial. Such differentiation within the Reserve component would provide an additional sourcing option for units, teams, and personnel for contingency operations 

or emergencies. 

Future planning envisions an era of persistent conflict where some type of RC activation authority will be required to augment the AC to maximize effectiveness and 

efficiency of the Total Force. At present, we have sufficient authority to mobilize RC 

forces, however, as directed (by the Senate Armed Services Committee conference 

report S. Rept. 111–201, page 138) we have analyzed our access authorities to support long-term utilization of the RC as part of the operational force. We foresee an 

authority gap when the Nation is faced with persistent demands on the Total Force 

but does not have specific operational missions, a national emergency or war situation. This authority gap exists for some, but not all, of the full spectrum of military 

missions, including training, security force assistance and building partnership capacity, that our RC is specifically well suited to perform as a complementing part 

of the Total Force. We are reviewing potential changes to existing statute to close 

this authority gap to further increase dwell for the Active component while maintaining RC readiness. 

Reintegrating and Continued Care of the Reserve Component as Part of the Operational Force 

1. Resilience Training & Preparation 

Resiliency is at the core of the Yellow Ribbon Reintegration Program (YRRP) mission. Since its inception in 2008, there has been an ever increasing focus on resiliency building and training for the National Guard and Reserve Forces. In response 

to growing awareness regarding the connection between post-traumatic stress (PTS), 

substance abuse, criminal activity or suicide and ‘‘bounce back’’ ability, Reserve comVerDate Aug 31 2005 09:55 Jan 25, 2012 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00208 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6621 Y:\BORAWSKI\DOCS\68089.TXT JUNE PsN: JUNEB
203 

ponent (RC) members and their families are being offered training to enhance their 

resiliency skills. The RCs have incorporated resiliency skills into their training protocols which are available to activated servicemembers. The objective of the YRRP 

is to ensure the readiness and well-being of National Guard and Reserve servicemembers and their families by providing dynamic events, information, services, referrals, and proactive outreach opportunities throughout the entire deployment 

cycle. 

Resilience training, one component of a comprehensive program, has been added 

to assist members of the Armed Forces with building mental and emotional resiliency to successfully meet the demands of the deployment cycle. YRRP staff members have attended Service and DOD-wide training events and are scheduled to attend additional sessions in 2011 to ensure the unique requirements of the National 

Guard and Reserve are incorporated into the resilience training approach. 

As part of the YRRP, services and information that foster resiliency are provided 

at the pre-deployment, during deployment, and the 30, 60, 90 day post-deployment 

events. The Yellow Ribbon Reintegration Program implemented a Cadre of Speakers 

program, hiring facilitators who specialize in resilience training and who are available to YRRP event planners across the country. These facilitators also work with 

Military and Family Life Counselors and chaplains to provide critical support 

around resilience issues at YRRP events, ensuring individual assistance is available 

for each family or servicemember as required. 

Additionally, other sessions and resources focus on marriage and children, substance abuse awareness, financial counseling, anger management, employment assistance and Department of Veterans Affairs’ information regarding benefits and 

medical care eligibility. To find an event or additional resources, a RC member, commander, planner, or family member can access information at http:// 

www.yellowribbon.mil/. 

2. Family Programs 

In both the Active and Reserve components, servicemembers and their families 

have made tremendous sacrifices for our Nation and they continue to do so. Guard 

and Reserve families rely on their local leaders and communities for support. DOD 

and its partners in governmental and non-governmental organizations have worked 

to coordinate support systems and communicate available resources to our servicemembers and their families. We all know that the work to strengthen and support 

military families is never complete and DOD continually strives to identify gaps in 

our support and to link appropriate community resources. 

Throughout a servicemember’s continuum of service, DOD strives to put in place 

a viable support system. A coordinated network of support with defined processes 

serves the needs of military families in geographic locations closest to where they 

reside. Additionally, as stated in the Presidential Report on Strengthening Our Military Families, there have been positive reviews from States successfully implementing a one-stop resource to handle State-wide military family issues using InterService Family Assistance Committees (ISFACs). These locally-based committees 

work to build community capacity and strengthen networks of support. DOD plans 

to build on these grassroots efforts to benefit geographically dispersed Active, 

Guard, or Reserve servicemembers and families. 

3. Employment Initiative Program (EIP) 

One of the greatest challenges facing our Nation right now is unemployment and 

underemployment, and these related problems are especially severe for those in the 

Guard and Reserve or for those leaving active military service. Whether they are 

soldiers, sailors, airmen, coast guardsmen, or marines completing active duty, or 

members of the Guard and Reserve returning from deployment, many of these great 

men and women return home to an uncertain future because of the tough job market. 

The promise of a secure job provides servicemembers and their families with stability and peace of mind. In the December 2009 Status of Forces Survey of Reserve 

Component Members, servicemembers across six of the seven Reserve components 

(Coast Guard Reserves not included) self-reported a 12 percent unemployment rate, 

although the highest unemployment rate across all components was 22 percent 

among junior enlisted troops in the rank of E1–E4. As this data is self-reported, 

many of these younger troops are likely to be students. The total number of respondents was 20,238 (from an estimated population of 822k) RC servicemembers. 

In accordance with NDAA 2011 requirement to provide transitioning servicemembers with employment information, the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Reserve Affairs has focused resources on ensuring servicemembers have a civilian job 

that provides stability in their civilian life and allows them the time and resources 

204 

to contribute to our national defense by serving in the Guard and Reserve. During 

fiscal year 2010, the YRRP aligned with Employer Support of the Guard and Reserve (ESGR) and Family Programs. This was accomplished to create synergy and 

realize efficiencies for the servicemembers and families served by YRRP, ESGR and 

Family Programs’ missions. Since ESGR’s creation in 1972, the focus has been on 

developing and promoting employer support for Guard and Reserve service. In fiscal 

year 2011, ESGR placed additional emphasis on the employment arena and now assists servicemembers throughout the entire employment cycle. The current employment challenges led to the implementation of EIP. 

The overall intent of EIP is to take full advantage of all ESGR, Yellow Ribbon, 

and Family Programs, in partnership with public and private entities, to enhance 

employment opportunities for servicemembers and their families, especially focusing 

on those completing active duty tours and our Wounded Warriors. Of note, ESGR 

possesses a very strong network of over 4,700 volunteers located throughout the Nation. EIP will leverage the volunteer network to meet the requirements of this mission. 

At the national leadership level, DOD is working in a collaborative effort with 

Federal agencies—including the Department of Labor, Department of Veterans Affairs, Small Business Administration and the Office of Personnel Management—to 

create efficiencies, enhance the employment process and serve as an effective resource for servicemembers and employers. In addition, ESGR has worked with specific associations to enhance the overall effectiveness of this program. One example 

is ESGR’s work with the Society for Human Resource Management (SHRM). The 

more than 263,000 HR professionals of SHRM are instrumental in engaging with 

employers while determining meaningful employment opportunities for servicemembers. 

EIP has a high-tech and high-touch approach. The high-tech approach is comprised of the Employer Partnership of the Armed Forces Web site 

www.employerpartnership.org which provides employers with the ability to post 

available jobs and allow servicemembers to post resumes and make a job connection. 

The high-touch approach comes through a series of employment related events being 

conducted with YRRP Events and State specific job events. 

ESGR is positioned to meet the challenge of ensuring servicemembers have quality civilian job opportunities. Pilot programs conducted in fiscal year 2010, consisting of job fairs, transition assistance and job training sessions, proved valuable 

in helping servicemembers at the local level. This community-based approach will 

be a pivotal element in EIP as it continues to develop. 

READINESS OF THE TOTAL FORCE

Military readiness is not an abstract concept that can be reduced to colors on a 

chart—it involves a complex series of factors and indicators that must be evaluated 

and managed carefully. For example, our Services are achieving or exceeding their 

recruiting goals and have exceptional retention rates. In addition, the Force is combat experienced and proficient in a wide range of operations, including irregular 

warfare and stability operations. However, equipment readiness and training for 

conventional warfare have suffered during the same period. It is in this complicated 

environment that Personnel and Readiness works to maintain and sustain the 

Readiness of the Total Force through support to the combatant commanders, as well 

as the military Services. 

Readiness and Deployments 

Multiple deployments to Iraq and Afghanistan have increased the stress on our 

servicemembers and their families, and some would argue have reduced the readiness of the Department. However, our forces are combat experienced and proficient 

in a wide range of real world operations. They are no doubt the best trained and 

equipped force in the world. The All-Volunteer Force is healthy, and our Services 

are achieving or exceeding their recruiting and retention goals with quality people. 

In short, our forces remain ready to execute the missions assigned to them by the 

President. 

We have focused on preparing our ground combat forces for the operations they 

face in Iraq and Afghanistan. This means there is less focus on the type of training 

we have done in the past such as large scale ground maneuver warfare (i.e. tank 

on tank). We can and will rebalance this training when needed to make certain our 

forces are prepared to meet the needs of our combatant commanders in a complex 

and uncertain security environment. 

We also carefully manage the dwell time of our forces across the Department, and 

have limited unit deployments and mobilizations to 1 year. We have also balanced 

the additional forces for Afghanistan against those coming available from the drawVerDate Aug 31 2005 09:55 Jan 25, 2012 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00210 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6621 Y:\BORAWSKI\DOCS\68089.TXT JUNE PsN: JUNEB
205 

down in Iraq. We are meeting the Operation New Dawn responsible drawdown plan 

goals. The Army had 25 Brigade Combat Teams (BCTs) deployed to Operation Iraqi 

Freedom and Operation Enduring Freedom in 2008, 21 BCTs deployed in 2010, and 

are projecting to have 50 percent fewer BCTs deployed in 2012 as compared to 2010. 

The Army projects the average unit boots on the ground to dwell ratio to improve 

to approximately 1:2 for Active component units and 1:4 for Reserve component 

units in 2012. We are making excellent progress toward our dwell goal of 2 or more 

years at home for every year deployed with nearly 70 percent of the Active Force 

meeting or exceeding this goal. 

Suicide Prevention 

Suicide prevention is a very important issue within the Readiness portfolio. The 

loss of even one life to suicide is heartbreaking; it degrades the readiness of the 

force and has a profound impact on both the unit and the family members left behind. Many factors contribute to the suicide rate. One factor relates to leadership. 

Each Service acknowledges the important role that leaders, both officer and NCO, 

play in building resiliency among those under their command. In 2010, there were 

294 servicemembers who committed suicide while on active duty, down from a total 

of 310 in 2009. While this is not a significant decrease, we have arrested the steady 

increases in overall active duty suicides that began in 2006. I believe this is due 

largely to our increasing emphasis on resilience across the Department highlighted 

by programs such as the Army’s Comprehensive Soldier Fitness. This program is designed to develop and institute a holistic fitness program for Soldiers, families, and 

Army civilians in order to enhance performance and build resilience. To date, the 

Army has trained 3, 253 Master Resilience Trainers to facilitate this goal. The other 

Services are developing or enhancing similar programs and benchmarking off the 

Army’s success. 

There have been several studies and task force reports (DOD, Army and RAND) 

released over the past year each with multiple observations and recommendations. 

The Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Readiness is currently leading a 

team of senior Officers and Executives from the Department in an effort to examine 

these reports and devise an implementation plan based on the recommendations 

that will enhance our suicide prevention efforts across the Department. 


504per8.eps
206 

Focus/Highlight RC and RC Suicide Prevention Strategy 

The Army National Guard reported 112 suicides in 2010 (145 total with Army Reserve added) which was up significantly from the previous year (80 total Army 

Guard/Reserve), which is a cause for concern. This already complex issue becomes 

even more complex when dealing with our Reserve component because of their continuous transition from military to civilian life. Nevertheless, the Department is 

committed to addressing this issue in our Reserve component. We currently have 

a Director of Psychological Health in each of our 54 States and territories who acts 

as the focal point for coordinating the psychological support for Guard members and 

their families. The NDAA mandated that the Department expand suicide prevention 

and community healing and response training under the Yellow Ribbon Reintegration Program. We have made some progress here and are in the process of reinvigorating this effort with input from a Reserve Component Stakeholder Group comprised of all of the Reserve and National Guard components, Reserve Affairs Yellow 

Ribbon representatives and members of the Defense Centers of Excellence. Additionally, we are examining ‘‘peer-to-peer’’ programs, such as New Jersey Vet2Vet, to see 

what role these types of programs can play in reducing suicides. 

The Suicide Prevention and Risk Reduction Committee 

The Suicide Prevention and Risk Reduction Committee serves as a forum for 

inter-Service and Veterans Affairs partnership and coordination. Chaired by the Defense Centers of Excellence, its members include the Suicide Prevention Program 

Managers from all Services, representatives from the National Guard and Reserves, 

the Department of Veterans Affairs, and other key governmental organizations. This 

organization has led the way in standardizing suicide reporting and data collection, 

forming key partnerships, growing the DOD/VA Suicide Prevention Conference into 

a nationally recognized event, and addressing several key suicide prevention issues. 

I plan to continue to mature this body, making it more inclusive and effective as 

a venue for collaboration across DOD and Veterans Affairs. 

Drug Demand Reduction Initiative 

Illegal and prescription drugs remain readily available to DOD servicemembers. 

The use of illegal drugs and the misuse of prescription drugs are both a symptom 

and problem that fuels the worsening of other conditions; such as deployment stress, 

suicides, and workplace safety resulting in degradation of unit readiness. Based on 

a recommendation of the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, we are taking a new 

systematic approach to counter an emerging drug abuse problem in the military. 

The Department’s current demand reduction approach will be expanded to include 

prescription drug testing and integrated with the Readiness Office’s suicide and accident reduction efforts. As part of this effort, we plan to further target applicant 

testing, improve random drug testing in CONUS and in theater, and expand testing 

to include commonly abused prescription drugs. 

Military Leadership Diversity Commission 

The MLDC, mandated by the NDAA for Fiscal Year 2009 and referred to as the 

MLDC, is scheduled to release its final report directly to the President and Congress 

in mid-March 2011. The draft final recommendations described on the MLDC public 

web site provide an insight into the content of the final report. 

The draft report reflects over 12 months of work performed by 31 appointed commissioners in response to the MLDC Charter to conduct a comprehensive evaluation 

and assessment of policies that provide opportunities for the promotion and advancement of minority members of the Armed Forces, including those who are senior officers. 

Specific recommendations define diversity as individual characteristics consistent 

with DOD core values; require diversity to become an institutional priority; make 

leading diverse groups a core competency; and call on Congress to mandate annual 

DOD diversity reports. Other key final recommendations address the following 

areas: 

• Retention programs for women 

• Activities that will expand the pool of qualified candidates 

• Eliminating the ‘‘combat exclusion policy’’ for women 

• Ensuring transparency throughout the promotion system 

• Conducting senior-level annual accountability reviews, and 

• Aligning organizational structures to ensure a focus on diversity. 

My staff and I stand ready to accept the decision of the President and Congress 

as relayed by the Secretary of Defense to address the findings and recommendations 

stated in the MLDC report. 

207 

Language, Regional, and Cultural Capabilities 

The Department is continuing its work to ensure our Total Force is prepared for 

a full range of varying and complex missions that our current and future security 

environment requires which includes building expertise in foreign languages, regional and cultural skills. DOD invested $652 million in fiscal year 2010 to support 

language and culture instruction to achieve higher proficiencies for the Total Force 

in these skills. This investment includes: (a) pre-accession training and education 

at the Service Academies and ROTC; (b) improved resident and non-resident language and culture training for uniformed language professionals and for General 

Purpose Forces; (c) provided monetary incentives to individuals to identify, sustain 

and enhance for foreign language proficiency; and (d) we strengthened foreign language proficiency testing and readiness reporting. 

The fiscal year 2011 budget focuses on sustaining gains achieved in previous 

years and continuing to build a solid foundation to meet future demands. The baseline funding in fiscal year 2011 is projected at $735 million (does not include 

MILCON). This includes establishing Language Training Detachments to provide 

and sustain commanders’ requirement for culturally based language training for 

general purpose forces, support the Afghanistan/Pakistan Hands program, and expand the role of English language training for partner nation personnel. 

The fiscal year 2012 budget focuses on sustaining gains achieved in previous 

years and continuing to build a solid infrastructure in which to meet future demands. The baseline funding request of $792 million in fiscal year 2012 supports 

redirected language and culture instruction to achieve higher proficiencies for the 

Total Force in these skills. This includes $46 million in fiscal year 2012 for Language Training Detachments to provide and sustain commanders’ needs for general 

purpose forces, support the Afghanistan/Pakistan Hands program, and expand the 

role of English language training for partner nation personnel. Today, the Department is moving ahead on several fronts to develop strategic direction, create effective policies, and refine processes for generating language, regional, and cultural capabilities. 

We recently published the Language, Regional and Cultural Strategic Plan that 

sets out our strategic direction in providing our warfighters with the capabilities 

needed to meet the diverse operational needs of the 21st century. In January 2011, 

we convened a DOD Summit on Language and Culture. Over 300 leaders from 

across the DOD, other U.S. Government agencies, industry, and academia met to 

discuss and propose innovative solutions to the key challenges facing the Department and the greater Nation. 

We also published counterinsurgency training guidance to require language and 

culture training for forces deploying to theater. The Department is tracking compliance with this training and tying language and cultural preparation of deployed 

forces to unit readiness reporting. This represents an enduring organizational 

change in how the Department views these capabilities. We are implementing a 

standardized requirements identification process. This process will identify the capabilities and capacity to ensure that the right mix of language and regional skills 

are developed to meet mission needs. In the past, demand signals were incomplete 

and did not always reach force providers. 

The Department supports the efforts of our Nation’s educational system to 

produce more graduates with language and culture skills. It has established more 

robust language requirements for our Service Academies and established programs 

and incentives for our Reserve Officers’ Training Corps. We are expanding the DOD 

Educational Activity foreign language program to provide a model for building foreign language skills pre-Kindergarten through 12th grade. These initiatives will ensure a strong return on investment. The results will be an increased capability in 

these skills which can be leveraged and expanded to meet needs in today’s dynamic 

and complex world. 

MILITARY HEALTH SYSTEM

Health Budgets and Financial Policy 

The Defense Health Program (DHP) budget request reflects that we are operating 

in an environment where financial resources are limited, and that specific actions 

must be undertaken to better manage the rise of health care costs. In many respects, our challenges in this area are not unlike those experienced by other public 

and private organizations that are similarly experiencing escalating health care 

costs—driven by an aging population, a continued increase in expensive new medical technologies and pharmaceuticals, and increased utilization of services. In our 

circumstance, however, we must also be aware that the exponential growth in 

health costs can pose a long-term threat to competing defense priorities. 

208 

DHP Future Health Care Costs TRICARE—MHS Costs 

In the budget proposed by the Department, we have included a number of specific 

initiatives that both ensure we continue to provide the finest health benefit in this 

country for our active and retired servicemembers and their families, and also puts 

us on a long-term path to proper financial stewardship of the taxpayers’ dollar. 

First, we are focused on internal efficiencies. From targeted reductions in non-patient care contractor support to greater optimization of our medical supply chain, 

we are pursuing a range of initiatives that offer real reductions in our budget. Second, we are pursuing a more equitable management of benefits across all health 

care programs. We are continuing to align civilian provider payment policies with 

Medicare, as Congress has long directed. Finally, for working age retirees, we are 

proposing minor changes to out-of-pocket costs that are exceptionally modest and remain well below the inflation-adjusted out-of-pocket costs enjoyed in 1995, when 

TRICARE Prime was first introduced. We have incorporated numerous safeguards— 

grandfathering in all current enrollees to unique programs; phasing-in new reimbursement methodologies for providers; and excepting certain beneficiaries (survivors and medically retired servicemembers) from any enrollment fee changes—in 

order to protect our most vulnerable beneficiaries. 

Health Affairs/TRICARE Management Activity Strategic Direction 

I am also encouraged by the long-term strategic direction of our medical program. 

The Office of Health Affairs has adopted a strategic construct—the Quadruple 

Aim—that captures the core mission requirements of this unique health system of 

ours: (1) Improved Readiness; (2) Improved Health; (3) Enhanced Patient Experience; and (4) Responsible Management of Cost. The Health Affairs leadership, together with the Service Surgeons General, has put into place a sophisticated set of 

strategic imperatives and quantifiable measures that help inform me and the Service Secretaries and Chiefs on our progress in meeting the most important goals for 

our servicemembers and families—that includes how we are performing in the areas 

of psychological health and traumatic brain injury, delivery of preventive health 

services, focus on outcomes and overall satisfaction with the delivery of health care, 

to name just a few. 

Mental Health Professionals 

The mental health workload has increased across the Military Health System 

(MHS) for both active duty servicemembers and family members. Among the reasons for this increased workload are PTSD, TBI, earlier identification of mental 

health issues, increased suicides and suicide attempts, and reduced stigma of seeking mental health care. This workload has increased the need for mental health providers. Currently, throughout the MHS, there are a total of 7,662 military, civilian, 

and contract employees (full-time equivalents) providing mental health care. This 

reflects a shortage of 1,025 which puts the MHS at 88 percent fill compared to requirements. We are pursuing efforts to assist the Services in recruiting and retaining these critical mental health provider positions. These efforts include using Direct Hire Authority and Expedited Hiring Authority that Congress provided the Department to help recruit providers. Additionally, we are implementing the Physician 

and Dentist Pay Plan (PDPP) which will ensure we can pay critical shortage specialties, such as psychiatrists, salaries competitive with the private sector. 

DOD/VA COLLABORATION

In order to take better care of our servicemembers, in particular, our Veterans 

who have served in combat, it is imperative that DOD and VA have a close and collaborative working relationship. While our two organizations have different missions, our priority is the same—taking care of those who have served and sacrificed 

for our country. 

In this effort, DOD and VA work together through a governance body, created by 

Congress, to ensure that we are in constant communication and work in collaboration. The formal governance council structure put in place to oversee development 

of policy and support DOD/VA joint initiatives and resource sharing, including information sharing is the Joint Executive Council (JEC), which is co-chaired by the 

Deputy Secretary of VA and the DOD Under Secretary for Personnel and Readiness. 

The JEC is the overarching council, linking the DOD/VA with two supporting councils: the Health Executive Council (HEC) and the Benefits Executive Council (BEC). 

The Health Executive Council (HEC) is co-chaired by the Assistant Secretary of 

Defense for Health Affairs and the VA Under Secretary for Health and reports directly to the Joint Executive Council (JEC). The HEC meets bimonthly and is responsible for implementing a coordinated health care resource sharing program. The 

HEC is chartered to oversee the development and implementation of health care reVerDate Aug 31 2005 09:55 Jan 25, 2012 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00214 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6621 Y:\BORAWSKI\DOCS\68089.TXT JUNE PsN: JUNEB
209 

lated issues in the VA/DOD Joint Strategic Plan (JSP), oversee working groups and 

steering groups, identify opportunities to enhance mutually beneficial collaboration, 

and submit input to the JEC annual report on progress of the JSP for health issues. 

The HEC has charged 20 groups to focus on specific high-priority areas of national 

interest, achieving significant success in improving interagency cooperation. 

Today, most healthcare information captured by the DOD and VA is done so electronically and deemed necessary for the continuity of care and benefits administration. Currently, this information is being shared only as viewable data, not computable. Although both Departments utilize electronic health records (EHRs) and have 

computer systems to automate administrative and healthcare functions, there is not 

a widespread adoption of EHRs in the private sector among the many providers who 

deliver care to DOD and VA beneficiaries. Some information available in both DOD 

and VA EHRs is of utmost importance to the clinical communities treating and caring for DOD and VA beneficiaries. Interoperability of EHRs between the DOD and 

VA is the end-state goal of departmental healthcare information sharing. The purpose of EHR interoperability is to achieve a single logical (not physical) electronic 

health record view from the day an individual enters military service throughout 

their military career, and after they leave the military. 

The Departments continue to identify opportunities to enhance DOD/VA electronic 

health data sharing. After a December 2010 review by the Vice Chairman of the 

Joint Chiefs of Staff, DOD and VA formed six teams to create a collaborative approach to the EHR Way Ahead. The teams—Enterprise Architecture, Data Interoperability, Business Process, Systems Capabilities, Presentation Layer, and Missions Requirements/Functions—cover high-level activities needed to plan, develop 

and deploy final recommended solutions. In-progress reviews of the joint EHR modernization collaboration effort have been held with the Deputy Secretaries of the two 

departments and team findings are being elevated to the DOD and VA Department 

Secretaries for discussion and consideration. 

We believe this careful, collaborative approach will, in fact, enhance our decisionmaking process and lead to a solution that can be implemented in a more timely 

and coordinated manner. The EHR Way Ahead addresses specific challenges with 

the current EHR, including outdated legacy technologies; ongoing performance and 

data availability problems; and difficulty in using healthcare industry standards. 

World-Class Medical Care in the National Capital Region 

The Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) construction projects at Bethesda and 

Fort Belvoir will provide nearly 3 million square-feet of new world-class clinical and 

administrative space, cutting-edge technology, and Americans with Disability Act 

lodging to meet the rehabilitation needs of wounded, ill, and injured servicemembers. The new facilities will improve the infrastructure for casualty care and 

services and better align healthcare delivery with the population centers of the National Capital Region (NCR) beneficiaries. The projects are on schedule to receive 

patients and clinical functions from Walter Reed Army Medical Center by September 15, 2011, while casualty care and patient safety remain the top priorities 

related to the move. The majority of the BRAC construction at both sites is complete 

and patient care is being provided in the new inpatient and outpatient pavilions at 

Bethesda. The Department is paying close attention to the timeliness and milestones necessary to achieve the final moves. 

The BRAC projects are only part of the larger transformation of Military Medicine 

in the NCR. The NCR contains a mix of nearly 40 Army, Navy, and Air Force Medical Treatment Facilities (MTFs), has almost 550,000 eligible beneficiaries, and runs 

on an annual operating budget of almost $1.5 billion. Its most important patients 

are the casualties returning from the war and their families. The Department is 

taking the opportunity to substantially enhance and transform this multi-Service 

military healthcare market to provide effective and efficient world-class healthcare. 

The Joint Task Force National Capital Region Medical (JTF CapMed) is a standing 

JTF that was established to oversee the rationalization and realignment of medical 

infrastructure to achieve greater effectiveness and cost efficiency through the integrated delivery of healthcare. 

DOD’s Comprehensive Master Plan (CMP) for the NCR, provided to Congress last 

year, outlined how JTF CapMed will implement an Integrated Healthcare Delivery 

System (IDS) to provide this world-class healthcare cost effectively. The Department 

has provided JTF CapMed with command and fiduciary authorities to manage 

MTFs in the NCR and directed that the new hospitals at Bethesda and Fort Belvoir 

become joint commands subordinate to JTF CapMed to develop best practices, enhance interoperability and patient safety, and combine shared services such as contracting, personnel, and consolidated information technology—ultimately improving 

the patient and family experience. An example of clinical transformation is in the 

210 

direct care pharmacy system that will facilitate prescriptions and refills no matter 

where in the NCR they are presented, provide refills to Six Sigma quality standards, and alleviate traffic concerns at NCR BRAC sites. 

The Department has requested $109 million in the President’s 2012 budget ($762 

million between fiscal year 2012–fiscal year 2016) to recapitalize medical facilities 

at Bethesda that the BRAC did not address and provide the new space required to 

convert to single patient rooms and expand support for the operating suites. These 

facility projects and the implementation of the NCR IDS by JTF CapMed are part 

of the Department’s commitment to providing ‘‘world-class’’ healthcare in the NCR 

and fulfilling the requirements under section 2714 of the NDAA for Fiscal Year 

2010. 

WOUNDED WARRIORS

Taking care of our wounded, ill, and injured servicemembers is one of the highest 

priorities of the Department, the Service Secretaries, and the Service Chiefs. Reforming unnecessary bureaucratic processes is crucial to ensuring servicemembers 

receive, in a timely manner, the care and benefits to which they are entitled. The 

Department’s leaders are working to achieve the highest level of care and management and to standardize care among the Military Services and Federal agencies. 

Key initiatives include: 

• Establishing an Integrated Disability Evaluation System (IDES)—to create a simpler, faster, more consistent process for determining which members may continue their military service and helping them become as independent and self-supporting as possible. To date, the IDES has been implemented in 78 locations covering over 73 percent of the eligible population. 

The DOD and VA have a strategic goal of moving 100 percent of eligible 

servicemembers into the IDES by end of September 2011. 

• Enhancing the efforts of care coordinators who work closely with wounded, ill, and injured servicemembers, their families and their recovery teams 

to develop a Recovery Care Plan that identifies servicemember and family 

goals, and the resources they need to achieve them, such as assistive technology, education, employment, or housing. 

• Developing and implementing an Education and Employment Initiative 

for wounded, ill, and injured servicemembers designed to utilize existing 

education benefits, to prepare and align wounded, ill, and injured servicemembers to DOD civilian positions. 

• Ensuring a high standard for facilities caring for Wounded Warriors. Especially key are first rate hospitals as well as facilities and trained staff for 

the Service Wounded Warrior Programs—designed to ensure exemplary 

support for Wounded Warriors and their families. 

• Working with the VA to create Virtual Lifetime Electronic Records, a key 

administration initiative, which is critical to improving veteran care and 

services by enhancing the availability of administrative and health information. 

The fiscal year 2012 budget request includes $2.3 billion for the enduring WII program (Table 9). Of this amount, $415 million provides for the continued support of 

cutting edge Wounded, Ill, and Injured medical research, through both the Defense 

Health Program and the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency. This research 

is highly focused on psychological health/Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) 

and Traumatic Brain Injuries (TBI), but also includes prosthetics, vision and hearing loss, and other conditions directly relevant to the injuries our soldiers are currently receiving on the battlefield. 


504per9.eps
211 

Disability Evaluation System/Integrated Disability Evaluation System 

The genesis of the Disability Evaluation System (DES) is the Career Compensation Act of 1949. The DES was relatively unchanged until 2007. As a result of public 

concern and congressional interest, the Senior Oversight Committee chartered the 

DES Pilot in November 2007. The SOC vision for the DES Pilot was to create a 

‘‘Servicemember Centric’’ seamless and transparent DES, administered jointly by 

the DOD and VA. 

DOD and VA launched the DES Pilot at the three major military treatment facilities (Walter Reed, Bethesda, and Malcolm Grow) in the National Capital Region 

(NCR) on November 21, 2007. The DES Pilot successfully created a seamless process 

that delivers DOD benefits to wounded, ill and injured servicemembers and VA benefits to servicemembers as soon as possible following release from duty. DOD found 

the DES Pilot to be a faster, fairer, more efficient system and, as a result, the SOC 

Co-chairs (Deputy Secretary of Defense and Deputy Secretary of Veterans Affairs) 

on July 30, 2010, directed worldwide implementation of the process beginning in October 2010 and to be completed at the end of September 2011. On December 31, 

2010, the first Integrated Disability Evaluation System (IDES) site became operational, which marked the end of the pilot, and the name was formally changed to 

the IDES. 

The IDES, similar to the pilot, streamlines the DES process so that the member 

receives a single set of physical disability examinations conducted according to VA 

examination protocols, proposed disability ratings prepared by VA that both DOD 

and VA can use, and processing by both Departments to ensure the earliest possible 

delivery of disability benefits. Both Departments use the VA protocols for disability 

examination and the proposed VA disability rating to make their respective determinations. DOD determines fitness for duty and compensates for unfitting conditions incurred in the line of duty (Title 10), while VA compensates for all disabilities 

incurred or aggravated in line of duty during active military, naval, or air service 

for which a disability rating of 10 percent or higher is awarded and also determines 

eligibility for other VA benefits and services (Title 38). The IDES permits both Departments to provide disability benefits at the earliest point allowed under both titles. Servicemembers who separate or retire (nondisability) may still apply to the 

VA for service-connected disability compensation. 

In summary, the IDES features a servicemember-centric design, simpler, faster, 

and more consistent evaluations and compensation, single medical exam and disability rating, seamless transition to Veteran status, case management advocacy, 

and establishment of a servicemember relationship with the VA prior to separation. 

It also provides increased transparency through better information flow to servicemembers and their families and a reduced gap between separation/retirement from 

Service to receipt of VA benefits. Active component members completed the program 

37 percent faster than a sample of legacy DES cases. As of April 11, 2011, cumulative IDES enrollment is 21,328 servicemembers with 6,893 completing the program by medical separation, retirement, or return to duty and 13,473 remaining enrolled. 

DOD is partnering closely with the Department of Veterans Affairs as we aggressively move toward IDES implementation at all 139 CONUS and OCONUS sites by 

30 September 2011. 

The impact of each stage of the IDES expansion and cumulative DES population 

is shown below: 

• Stage I—West Coast & Southeast (October–December 2010)—(completed) 

58 percent 

• Stage II—Rocky Mountain & Southwest Region (January–March 2011)— 

(completed) 73 percent 

• Stage III—Midwest & Northeast (April–June 2011)—90 percent 

• Stage IV—Outside Continental United States (OCONUS)/CONUS (July– 

September 2011)—100 percent 

IDES constitutes a major improvement over the legacy DES and both DOD and 

VA are fully committed to the Worldwide expansion of IDES. The Department is, 

however, continuously exploring new ways to improve the current system. The Secretaries of Defense and Veterans Affairs are currently exploring several options to 

shorten the overall length of the disability evaluation process from its current goal 

of 295 calendar days. In addition, the departments are also looking closely at stages 

of the disability evaluation system that are outside of timeliness tolerances and developing options to bring these stages within goal. We are committed to working 

closely with Congress in exploring new initiatives that can further advance the efficiency and effectiveness of the disability evaluation process. 

212 

Transition Initiatives 

To strengthen our Transition Assistance Program (TAP) and reinforce its value 

to servicemembers and their families, the Department, in collaboration, with our 

partners at the Departments of Veterans Affairs (VA) and Labor (DOL) is committed to moving TAP from a traditional event-driven approach to a modern, innovative lifecycle approach. We are shifting from an end of military life-cycle event to 

an outcome based model that will measure success not only on the number of 

servicemembers who use the TAP process, but also on the number of transitioning 

servicemembers and their families who find the TAP process beneficial in assisting 

them with their life goals, military career progression, and/or new careers/meaningful employment outside of uniformed service. We will be implementing this strategic 

plan with focuses on information technology, strategic communications, and resources and performance management. The end-state for the TAP overhaul will be 

a population of servicemembers who have the knowledge, skills, and abilities to empower themselves to make informed career decisions, be competitive in the global 

work force and become positive contributors to their community as they transition 

from military to civilian life. 

As part of this effort, we launched the DOD Career Decision Toolkit in August 

2010. The Toolkit was developed in collaboration with the Military Services and our 

TAP partners at the Department of Veterans Affairs and Department of Labor to 

help simplify the learning curve for transitioning servicemembers with the information, tools, and resources they need to succeed in the next phase of their lives. The 

toolkit uses the latest technology to consolidate the very best teaching materials 

from all the Service branches and provides thousands of on-demand resources to 

servicemembers. It is interactive, simple to use and portable. The toolkit includes: 

• More than 3,000 on-demand information and planning resources 

• Transition subjects such as career exploration, financial planning, resume 

creation, interviewing skills and compensation negotiation 

• Tools that enable servicemembers to catalogue their military skills, training, and experience in ways that transfer to civilian sector 

• Post-Service benefits and resources 

• Resources that allow users to self-assess individual transition needs and 

plan personalized options 

We are developing an ‘‘end-to-end’’ virtual TAP delivery vehicle delivery platform 

that will provide the back-bone of the transformed TAP program, integrating the 

Guard and Reserve components, as well as expanding services available to family 

members. 

DOD has also played a supporting role with the Office of Personnel Management 

on the initiative to increase hiring veterans in all Federal agencies. This is now recognized as President Obama’s Veterans Employment Initiative that directs all Executive Agencies to increase veteran employment. TAP is one of the programs we will 

use to educate and inform servicemembers about Federal Service career opportunities. 

MILITARY FAMILY & COMMUNITY SUPPORT

The fiscal year 2012 budget continues to reflect the decision to shift funding for 

family support programs that are enduring—i.e., programs that will not disappear 

as combat deployments and war funding decline—from the OCO budget to the base 

budget. 

The fiscal year 2012 budget includes $8.3 billion (Table 13 ) for family support 

programs vital to the morale and well-being of our military members and their families. Key programs include: 

• Child Care and Youth Programs: Includes funding for child care, child 

and youth development programs, National Guard Youth Challenge Program, and child development centers. The fiscal year 2012 funding provides 

childcare spaces for over 200,000 children. 

• Morale, Welfare, and Recreation: Includes funding for Community Support activities, recreation programs, voluntary education and tuition assistance, temporary duty lodging, and revenue generating programs. 

• Warfighter & Family Services: Includes funding for Family Support Centers and for counseling support services for Active Duty, National Guard, 

and Reserve members and their families. 

• Commissary: Operations are appropriated with the Defense Commissary 

Agency (DeCA) Working Capital Fund. The DeCA operates 250 stores at 

military installations around the world and employ a workforce that consists of over 14,700 civilian full-time equivalents. 

213 

• Department of Defense Education Activity (DODEA) Schools: fiscal year 

2012 budget supports the education of 94,503 students in 124 schools in 12 

countries and 33,779 students in 70 schools in 7 States, Puerto Rico, and 

Guam. 

• Spouse Employment: Funds tuition assistance and intern programs to 

support military spouses’ employment opportunities, with full funding for 

the My Career Advancement Account (MyCAA) Program ($190 million) and 

funds to support the Military Spouse Federal Intern Program to assist in 

securing positions in other Federal agencies ($17 million). 

Family Support—Joint Family Support Assistance Program 

On January 24th of this year at a ceremony held at the White House, the President, Mrs. Obama and Dr. Biden formally released the results of the Presidential 

Study Directive on Military Families endorsed by all the Cabinet Secretaries. This 

report was the result of an unprecedented level of intense collaboration between 

Federal agencies at the direction of the President, taking a whole of government approach to address the needs of military members and families by leveraging the collective resources and expertise of the entire Cabinet. 

The work reflected in the report was conducted by the Military Family Interagency Policy Committee (IPC), which included representatives from every cabinet 

agency, and identified and addressed the most pressing military family issues faced 

by soldiers, sailors, airman, marines, and coastguardsmen in the Active, Guard, and 

Reserve ranks, veterans, and especially families of the fallen. The IPC identified 

four priority areas that the Cabinet agencies would rally together to address: 

• The first: improving the well-being and psychological health of military 

families by expanding access to counseling, protecting families from abusive 

financial practices and reducing homelessness among our veterans. 

• The second: ensuring that military children are receiving the support and 

education they need thrive, especially when a parent is deployed and when 

making the difficult transition between different communities and schools. 

• The third: expanding career development and educational opportunities 

for military spouses, including opportunities for Federal employment and 

working with the private sector to harness the incredible talents of spouses 

and veterans. 

• The fourth: increasing the availability and quality of child care for 

servicemembers with children, including the many single parents serving 

the military. 

The IPC has now entered the implementation phase of the report, efforts which 

are now well underway. 

Again, while the Presidential Study Directive and the work of the IPC represent 

an unprecedented level of collaborative effort that recognizes the service and sacrifice of our military members, veterans, and especially their families, supporting 

military families in the long term simply cannot be the work of government alone. 

Child Care 

The Department continues to build child capacity that supports Reserve component families while the servicemember is deployed, geographically dispersed active 


504per10.eps
214 

duty military families, and servicemembers living in areas in the continental United 

States where on-installation military child care is unavailable. An initiative to expand the availability of quality child care programs is underway in 13 pilot States. 

These States were selected based on multiple factors such as residential/demographic information and locations where State’s efforts to improve the quality of 

child care are in tandem with DOD. In addition, an analysis of State licensing and 

oversight standards for the pilot States will guide efforts to provide training and 

technical assistance to improve quality of child care. Central to the success of this 

strategy is the placement of a Child Care Liaison in each pilot State who will work 

to assist in developing State-specific strategies that recognize the unique challenges 

and assets of the State and local communities. This individual will be tasked with 

developing communication strategies among various State partners to reduce duplication of effort and ensure resources are effectively utilized. 

Youth Programs 

Military youth make tremendous sacrifices and they deserve high quality programs and services that meet their needs. The Department has been recognized for 

providing dynamic, innovative and successful youth programs to nearly 660,000 

military children and youth between the ages of 6–18 years on a daily basis around 

the globe. We are proud of the vital programs and services offered for youth during 

out-of-school hours. Today, youth programs are available where military families 

live—whether on military installations or in civilian communities. The programs are 

expanding by developing partnerships with other youth-serving organizations to 

augment the DOD programs; thereby offering a variety of additional resources to 

promote positive youth development. Military youth programs prepare youth to 

meet the challenges of military life, adolescence, and adulthood with programs and 

activities such as physical fitness and sports, arts and recreation, training in leadership, life skills and career/volunteer opportunities, mentoring, intervention and support services. DOD’s enhanced youth programming also supports character and leadership development, sound education choices, and healthy life skills. 

Family Readiness Programs 

The Department provides family readiness programs through a network of Family 

Centers at installations worldwide that seek to prepare military families to effectively navigate the challenges of daily living experienced in the unique context of 

military service. Family Centers provide information and referral; training; and 

counseling opportunities to educate families about the potential challenges they may 

face; equip them with the skills to competently function in the face of such challenges; and increase awareness of the supportive resources available to them. The 

focus is to assist families with deployment; relocation; spouse employment; family 

life education including parenting; personal financial management; volunteer opportunities; and non-medical counseling. 

In fiscal year 2007, Congress mandated that the Department implement a Joint 

Family Support Assistance Program (JFSAP) to augment existing family programs 

and provide outreach and support to Active Duty, Guard, and Reserve military 

members and families who are geographically separated from military installations. 

Congress also mandated that the JFSAP coordinate family assistance programs and 

activities provided by Military OneSource, Military and Family Life Counselor Program, counselors, DOD, other Federal agencies, State and local agencies, and nonprofit entities. In 2008, the Department implemented JFSAP teams at National 

Guard Joint Force Headquarters in all States and Territories to work with military 

and civilian resources to provide support and services to military families in the 

communities where they live. 

Family Advocacy Programs 

The DOD Family Advocacy Program (FAP) addresses physical, sexual, and emotional abuse and neglect involving Active component military personnel and family 

members who are victims and abusers. On each military installation with commandsponsored families, there is a FAP that provides services in prevention, identification, intervention, and treatment of child abuse and neglect and domestic abuse. We 

evaluate the effectiveness of FAP through rates of family maltreatment and outcome 

measures for prevention and treatment. Through 9 years of high stresses on our 

families due to wartime deployments our rates of such family maltreatment have 

remained relatively stable but we continue to monitor this carefully because of the 

cumulative effects of such stresses. For 2 consecutive years 85 percent of our new 

parents who have participated in the New Parent Support Program for at least 6 

months have had no substantiated child abuse or neglect the following year, and 

90 percent of substantiated spouse abusers who completed FAP treatment have had 

215 

no substantiated spouse abuse the following year, and we are working to develop 

additional outcome measures. 

MILITARY ONESOURCE

Military OneSource offers free, convenient, 24/7/365 days access to confidential resource and referral support for servicemembers and their families to improve the 

quality of their lives and the effectiveness of military community support efforts. 

Military OneSource provides over 22,000 non-medical, short-term, solution focused 

counseling sessions per month delivered face to face, telephonically, and on line. The 

number of counseling sessions provided by Military OneSource has increased 930 

percent since fiscal year 2005 with customer satisfaction consistently remaining well 

above 90 percent. Other Military OneSource services include relocation assistance, 

financial counseling, free tax filing services, document translation, child care and 

education resources, special needs consultation, elder care consultation, on-line library resources, and health coaching. Military OneSource Education and Career 

consultants assist almost 3,000 military spouses weekly with information regarding 

portable careers; education, training and licensing requirements; resume and interview preparation; and identifying employment resources. Additionally, we are increasing opportunities for military spouse careers through expansion of the Army 

Spouse Employment Partnership to Marine Corps, Navy, and Air Force spouses. Additionally, Military OneSource serves as a conduit to the Wounded Warrior Resource 

Center. 

Wounded Warrior Resource Center 

The Wounded Warrior Resource Center (WWRC), accessed via Military 

OneSource, provides immediate assistance to wounded, ill, and injured servicemembers, their families, and caregivers with issues related to health care, facilities, 

or benefits. The WWRC works collaboratively with the Military Services’ wounded 

warrior programs and the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) to ensure callers are 

promptly provided a specific plan of action to address their concerns within 96 business hours of contacting the WWRC. In fiscal year 2010, 2,046 cases for wounded 

warriors were handled. The top three issues concerning callers were health care (38 

percent), military benefits (20 percent), and VA (20 percent) benefits. 

Dependents’ Education Programs 

DOD is committed to ensuring that all children of military families are provided 

an education that prepares them to be successful in their careers, leading contributors in their communities and productive citizens in the 21st century. The DODEA 

provides quality pre-kindergarten through 12th grade educational opportunities and 

services to eligible military dependents around the globe. DODEA is committed to 

providing a rigorous college preparatory curriculum and closing the achievement 

gap in schools. DODEA schools consistently score very highly on the National Assessment of Education Progress, otherwise known as the ‘‘Nation’s Report Card’’. 

Of the approximately 1.2 million military dependent children, DODEA educates 

approximately 86,000 in 195 schools in 12 foreign countries, 7 States, Guam, and 

Puerto Rico. Where DODEA schools in overseas locations are not an option, DODEA 

also assists eligible military dependent students through a tuition reimbursement 

program. 

DODEA has a proud history of providing quality education for children of military 

families, the majority of which has been taught in traditional classrooms. As an organization dedicated to continually improving the education experience for our students DODEA launched its Virtual High School in Fall 2010 with approximately 45 

course offering as a supplemental program in a variety of curriculum areas. The 

DODEA Virtual High School (DVHS) is serving approximately 891 students with enrollments totaling 940 thus far. Through the Virtual School Program, DODEA has 

been able to accomplish the mission of addressing secondary education needs for 

students in transition, where courses are not offered in a local school setting or 

when student situations preclude enrollment via a local school such as due to medical illness, schedule conflicts or other challenges identified by the local schools. 

Because the majority of children of military families are educated in public 

schools across our Nation, DODEA champions world-class education for military 

children in public schools by supporting military-connected local education agencies 

(LEAs). Through an expanded authority, set to expire in 2013, DODEA shares its 

expertise, experience and resources to assist military children during transitions, to 

sharpen the expertise of teachers and administrators in meeting the needs of military children, and to provide assistance to LEAs on deployment support for military 

children. 

216 

DODEA, through its Partnership Program, has provided grants to over 60 LEAs 

school districts, in over 800 schools and serving more than 540,000, of which the 

nearly 41 percent are from military families. We are approving grants to help improve schools, even some that did not make their respective States’ adequate yearly 

progress. All grants focus on enhancing student learning opportunities, student 

achievement, and educator professional development at military-connected schools. 

Some grants also have a counseling component that focuses on easing the challenges 

that military students face due to transitions and deployments. The grant seeks to 

build capacity to improve school climate as well as social and academic results in 

schools serving military children. 

The demands of extended wartime add to the ever-present challenges faced by 

military families. Research suggests that the children of deployed parents collectively experience more stress than their peers. While they are often described as a 

resilient group, the cumulative effects of multiple moves and significant parental absences can erode this resilience. 

The Department is working collaboratively with the Department of Education to 

improve the understanding of the challenges facing military children, and what is 

necessary to ensure that military-connected students receive an outstanding education from ‘‘cradle through career.’’ This effort requires a focus on not only militaryconnected students, but on their families, their communities, their schools and their 

teachers. 

Further, performance data that would allow us to identify and ultimately make 

recommendations to improve the educational outcomes for military children attending public schools is currently not available. Data collection and analysis are critically important to directing educational resources to those schools who are most impacted by the enrollment of military children. As a result, I worked with the Department of Education in support of a new means of collecting and reporting performance data of military-connected children as part of the reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act. 

DOD has extended the Military and Family Life Counselor (MFLC) program to 

support and augment military-connected schools. MFLCs provide non-medical support to faculty, staff, parents, and children for issues amenable to short-term problem resolution such as school adjustment issues, deployment and reunion adjustments, and parent-child communications. There are MFLCs serving in 255 militaryconnected public schools and 65 DODEA schools. Since the end of 2009, DOD has 

provided children of active duty military with free, unlimited access to online tutoring, academic skills courses, and homework assistance in math, science, social studies, and English for kindergarten through 12th grade (K–12) students through 

Tutor.com. Professional tutors assist military dependent students with completing 

homework, studying for standardized tests, and writing papers. The program provided 162,570 sessions during fiscal year 2010. 

Recognizing that supporting military children takes a school-wide effort, DOD offers professional development to help inform school staff of the academic challenges 

that these children face. These include training modules and sessions on special 

education, as well as ‘‘Students at the Center,’’ an interactive educational resource 

for military families, military leaders, and school leaders. 

Finally, in an effort to ensure all of our students receive an education of the highest quality, I have directed two assessments on the effectiveness of DOD in meeting 

the educational needs of all military children and on the physical conditions of the 

public schools located on military installations. The first assessment will examine 

the effectiveness of DOD in meeting the educational needs of military families, layout the full scope of issues, and develop specific action plans for leveraging success 

and addressing deficiencies. We will pay particular attention to ensuring a world 

class preparatory instruction for science, technology, engineering, and mathematics 

(STEM) and foreign language programs. The second assessment will address the 

physical condition of the 160 public schools located on our military installations in 

the United States. 

MWR Support to Troops in Combat 

Support is critical to helping troops communicate with family and friends, stay 

physically and mentally fit, and reduce stress and boredom. The Department funds 

over 1,000 free MWR Internet Cafes in Iraq and Afghanistan and 135 portable satellite units, known as Cheetahs, to support remote locations. Cheetahs run off 

Humvees and can be set up and taken down in 20 minutes. Other MWR support 

includes fitness, sports and recreation equipment, portable movie theaters, and 

large screen televisions with DVD and video projection players and professional entertainment. The Department shipped over 264,400 paperback books and 231,974 

Playaways (self-contained digital audio books) in fiscal year 2010. Playaways now 

217 

surpass paperback books in popularity with troops citing ease of use, convenience, 

and ability to read at night without electricity. Included in the Playaway inventory 

were 17,678 Dari and Pashto basic language/Afghan culture and 5,535 Arabic language Playaways. The free DOD MWR Online Library offers free downloads of audio 

and e-books and access to up-to-date data bases offering recreation, education and 

career transition support. The ability of injured servicemembers to engage in recreation and sports is a very important component of rehabilitation and reintegration. 

Under a contract with Penn State University, MWR specialists are trained to work 

with medical personnel, wounded warrior units, community parks and recreation, 

and non-profits to ensure inclusive and adaptive sports and recreation are part of 

installation MWR and community recreation programs. The DOD Paralympics’ Program continues to provide rehabilitation support and mentoring to injured servicemembers/veterans who have sustained various types of injuries. Paralympics’ military events are conducted at 4 DOD and 14 VA Medical Treatment Facilities, 29 

Army Warrior Transition Units, 7 Marine Corps Wounded Warrior Battalions/Detachments, and 3 Navy and 3 Air Force locations. As an adjunct, training is well 

underway for the second annual Warrior Games Competition in Colorado Springs 

in May. 

DOD–State Initiatives 

DOD continues to work with State governments to educate their policy makers 

on the life-challenges faced by servicemembers and their families and to ensure that 

State-level policies do not disadvantage military families due to their transient life 

style. States have addressed several key quality of life issues, to include the impact 

of frequent school transitions experienced by military children, the loss of income 

by military spouses as a result of military moves, and the enforcement of the congressionally-mandated DOD predatory lending regulation. The response from States 

has affirmed their commitment to supporting the well-being of the Nation’s fighting 

force. For example, 35 States have approved the Interstate Compact on Educational 

Opportunity for Military Children, 38 States (plus DC) now provide eligibility for 

unemployment compensation to military spouses, and 32 States (plus DC) enforce 

the DOD predatory lending regulation. The Department is continuing this effort in 

the 2011 State legislative sessions with strong emphasis on support of military families through the issues listed above, plus provisions to protect military parents in 

child custody decisions and provisions that can expedite occupational licensure processes to allow military spouses to get to work faster in a new State. Additionally, 

the Department is partnering with the Uniform Law Commission and the PEW 

Trust on the States to inform State legislators of the new Uniform Military and 

Overseas Voters Act which simplifies the absentee voting process by making it more 

uniform, convenient, and efficient. 

Military Voting Update 

The Department ‘‘rolled out’’ three sets of online voting assistance tools in the 

2010 election: an online registration tool, an online Federal Write-In Absentee Ballot 

(back-up ballot) tool, and, in partnership with 17 States, an online absentee ballot 

delivery tool (up from only 8 States in 2008). In fact, 31 States had an online blank 

ballot delivery process in place for the 2010 election, and all States provided ballots 

electronically upon request, providing tens of thousands of ballots almost instantaneously. This gave the voter more time to return the voted ballot by mail. Online 

and print advertising was used to implement an intensive voter outreach campaign 

to increase awareness and use of the tools on the Federal Voting Assistance Program (FVAP) FVAP.gov Web site which stresses direct-to-voter assistance. The 

FVAP.gov website usage almost doubled over the 2006 election cycle, and the backup ballot wizard usage increased three-fold. 

The Department implemented worldwide expedited return of ballots for overseas 

military voters. The Military Postal System Agency and U.S. Postal Service (USPS) 

went beyond requirements of the MOVE Act by providing Express Mail return delivery rather than simply expedited return. The result was 92 percent of overseas military ballots were returned to local election officials from Military Post Offices in less 

than 7 days, with the worldwide average of 5.2 days ballot return delivery time. 

The President’s fiscal year 2012 budget fully supports the FVAP program. Total 

O&M and RDT&E funding for FVAP was $17.425 million for fiscal year 2010, 

$46.481 million for fiscal year 2011, and the President’s fiscal year 2012 budget request for FVAP is $32.353 million. FVAP will build on the success of the 2010 election to improve even more the voting opportunity in the 2012 election cycle for military and overseas voters. 

218 

Special Needs: New DOD Office 

The NDAA for Fiscal Year 2010, Section 563 (10 U.S.C., 1781c) required the Secretary to establish an Office of Community Support for Military Families with Special Needs (OSN); the Military Departments to expand coordination of assignment 

for military families with special needs for assignments to and within the United 

States, and to expand community support to military families with special needs. 

It also required an annual report on the gaps in services, ways to address the gaps 

and future legislation. 

The OSN was officially established in September 2010 within the office of the 

Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Military Community and Family Policy 

that is committed to military families with special needs. The Office has nine staff 

who have experience and educational backgrounds in special education, early intervention, physical and occupational therapy and communications. The Office submitted the first annual report to Congress in 2010 and is currently preparing the 

second report due April 28, 2011. Costs for the new office in fiscal year 2010: $1.3 

million; in fiscal year 2011: $1.4 million; and fiscal year 2012 [requested]: $1.4 million. 

Voluntary Education Opportunities 

DOD is committed to making educational opportunities available to our servicemembers and does this through 350 military education sites worldwide to include 

Iraq, Afghanistan, Kosovo, Sinai, Qatar and Kuwait. During fiscal year 2010, our 

Voluntary Education program helped fund 857,786 enrollments by 322,964 servicemembers, which resulted in our servicemembers earning 43,510 diplomas and 1,783 

certifications/licensures. Servicemembers are ‘‘blending’’ their course work, taking 

both traditional and on-line courses, with approximately 71 percent of servicemembers taking some courses on-line. Due to the growth in on-line enrollments and 

servicemembers attending schools off our military installations, DOD has established a policy requiring all post-secondary institutions participating in the DOD 

Tuition Assistance (TA) program execute a memorandum of understanding (MOU) 

with DOD which sets certain standards of conduct for all institutions, whether they 

are on- or off-base, traditional or on-line. DOD is also developing an automated 

tracking system to document all concerns and complaints by students, DOD personnel and schools. The system will track the complaint and record its resolution. 

DOD is also partnering with the Departments of Education and Veterans Affairs to 

address common issues concerning administration of Federal education benefit programs as they relate to the three agencies involved and the benefits provided to 

servicemembers and veterans. 

Military Commissaries 

The commissary continues to be one of the most popular non-pay compensation 

benefits that our military members (Active, Guard, or Reserve,) retirees, and their 

families enjoy. Operated by the Defense Commissary Agency (DeCA), this integral 

element of the total compensation package not only does much to enhance the quality of life for military families, but also provides an excellent savings from them. 

Last fiscal year, the commissary provided direct savings to commissary customers 

of $2.69 billion for a taxpayer cost of $1.3 billion. Providing savings on the patrons’ 

overall purchases of 31.5 percent, for those patrons who consistently use their commissary, savings can amount to nearly $4,400 per year for an average family of four, 

over $2,400 for a couple, and more than $1,500 for a single servicemember. 

Perhaps most importantly, the commissary enables troops to focus on their mission when deployed, improving retention by providing a ‘‘sense of community’’ for 

military personnel and their families, and providing access to American products 

around the world in a safe, secure shopping environment. 

As an organization, DeCA is a model for departmental efficiencies. DeCA has a 

proven history of taking cost out of the commissary system without decreasing the 

value of the benefit provided. In fact, when measured in constant dollars, DeCA’s 

operating costs are only slightly more than one-half of what they were when the 

Agency activated on October 1, 1991. DeCA’s efficiency track record continues with 

a fiscal year 2012 budget submission of $1,376.8 million. 

CIVILIAN PERSONNEL POLICIES

Strategic Human Capital Management, Competency Management, and Civilians in 

the Total Force 

The Department is making progress toward developing a more systematic approach and enterprise tools for strategic human capital planning that covers over 

750,000 civilian employees in over 600 occupations. The total number of DOD civilVerDate Aug 31 2005 09:55 Jan 25, 2012 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00224 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6621 Y:\BORAWSKI\DOCS\68089.TXT JUNE PsN: JUNEB
219 

ians has evolved from 777,844 in fiscal year 2010 to 790,497 in fiscal year 2011 and 

will stabilize at 783,702 in fiscal year 2012. For example, a Competency Management Framework has been designed that includes plans for the phased development 

and deployment of a tool for competency assessments beginning with mission-critical 

occupations. A proof-of-concept Enterprise Competency Management will undergo 

validation testing this summer and the long-range plan is to replace multiple competency assessment tools with a single tool for use across the Department. Another 

example is the integration of strategic workforce planning, competency management, hiring improvement, and leadership development initiatives to ensure that 

the Department can recruit, retain, and develop an agile, competency-focused civilian workforce throughout the employee life-cycle that is responsive to swiftly changing mission demands and complex challenges. These are multi-year initiatives that 

are intended to improve the Department’s ability to rapidly grow, contract, and shift 

the work force in response to emerging mission and capability requirements. The 

Department also recognizes the need for integrated Total Force planning to better 

assess and manage the mix of Active and Reserve military, civilian, and contract 

requirements in order to leverage the best talent source available to provide shortterm, mid-range, and longer capabilities. 

Hiring Reform 

In 2010, the Department made positive and meaningful progress toward reforming its civilian hiring practices. DOD completed all mandates of the President’s Hiring Reform Memorandum of May 2010, including the following: 

• Elimination of Knowledge, Skill and Abilities (KSAs)-style essays when 

applicants first apply for Federal employment; 

• Allowing the submission of resumes and cover letters; 

• Using the category rating approach to determine best qualified candidates; 

• Increasing Hiring Manager involvement and accountability; 

• Improving the speed and quality of the hiring process; and 

• Informing applicants of their application status at key stages in the process. 

While meeting these mandates, the Department pushed its hiring reform efforts 

in other ways. DOD has reduced the number of days it takes to hire an employee 

by developing a common business process, deploying tools to automate key steps in 

the hiring process, and providing manager and human resource specialist training 

and job aids. In addition, the Department’s arsenal of hiring-related metrics and 

measurements has grown, thereby enabling transparency and targeted improvements to the hiring process. 

In fiscal year 2010, the Department processed nearly 250,000 hiring actions. 

While doing so, DOD reduced its external hiring timeline by 25 percent from the 

fiscal year 2009 baseline of 155 days to 116 days. This achievement exceeded DOD’s 

fiscal year 2010 goal of 140 days. In addition, time to fill for all hiring actions (internal and external) was 75 days. As a result of this progress on the external timeline, 

DOD’s yearly targets were adjusted aggressively downward to 101 days (originally 

112 days) in fiscal year 2011, and to 80 days in fiscal year 2012, with quarterly 

goals in place to monitor progress. In the first quarter of fiscal year 2011, DOD continued to reduce its external hiring timeline to 114 days and DOD expanded its key 

hiring metrics to include tracking time to hire for ‘‘all hires.’’ 

Another area of improvement is the automation of DOD’s hiring process. DOD 

procured an automated staffing tool in late fiscal year 2010 and is deploying it 

across DOD as an interim solution to approximately 70 percent of the Department 

in fiscal year 2011, and to 100 percent in fiscal year 2012. In addition, DOD is working with its components to continue improving hiring business processes, and to 

apply enterprise technology where feasible. 

DOD is also partnering with OPM on the re-engineering of USAJOBS, the job 

posting portal used by the Federal Government, with phase 1 (of 3) scheduled for 

deployment during calendar year 2011. DOD, along with DHS and other agencies 

large and small, is providing project leadership and personnel to OPM to complete 

this aggressive and ambitious undertaking. The USAJOBS 3.0 project is a high visibility project and DOD is the largest consumer of USAJOBS services. Major benefits 

to the Department include: 

• Improved job search functionality and results relevancy 

• Open architecture that encourages increased interoperability with 

Human Resource Information Technology (HRIT) products 

• A common repository for resumes and applicant documentation 

220 

• Improved functionality in the areas of assessments, recruitment, reporting, and career exploration 

The deployment of an enterprise staffing tool and improvements to USAJOBS are 

critical initiatives; however, without the participation and engagement from our Hiring Managers and HR Professionals, these efforts have isolated impacts. As such, 

a primary DOD objective is to foster and encourage strong partnerships between 

Hiring Managers and HR Professionals. To assist these key stakeholders, DOD’s 

Hiring Reform website (http://www.cpms.osd.mil/HiringReform/) was recently relaunched with a new look, and includes approximately 24 products in the Hiring 

Managers Toolkit, which was recognized by OPM as a best practice. A webinar series is in development, with content based on the four phases of the hiring process 

outlined in the Toolkit. 

The initiatives outlined represent DOD’s approach to hiring reform implementation, an approach aligned with the Department’s overall mission, and with its Strategic Human Capital Management objectives. A key success criterion is the involvement of senior leadership. As reported previously, the Department continues to solicit and utilize its cadre of senior leaders to guide its efforts, communicate and campaign for process improvements, and provide leadership throughout each hiring reform effort. We will continue to monitor these efforts closely, as Hiring Reform remains a high priority for the Department. 

Civilian Leadership Development 

The Defense Civilian Emerging Leaders Program (DCELP), as authorized by the 

NDAA for Fiscal Year 2010, section 1112, fills a critical need, by focusing, for the 

first time on a corporate scale, on developing civilian leaders at the entry and midlevel. The Department recognizes the need for an improved model to attract, retain, 

and deliberately develop civilian leaders to support pipeline readiness and enhance 

bench strength. We have conducted a gap analysis between existing programs and 

NDAA, section 1112, and designed a program framework to create a new program 

to recruit and develop new DOD civilian leaders, using proven models such as the 

Presidential Management Fellows program. Recognizing the financial environment 

and to ensure we have a sound programmatic framework, we will implement a 

DCELP pilot in September 2011 with up to 100 participants at the General Schedule (GS) 7 through 11 level from the Acquisition, Financial Management, and 

Human Resources career fields. The DCELP amalgamates leadership and technical 

proficiency. 

This new program will be additive to the Department’s current leadership programs, which include the Executive Leadership Development Program (ELDP) and 

the DOD Senior Leader Development Program (DSLDP). DSLDP was established in 

2008 to meet emergent leadership needs and provides a competency-based approach 

to the deliberate development of senior civilian leaders (GS 14 or 15 and equivalent 

grades) with the enterprise-wide perspective needed to lead organizations and programs and achieve results in the joint, interagency, and multi-national environments. We are pleased to report that DSLDP is entering its third annual cohort. 

DSLDP is a critical feeder pipeline for executive talent. Established in 1985, ELDP 

provides mid-level civilians (GS–12 through GS–14 and equivalent grades) with an 

extensive exposure to the roles and mission of the DOD and Interagency partners 

and an increased understanding of, and appreciation for, today’s warfighters 

through intensive hands-on field experiences. Both programs are aligned with the 

21st century competency framework and designed to ensure application of critical 

leader competencies and have garnered success for their target senior grade populations. These highly competitive Department-wide programs will serve as building 

blocks for the new leader development framework. 

In addition to the programs just mentioned, another critical building block in this 

arena is training managers and supervisors. Pursuant to the NDAA for Fiscal Year 

2010, Section 1113, the Department has established a holistic training curriculum 

and baseline learning objectives for each training topic. We are piloting this training 

in the Spring 2011 and will soon be turning our attention to developing the curriculum for refresher training, which the NDAA requires occur at least every 3 

years. Also, we are partnering with OPM and vendors to design assessment tools 

that will help predict interest and success for aspiring supervisors, as well as, developmental tools for current supervisors. Those assessment tools should be available 

for use by October 2011. 

Executive Talent Management Initiatives 

In a demanding year, confronted with cutbacks related to Efficiency Initiative directing the drawdown of over 200 Civilian Senior Executives, freeze on pay increases and reduced funding for performance awards, we continue to seek new and 

221 

innovative ways to incentivize and retain our Senior Executives. This year, the Department focused its efforts on Talent Management initiatives that will continue to 

prove our commitment to the Department’s senior leadership in ways not tied to 

monetary incentives, but that will provide for career development, personal growth, 

and enhanced readiness of our executives. 

Through Talent Management Panels held in the summer of 2010, DOD assessed 

the readiness of its executives, slated executives for critical mission positions and 

identified developmental and career broadening assignments and programs. 

Through this process, our executive cadre received targeted feedback to help identify 

competency gaps and recommend training and development opportunities. At the 

enterprise level, the Department was able to identify and address mission critical 

gaps in its workforce. As a result of the 2010 panels, DOD has further refined its 

automated tool for Talent Management & Succession Planning, to include the development of additional capabilities for the executive’s benefit. 

DOD has also implemented several developmental programs to increase an executive’s proficiency level on specific competencies. At the enterprise level, we concluded a successful pilot of the Joint Executive Management course, which focuses 

on improving business acumen in a joint environment for a DOD executive. We also 

began the design of a Department-wide orientation program, entitled ‘‘Vanguard’’ 

which will include an emphasized focus on the national security perspective. At the 

individual level, we implemented a 360-assessment and coaching program for executives’ self-improvement, and a mentoring and coaching program targeted at improving executives’ personal leadership skills. We will continue to look for further ways 

to improve the entire career lifecycle of our executives to ensure DOD possesses a 

world-class executive cadre capable of leading the Department and ensuring its 

readiness to fully support DOD’s warfighting efforts. 

Civilian Expeditionary Workforce 

The Department is working to better employ the talents of our civilian workforce 

to meet expeditionary mission challenges, especially those not directly related to 

war fighting. Global security challenges require adequate civilian capacity to conduct complex operations, including those missions that require close military-civilian 

planning and cooperation in theater. Since 2001, more than 43,000 Department civilians have been involved in contingency operations around the globe. Currently, 

from all sources, approximately 4,800 civilian employees are serving in the Central 

Command theater. 

In response to these imperatives, the Department institutionalized the Civilian 

Expeditionary Workforce (CEW) to provide deployable civilian experts to support 

military operations, contingencies, emergency operations, humanitarian missions, 

disaster relief, and stabilization and reconstruction operations. The CEW is designed to enhance the Department’s ability to work alongside and help build the capacity of partner defense ministries and provide surge support where needed. Today, 

the CEW is a Capability-Based Volunteers program. In the future, after the DOD 

Directive governing CEW is revalidated, the CEW will encompass a pre-identified 

subset of the Department’s emergency essential and volunteer civilian workforce by 

skill sets and capabilities, who are trained, ready, cleared, and equipped for rapid 

response and quick assimilation into new environments. Since June 2010, CEW deployments have increased by 51 percent, from 171 deployed civilians to 353 as of 

the end of February 2011. Civilians deployed under the CEW receive general and 

theatre-specific, urban training, and are eligible for the same health care benefits 

in-theatre as deployed military personnel, including medical evacuation and access 

to hospital services. 

With the support of Congress, the Department has obtained important incentives 

and benefits to help compensate for the inherent risks of deployment. The Department continues to identify pertinent issues and propose fully integrated solutions 

to ensure force health protection, surveillance, deployment benefits, and medical 

care for civilians who have been injured, wounded, or have contracted diseases while 

deployed in support of contingency operations. We have worked in partnership with 

OPM, the Department of State, and the Department of Labor to ensure all similarly-situated Federal civilians receive consistent and equitable benefits commensurate with the risks of deployment. In this endeavor, working with our partner agencies, we developed proposed legislation to provide a standard benefits package for 

all Federal employees. 

New DOD-wide Performance Management System, Redesigned Hiring, and Workforce Incentives 

The NDAA for Fiscal Year 2010 mandated new DOD-wide personnel authorities, 

including a fair, credible, and transparent performance management system that 

222 

links employee bonuses and other performance-based actions to performance appraisal, and redesigned appointment procedures that will better meet mission needs; 

and provided discretionary authority to establish the DOD Civilian Workforce Incentive Fund for incentive payments for individual and team performance and to attract applicants or retain employees with particular or superior qualifications or 

abilities. The NDAA requires these authorities to be developed in coordination with 

OPM and that their development, design, and implementation are subject to collective bargaining obligations. Executive Order 13522, Creating Labor Management 

Forums to Improve Delivery of Government Services, allows employees and their 

union representatives to have pre-decisional involvement in decisions relating to all 

workplace matters to the fullest extent practicable. 

The Department has been mindful of its responsibility to work with exclusive representatives of DOD employees, involve the workforce, and not constrain the development of the new authorities. In the interest of building an effective relationship 

between management and labor, the conference originally planned for April 2010 to 

begin exploring ideas for these authorities was postponed to give time for further 

collaborative discussions between labor and management with respect to a pre-design conference to help identify broad concepts for the NDAA personnel authorities 

mentioned above. The October 2010 reports to Congress covered the jointly designed, planned, and led New Beginnings Conference held in September 2010, the 

first mutually agreeable date. 

Since the September conference, DOD has continued to engage the DOD unions 

on these authorities. A joint planning group met in mid-December to identify requirements for the start-up of the design effort. A second planning meeting was held 

January 20, 2011, with follow-up teleconferences on February 4 and 11. There are 

three joint design teams—performance management, hiring, and workforce incentive 

fund—with equal representation between management and DOD unions. Each team 

has a management and labor co-lead. Team members are from the DOD components, OPM, and Federal Managers’ Association and include line managers, union 

officials, employees at various grade levels, and human resources professionals from 

the National Capital Region and well beyond. 

Marketing DOD Employment Opportunities 

The Department values the experience and commitment of our servicemembers 

and places special emphasis on supporting transitioning servicemembers, wounded 

warriors, and veterans in their search for employment. We continue our efforts to 

actively reach out to our veterans to assist them in their civilian employment search 

with aggressive marketing and outreach programs, transition assistance programs, 

career fairs, and benefits counseling and assistance. 

The Department continues this tradition in support of Executive Order 13518, the 

Veterans Employment Initiative. In January 2010, the Department stood up the 

DOD Veterans Employment Program Office to promote veterans recruitment, training and development throughout the Department. 

DOD aggressively promotes/markets veterans hiring through DOD’s Hiring Heroes Program, veterans outreach events, and assistance to veterans with navigating 

the application process in their search for employment. 

To facilitate hiring, the Department manages nationally recognized Hiring Heroes 

Career Fairs, conducting 8 to 10 events throughout the United States each year. 

These events are specifically designed for and marketed to wounded, ill, and injured 

servicemembers, transitioning military, veterans, and their families to assist them 

in their search for employment. Since April 2005, 40 Hiring Heroes Career Fairs 

have been conducted, reaching over 13,800 job seekers and 2,388 employers. In 2010 

alone, 9 career fairs were conducted, resulting in 297 placements. Six Hiring Heroes 

Career Fairs are scheduled for fiscal year 2011 at Fort Sam Houston, TX (2); Fort 

Riley, KS; Camp Pendleton, CA; Fort Lewis, WA; and Walter Reed Army Medical 

Center. These events are marketed through the military services, Transition Assistance Program Offices, Civilian Personnel Centers, Wounded Warrior Transition Brigades, Military Treatment Facilities, Department of Labor and Veterans Affairs, 

and numerous Veterans Service Organizations using posters, flyers, emails, 

Facebook, Twitter, Web sites, et cetera. 

The www.DODVets.com Web site provides veterans and transitioning servicemembers with information on employment opportunities, veterans’ preference, special hiring authorities, Q&As, as well as a calendar of recruitment events for veterans conducted throughout the United States. The Web site also provides Hiring 

Managers with information on veterans hiring authorities. 

The Student Training and Academic Recruitment (STAR) Program is another innovative recruitment program developed by the Department. Students are hired as 

on-campus representatives to promote DOD as the ‘‘Employer of Choice’’ and to marVerDate Aug 31 2005 09:55 Jan 25, 2012 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00228 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6621 Y:\BORAWSKI\DOCS\68089.TXT JUNE PsN: JUNEB
223 

ket (through peer-to-peer interactions such as information sessions, special events 

and one-on-one) DOD’s various and diverse employment and scholarship opportunities. The program is designed to create a cost effective way to market to and recruit 

students in academic studies which mirror DOD’s mission critical occupations and 

to provide a year-round DOD presence on campus. The main goal of the program 

is to build a competent, diverse, and a highly-skilled civilian workforce, ready to 

meet 21st century global challenges and to support the Department’s national security mission. The STAR Program is currently active at 5 universities, Michigan 

Technological University, Houghton, MI, University of Puerto Rico at Mayaguez, 

Mayaguez, PR, Tennessee State University, Nashville, TN, Morgan State University, Baltimore, MD and Rochester Institute of Technology/National Technical Institute for the Deaf, Rochester, NY. To date, the STAR program has resulted in permanent Federal career opportunities for 10 of the participating students. 

National Security Personnel System Transition 

The NDAA for Fiscal Year 2010 repealed the statutory authority for the National 

Security Personnel System (NSPS) and requires that all covered employees be 

transitioned by not later than January 1, 2012, to the statutory pay and personnel 

system that last applied or that would have applied if NSPS had never been implemented, as appropriate. The law also requires that employees not suffer a loss of 

or decrease in pay upon conversion out of NSPS due to its repeal. The rules of the 

gaining pay and personnel system apply to determine employee placements and pay 

setting. 

The termination of NSPS and the transition of all employees and positions are 

on schedule to be completed by the statutory deadline. Before drawdown began in 

late February 2010, there were approximately 226,000 employees covered by NSPS. 

Because 75 percent of them occupied positions with origins in the General Schedule 

(GS) system, the Department’s goal was to transition most employees back to GS 

during fiscal year 2010. The DOD components assessed their readiness and determined NSPS transition schedules based on the following criteria: least possible disruption to mission and hardship to employees, existence of classified positions under 

the successor personnel system, existence of legacy performance management systems, and information technology capability. 

During fiscal year 2010, approximately 172,000 employees (representing 76 percent of the NSPS population) were transitioned out of NSPS to GS. As of September 

30, 2010, approximately 53,000 employees remained covered by NSPS and will be 

transitioned in calenar year 2011—approximately 44,000 by the end of June, another 8,000 by October, and the remaining employees before the statutory deadline. 

Employees are being transitioned in calendar year 2011 to the acquisition workforce 

personnel demonstration project, Navy alternative personnel system (‘‘China Lake’’), 

new laboratory personnel demonstration projects as required by section 1105 of 

NDAA, and to GS. Employees going to GS during calendar year 2011 include those 

assigned to designated healthcare occupations for which the Department had long 

considered implementing alternative pay and qualification systems under special 

authority and those affected by special situations, including employees who were deployed or who were subject to 2011 BRAC actions. A report to Congress at the end 

of April 2010 described steps taken for the reclassification of NSPS positions and 

the initial plan for transitioning employees and organizations from NSPS. The first 

semiannual report on transition progress, transmitted in October 2010, provided information on the transition of employees to the GS system during fiscal year 2010. 

Reports at the end of April and October 2011 will include information about the 

transition of the remaining employees covered by NSPS. 

Disestablishment Initiatives 

In August 2010, Secretary Gates announced a set of initiatives aimed at increasing efficiencies, reducing overhead costs and eliminating redundant or low priority 

functions. These initiatives included the decision to disestablish the Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Networks and Information Integration, the Business 

Transformation Agency, the Joint Chiefs of Staff J–6 Command, Control, Communications, & Computer Systems organization and a recommendation for the closure 

of the United States Joint Forces Command. 

Since the announcement, the Department has engaged and met with various leaders of the affected organizations to discuss their way forward. We also established 

a Personnel and Readiness Transition Team, to work with the affected organizations 

to help them develop a transition strategy that is designed to be attentive to the 

needs of the affected population, transparent, and facilitates access to transition 

programs and tools. For the past 6 months, the team has been working closely with 

the affected organizations by assisting them with workforce analysis, timelines, and 

224 

to identify necessary steps in implementing the disestablishment actions. We have 

leveraged best practices and lessons learned from BRAC actions and incorporated 

those lessons into our planning efforts. 

With the final approval of the recommended actions, my staff continues to work 

closely with the leadership in the affected organizations by assisting them to develop their final implementation plans. We are providing specific human resources 

policy guidance, assistance with outplacement tools and programs and information 

to implement the associated personnel actions. We have launched a web page with 

links to the affected organizations to communicate with the affected workforce and 

to help answer questions and alleviate anxiety. We are committed to working with 

leaders of affected organizations to do everything possible to assist their employees 

in order to facilitate a smooth transition and mitigate any adverse impact on the 

affected workforce. 

Pay Freeze 

The Department implemented the pay freeze in accordance with statute, issued 

clear guidance, and ensured that the President’s intent with regard to pay adjustments was applied in a fair and equitable manner across the Department. Although 

the pay freeze legislation covers most civilian DOD employees, we recognize that 

there may be exceptions based on extraordinary circumstances. Special rates may 

be approved under extraordinary recruitment or retention evidence and availability 

of funding for particular occupations. In the past couple of years, staffing challenges 

arose in specific medical occupations and in highly skilled and qualified blue collar 

occupations. The DOD pay freeze exception policy is currently under review. We 

have already instituted a review process whereby overseas commands can petition 

DOD for exclusions to the pay freeze based on the criteria developed with OPM and 

the State Department. 

Insourcing 

We understand that, across the entire department, we must do a better job of 

managing our Total Force of Active and Reserve military, government civilians, and 

contracts for services. Moreover, in the absence of change our Total Force costs, and 

associated health care expenses, will become prohibitively more expensive. Predictable consequences will include inadequate recapitalization, and a severely degraded 

future readiness. 

To that end, we are changing how we strategically look at the Total Force, both 

as we execute our mission and plan across the Future Years Defense Program. This 

not only includes the development and promulgation of policies, but is contingent 

on providing managers with the tools, resources, and information necessary to 

achieve the outcomes we desire in this increasingly austere fiscal environment. 

Among other things, while we must deliver an All-Volunteer Force as a large and 

as capable as our commanders require, we must also ensure that we consistently 

challenge assertions of military essentiality, only planning for uniformed personnel 

if necessary. Similarly, the balance between Active and Reserve Forces must be judicious and well-reasoned. 

DOD is committed to meeting its statutory obligations under Title 10 to annually 

review its contracted services, identifying those that are more appropriately performed by the government workforce and should, therefore, be in-sourced. This includes services that are inherently governmental and could include services closely 

associated with inherently governmental work; that provide unauthorized personal 

services; or that may otherwise be exempted from private sector performance (to 

mitigate risk, ensure continuity of operations, build internal capability, meet and 

maintain readiness requirements, etc). While some contracted services may be identified for in-sourcing, some services determined to be no longer required or of low 

priority may be reduced in scope or eliminated, while other required services will 

continue to be provided by the private sector. 

Additionally, partnering with USD (AT&L), the military departments, and others, 

P&R is ready to meet its newly delineated responsibilities under Title 10, and improve how the Department accounts for its contracted services. Collectively, the actions being taken will improve the long-term utility of the inventory of contracts for 

services; more adequately ensure the representation of Total Force management equities during the review process; and improve the Department’s ability to accurately 

and holistically assess its contracted workload and the services being delivered in 

the context of applicable statutes, policies, and regulations. These changes are critical to improve the Department’s ability, over the next several years, to more effectively manage individual contracts and workload associated. This will ensure we 

achieve the right balance in our workforce, aligning inherently governmental activiVerDate Aug 31 2005 09:55 Jan 25, 2012 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00230 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6621 Y:\BORAWSKI\DOCS\68089.TXT JUNE PsN: JUNEB
225 

ties to military and civilian workforces and commercial activities to the most cost 

effective service provider—be that military, civilian, or contracted support. 

Those contracted services that meet the necessary criteria (consistent with governing statutes, policies, and regulations) will be in-sourced, by: 

• absorbing work into existing government positions by refining duties or 

requirements; 

• establishing new positions to perform contracted services by eliminating 

or shifting equivalent existing manpower resources (personnel) from lower 

priority activities; and 

• on a case-by-case basis, requesting an exception to the civilian limits the 

Secretary has asked the Department to adhere to. 

Our in-sourcing efforts are focused on rebalancing the workforce, rebuilding critical internal capabilities (including the acquisition workforce), and reducing operational risks and are consistent with the reforms to government contracting that 

President Obama called for in March 2009: addressing overreliance on contractors; 

appropriately aligning inherently governmental activities to government performance; performing functions efficiently and effectively; and protecting the public’s interest while providing the best value for taxpayers. 

Lastly, while there has been significant focus over the past few years on insourcing, the Department recognizes that insourcing is just one of many management tools and is not a one-size-fits-all solution. Not all in-sourcing is good, just as 

not all out-sourcing is bad. The private sector is, and will continue to be, a vital 

source of expertise, innovation, and support to the Department’s Total Force. 

We appreciate Congress’ concern related to public-private competitions under 

OMB Circular A–76. I will soon be submitting a report that is the result of nearly 

18 months of policy and ‘best practice’ review. Our report will make recommendations to improve the end-to-end public-private competition process. We believe that 

a public-private competition process can be a useful tool for our commanders and 

managers to use to validate an organization’s manpower and other requirements; 

drive a more consistent delivery of mission critical support and services to our 

servicemembers and families; and deliver readiness while minimizing fiscal opportunity costs to meet the compelling needs of the Department. 

In summary, we must have a Total Force that provides our commanders the enabling manpower they require. However, we must also ensure that its costs do not 

deprive those same commanders and our forces of the technologies, platforms, and 

systems that will translate into necessary capabilities. 

CONCLUSION

We are confronted with three fundamental and related challenges as we transition 

the end strength of our forces and execute efficiencies within the Department and 

the Services. First, we must continue to attract and retain high quality, motivated 

individuals for Active and Reserve military service and we must maintain an enthusiastic and skilled civilian workforce. Second, we need to work together with this 

Congress in creating a system of force management tools focused on a means to 

compassionately reduce the force as operations subside. Third, we must constantly 

weigh sufficiency against the risks of an uncertain future. As we invest in our 

human capital, we must do so judiciously. While our future challenges may often 

seem without bounds, our resources are not. We are faced with hard choices, as a 

Department and as a Nation, of allocating our resources the best we can to win the 

war at hand while taking care of our most valuable asset—our men and women in 

uniform. I look forward to working with this Congress to meet these challenges over 

the coming year and beyond. 

Senator WEBB. Thank you, Secretary Stanley. 

Mr. Hale, welcome. 

STATEMENT OF HON. ROBERT F. HALE, UNDER SECRETARY 

OF DEFENSE, COMPTROLLER, AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER 

Mr. HALE. Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman, Senator Hagan, Senator Ayotte. I appreciate the opportunity to be here to testify. 

I’m going to focus on our overall budget very briefly, and our efficiency proposals. I’ll concentrate on the proposed healthcare initiatives. 

226 

As you said, I submitted a statement for the record. 

Let me begin with the overview of the budget. 

We asked for $553.1 billion in base budget authority in fiscal 

year 2012, and it is intended to reinforce three priorities that Secretary Gates has established. First, it reaffirms our commitment to 

take care of the All-Volunteer Force. Secretary Gates has called 

this a ‘‘national asset.’’ I couldn’t agree more. It is our highest priority. Second, the fiscal year 2012 base budget continues to rebalance the Department’s capabilities to improve our ability to prevail 

in current conflicts. Third, it enhances the capabilities for conflicts 

we may face in the future. 

The budget also furthers the reform agenda that Secretary Gates 

started in fiscal year 2010. For this fiscal year, we propose continuing this cost-cutting, with an emphasis on business operations. 

Our plans propose savings of $170 billion in fiscal year 2012 

through 2016. These savings will be achieved in a variety of ways, 

through a number of reorganizations in the departments, through 

some selected termination of weapons systems, through infrastructure changes, and particularly by changes in our business processes. 

Included in this package of efficiencies are proposed changes in 

the military health system, and I’ll focus on those. In 2012, the budget includes $52.5 billion to support the military 

health system and its 9.6 million beneficiaries. We take pride in 

providing beneficiaries the best medical care, and we will do nothing to interfere with that goal. I want to underscore that commitment. But, the costs of the military health system have nearly tripled in the last decade, from $19 billion in 2001 to the present request for more than $52 billion. 

Our challenge is daunting, but real. We have to find ways to 

maintain the quality of healthcare, but slow the growth in costs. 

Meeting that challenge begins with streamlining operations at our 

headquarters. Health Affairs, for example, is reducing its headquarters staff by more than 700 contractors. I think there are people up at this table that can do better than I at describing where 

they’re headed in doing that. 

Additional reforms will involve beneficiaries. We are proposing a 

modest increase in TRICARE enrollment fees for working-age retirees; those under age 65. Congress introduced fees for TRICARE in 

the mid-1990s, when the program was created. Since then, those 

fees have not been changed, in dollar terms, at all. Had they been 

indexed to a medical index, the fee which is, today, $460 for families; and TRICARE Prime would have been more than $1,000. Instead, retiree out-of-pocket-cost expenses have fallen from 27 percent of healthcare costs in 1995 to 11 percent today. The administration’s proposal will increase fees for working-age retirees by a 

modest $5 a month for families and $2.50 a month for individuals. 

Beginning in 2013, future enrollment fees will be increased based 

on growth in the per capita national health expenditures. 

Indexing to national health expenditures will stabilize cost-sharing in TRICARE, though it will stabilize it at a level much more 

favorable to retirees than what Congress envisioned in the 1990s. 

These modest first-ever increases in TRICARE fees will save an estimated $434 million in 2012 through 2016, and more than $1 bilVerDate Aug 31 2005 09:55 Jan 25, 2012 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00232 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 Y:\BORAWSKI\DOCS\68089.TXT JUNE PsN: JUNEB
227 

lion through fiscal year 2021. I’ll mention a number of dollars 

throughout. But, if we don’t, or aren’t allowed to do this, then we 

will have to look for other changes. We’re not going to see increases 

in the Defense budget. We will have to look for other changes in 

the support and training we provide to our military. 

We also plan to change copays for pharmaceuticals to provide incentives for beneficiaries to choose the most cost-effective options 

for prescriptions; namely, the use of generic drugs and the delivery 

of prescriptions by mail. These reforms will save over $2.5 billion 

between 2012 and 2016. So, they’re particularly important, both to 

the quality of healthcare, but also to our budget. 

DOD proposes a regulatory change that will eliminate special 

subsidies for sole community hospitals that serve military beneficiaries. Current rates to sole community hospitals (SCH) are substantially higher than what is paid to most other hospitals treating 

military personnel. Federal law requires that we adopt Medicare 

rates at these hospitals, to the extent practical. That’s what we’re 

proposing. 

In addition to complying with the law, this change will save the health system $395 million between 2012 and 2016. We will phase 

in this change slowly over at least 4 years, in order to avoid adverse effects on care provided at the affected hospitals. 

Lastly, we propose equitable treatment for all Medicare-eligible 

military retirees. Under current law, a few Medicare-eligible enrollees are allowed to remain in the Uniformed Services Family Health 

Plan (USFHP), a plan involving six hospitals, whether they enroll 

in Medicare Part B, or not. They are the only retirees using the 

military health benefits who do not have to enroll in Medicare 

when they become age eligible. This is the one area where we need 

legislative authority to require those who are part of the USFHP 

to join Medicare, just like all the other retirees. 

Moreover, under current law, the six Federal family health 

plans—programs—receive claim payments that exceed Medicare 

rates. We seek legislation that will permit us to reimburse those 

plans in the same manner as we do for most other hospitals serving military beneficiaries. We will make these USFHP changes 

very gradually, fully grandfathering all who are currently over age65 and in the Family Health Plan. So, it will take place over a 

number of years. 

The Federal Government, as a whole, would save money under 

this plan; it’s not a lot, but there are modest savings. The Department savings from this proposal would be very substantial. We 

budget on an accrual basis for these. That is, we’re looking out over 

the whole career of an individual and setting aside money to pay 

for it. So, we immediately see major effects. Our budget would be 

reduced by $3.2 billion over the 5-year period from 2012 to 2016. 

So, it’s very important to us, budgetarily. 

I particularly ask the committee’s support for provisions affecting 

the sole community hospitals, and for legislation to permit changes 

in the USFHP. These proposals will permit the Department to comply with the law and treat all our hospitals and retirees equitably. 

Taken together, DOD’s healthcare proposals are reasonable and 

fair to all, we believe. None of our proposals would affect Active 

Duty servicemembers. That’s an important point. The proposals are 

228 

strongly supported by the Secretary of Defense—you heard him 

comment on them in his oral statement when he testified before 

the House Armed Services Committee; also by the Chairman of the 

Joint Chiefs—he also commented on them verbally; and indeed, by 

all our senior military leaders—they sent a rare 24-star letter of 

support to Congress, earlier this year, in support of these 

healthcare changes. 

These proposals generate savings that will help us pay for needed training and equipping of the Armed Forces. Indeed, as I said, 

if we don’t get authority to do this, we’ll face major holes in the 

military budget. So, that may be very hard to handle in difficult 

budgetary times. But, most importantly, the congressional support 

for these proposals will lay the groundwork for a sustainable future 

for the military healthcare system. 

Mr. Chairman, that concludes my oral remarks. When my colleagues are finished, I’d be glad to hear your questions. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Hale follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT BY HON. ROBERT F. HALE

Senator Webb, Senator Graham, members of the committee, thank you for the opportunity to speak about the budget of the Department of Defense and our efficiency 

proposals, especially our proposed health care initiatives. 

I will address these military health care issues with a focus on their financial aspects. I appreciate the leadership of the Under Secretary of Defense (Personnel and 

Readiness), and from his staff, on broader issues related to personnel in the Department. 

I would like to begin with a brief overview of the President’s Budget for the entire 

Department including our overall efficiency initiative. I will then focus on our health 

care proposals. 

BASE BUDGET REQUEST

Mr. Chairman, the Department’s budget for fiscal year 2012 includes $553.1 billion in discretionary budget authority and continues and reinforces three priorities 

laid down by Secretary Gates for the Department: 

• First, it reaffirms our commitment to take care of the all-volunteer force, 

America’s greatest strategic asset. We propose a 1.6 percent military pay 

raise, $8.3 billion for family support programs, and $52.5 billion for military 

health care. 

• Second, the fiscal year 2012 base budget continues the rebalancing of the 

Department’s capabilities in order to improve our ability to prevail in current conflicts, such as the unconventional war in Afghanistan. For example, 

we plan to invest $4.8 billion to purchase unmanned aerial vehicles and 

$2.3 billion for cyber activities. 

• Third, the President’s budget for fiscal year 2012 maintains and enhances 

capabilities for the conflicts we may face in the future. Included are a restructured but substantial Joint Strike Fighter program, a new tanker program, an aggressive shipbuilding program, a new ground combat vehicle, 

and many other initiatives. 

In addition to these three broad priorities, the budget for fiscal year 2012 furthers 

the reform agenda that Secretary Gates launched in fiscal year 2010 and which continues in this budget. In fiscal years 2010 and 2011 that agenda included steps to 

curtail or eliminate programs that have fully satisfied procurement needs, as well 

as those that are seriously troubled or provided capabilities too narrow to justify 

their expense. More than 20 programs were restructured or eliminated, among them 

further production of the F–22 and the C–17 aircraft, the program for the new VH– 

71 Presidential helicopter, the Navy’s DDG–1000 ship program, and the Army’s Future Combat System (FCS). These difficult decisions resulted in substantial savings. 

For fiscal year 2012, we propose to continue our cost-cutting with emphasis on 

business operations. Our plans save $178 billion in fiscal year 2012 to fiscal year 

2016 through efficiencies and streamlining of programs. The Armed Services identified about $100 billion of savings, which they are reinvesting to improve combat capability. The remaining $78 billion in Defense-wide savings was used to accommoVerDate Aug 31 2005 09:55 Jan 25, 2012 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00234 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6621 Y:\BORAWSKI\DOCS\68089.TXT JUNE PsN: JUNEB
229 

date reductions in the defense topline and to support the administration’s efforts to 

reduce the Federal deficit. 

These savings will be achieved through reform of DOD’s organizational structure, 

weapons programs, infrastructure, and business processes. We propose to terminate 

or consolidate organizations in all the military departments. We will terminate the 

Marine Corps’ Expeditionary Fighting Vehicle, end procurement of the Army’s 

SLAMRAAM surface-to-air missile, and make other changes in weapons programs. 

Changes in business processes include consolidation of data centers, improvements 

in weapons sustainment, reductions in acquisition costs, and elimination or streamlining of lower-priority support tasks in order to accommodate a civilian personnel 

freeze and reductions in funding for contractors. Included in this package of efficiencies are proposed changes to the Military Health System (MHS). 

HEALTH CARE EFFICIENCIES

The fiscal year 2012 budget includes $52.5 billion to support the MHS and its 9.6 

million eligible beneficiaries, including Active Duty servicemembers and their families, military retirees and their families, dependent survivors, and certain eligible 

Reserve component members and their families. Starting this year, the MHS is adding the TRICARE Young Adult Program, which extends benefits for certain dependents in accord with the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2011. 

We take pride in providing MHS beneficiaries with the best medical care, and we 

will do nothing to reduce the quality of that care. But the costs of the Military 

Health System have nearly tripled in little more than a decade, from $19 billion in 

2001 to the present request of more than $52 billion. The challenge we face: find 

ways to maintain quality health care while slowing the growth in costs. Efforts to achieve this are by no means new. To date, more than $1.65 billion in 

annual savings have been implemented. The 2007 National Defense Authorization 

Act prohibited employers from offering incentives to employees to drop employerbased health insurance in favor of TRICARE. Savings of $500 million were achieved 

thanks to rebates from pharmaceutical manufacturers for retail prescriptions. 

Matching payments to Medicare rates for outpatient care in hospitals and ambulatory centers will save another $900 million. Enhanced fraud, waste, and abuse detection and prosecution are expected to net another $137 million. By standardizing 

medical supplies and equipment, we are producing another $30 million in annual 

savings. 

These achievements are noteworthy, but we must do more. As a result, the Department has proposed additional headquarters reforms, changes in the TRICARE 

system that will better balance responsibilities for health between DOD and the 

people we serve, shifts in pharmacy co-pays designed to encourage efficiency, and 

changes to ensure that costs to individuals and payments to hospitals are consistent 

throughout the military medical care system. 

HEADQUARTERS EFFICIENCIES

Greater efficiencies begin with streamlined operations at headquarters. Health Affairs is reducing headquarters staff by more than 700 contractor positions, as well 

as promoting greater sharing of services and capabilities between the Armed Services. We are currently devising specific plans to accommodate these reductions, 

plans that include approaches such as contract consolidation and the efficiencies in 

Information Technology (IT) support. Other efficiencies are anticipated with the conclusion of the BRAC process and consolidation of medical headquarters for Health 

Affairs, the TRICARE Management Activity, and the Service Surgeons General. 

TRICARE ENROLLMENT FEES

Additional reforms will involve beneficiaries. We are proposing a modest increase 

in TRICARE enrollment fees for working age retirees. Congress introduced fees for 

TRICARE in the mid-1990s, when the program was created. Since then, annual fees 

have not been changed in dollar terms. Had they been indexed to Medicare, fees of 

$460 for families would have grown to more than $1,000 by fiscal year 2010. Instead, retiree out-of-pocket expenses actually fell from 27 percent of total health 

care costs in 1995 to 11 percent in fiscal year 2010. 

The administration’s proposal will increase fees for working-age retirees by a 

modest $5 per month for families and $2.50 per month for individuals, which will 

raise the annual fee from $460 to $520 for families and from $230 to $260 for individuals. Beginning in 2013, future enrollment fees will also be increased based on 

growth in per capita National Health Expenditures. Note that the increases will 

only affect the 1.6 million retirees in TRICARE Prime who are younger than 65 

years of age. Disabled retirees and survivors will be exempted. 

230 

These modest, limited, first-ever increases will save an estimated $434 million in 

the fiscal year 2012–2016 period and $1.5 billion through fiscal year 2021, money 

that will help to maintain a strong, well-trained military. 

PHARMACY CO-PAYS

We plan to change co-pays for pharmaceuticals to provide incentives for beneficiaries to choose the most cost-effective options for prescriptions, namely use of generic drugs and delivery of prescriptions by mail. Co-pays are eliminated altogether 

for generic drugs ordered through the mail order program, which will mean a savings to beneficiaries of $3 per prescription. Most non-generic drugs are available via 

mail order with no increase in co-pays. For retail pharmacies, co-pays are increased 

by $2 to $3 per prescription. We estimate that these reforms will save over $2.5 billion between fiscal year 2012 and 2016 and, again, help to maintain a strong military even in lean times. 

In addition, changes in co-pays are expected to improve patient care. It has been 

noted that patients with chronic conditions requiring regular medications are actually more likely to comply with their medical regimen when the prescriptions are 

delivered to their homes. 

SOLE COMMUNITY HOSPITALS

DOD proposes a TRICARE regulatory change that will eliminate special subsidies 

for Sole Community Hospitals (SCHs) that serve military beneficiaries. Current 

rates for the SCHs are more than twice as high as what is paid to other acute 

TRICARE network and non-network hospitals covered under this proposal and 29 

percent higher than commercial insurers are paying for the same services. Federal 

law requires that we adopt Medicare rates to the extent practicable. By implementing this regulatory change at SCHs, we can save the Military Health System 

$395 million between fiscal year 2012 and 2016. 

We realize that this proposal will have an impact on the revenue streams of certain hospitals, but that impact should be modest for all but a handful of hospitals. 

TRICARE accounts for less than 1 percent of inpatient admissions at the vast majority (81 percent) of SCHs and less than 5 percent of inpatient admissions at 95 

percent of these hospitals. We propose phasing this change in over the next 4 years 

for all affected hospitals, and we will work with those who are most affected to minimize disruptions. 

USFHP ENROLLEES

Lastly, we propose to provide equitable treatment for all Medicare-eligible retirees 

by offering a single program design across the country. Under current law, Medicare-eligible enrollees are allowed to remain in the Uniformed Services Family 

Health Plan (USFHP), whether they enroll in Medicare Part B or not. They are the 

only military retirees using military health benefits who do not have to enroll in 

Medicare when they become eligible. We seek legislative authority that will require 

those who are part of the USFHP to join Medicare upon reaching age 65. Under 

current law, the six USFHPs receive claims payments that exceed Medicare rates. 

We seek legislation that would permit us to reimburse these plans in the same manner as we do for all other Medicare-eligible retirees. Our plan will fully grandfather 

all of those who are already in USFHP, but would require future USFHP enrollees 

to transition to Medicare and TRICARE for Life once they become Medicare-eligible. 

Future retirees covered by the proposal would still be able to obtain services from 

providers associated with USFHP as long as the providers accept Medicare. 

We believe that it is not appropriate to treat individuals differently just because 

they join a particular plan. Nor is it appropriate to provide a few hospitals with special subsidies. This proposal is estimated to reduce Federal outlays by $34 million 

over the fiscal year 2012–2016 period and $279 million over the next decade. Because DOD budgets for this program on an accrual basis, the Department’s savings 

from this proposal would be substantial. Under our proposed changes, DOD accrual 

contributions are reduced by $3.2 billion over the 5-year period, fiscal year 2012– 

2016. 

CONCLUSION

I want to emphasize that none of our proposals would affect costs to Active Duty 

servicemembers. Also, there will be no change in enrollment fees for medically retired servicemembers or survivors of servicemembers. 

These proposals represent a package of incentives and changes in payments and 

benefits that we believe are reasonable and fair to all. Most importantly, they lay 

231 

the groundwork for a strong and sustainable future for the military health care system. The proposals generate savings that will help to pay for needed training and 

equipping of the Armed Forces. 

Mr. Chairman, that concludes my statement. My colleagues and I welcome the 

committee’s questions. 

Senator WEBB. Thank you very much, Secretary Hale. 

I would now like to call on Senator Graham, who has arrived, as 

predicted. 

Senator GRAHAM. Thank you. 

Senator WEBB. We welcome you to this hearing. I think you said 

you had three hearings going at the same time. 

Senator GRAHAM. Yes. I just met with General Petraeus’s wife, 

who is now in charge of protecting our military men and women 

from predatory lending practices. That was something I wanted to 

come and talk to our committee about. 

STATEMENT OF SENATOR LINDSEY GRAHAM 

Senator GRAHAM. Mr. Chairman, as always, I have really enjoyed 

our working relationship. I think we’ve done a pretty good job, if 

I say so myself, of keeping the men and women well equipped and 

well trained. 

On the healthcare front, this is really a difficult situation. You’re 

talking about 16.5 percent of the DOD’s budget, by 2028, being 

healthcare cost. Now, that’s doubling in less than 20 years. 

Are you retired? 

Senator WEBB. I am a retired marine, yes. 

Senator GRAHAM. Okay. He’s a retired marine. I, one day, hope 

to be a retired Air Force officer. 

I guess what I’m going to say is that I understand what the administration’s trying to do. We have to move this debate forward 

on sustainability. We haven’t had a premium increase since 1989. 

Some of the fees to be increased, proposed by the administration, 

I think, is something we should all consider. I respect the House. 

But, eventually you’re going to have to make some very draconian 

choices between healthcare and operational needs. That’s not 

where we want to find ourselves. 

Secretary Hale, your idea of trying to get a better bang for our 

buck, looking at programs to make them more efficient, improving 

the quality of care while lowering cost, is absolutely essential. 

Secretary McCarthy, we’re going to miss you. You’ve been a really good, stalwart advisor to this committee. 

To the rest of you, I appreciate your involvement. 

But, Mr. Chairman, somebody eventually is going to have to address this. We are just putting the DOD budget in an 

unsustainable Hobson choices here. I am convinced, with a little 

forward thinking, that people in my income level, when I retire, 

could be able to contribute a little bit more to save the system and 

free up some dollars for operational needs and the force of the future. 

I look forward to working with you and the administration to try 

to find out a way to make this happen. I support your 2012 budget. 

Healthcare’s important to our men and women; TRICARE for the 

Guard and Reserve was a good move. Worked with Secretary Clinton. The GI Bill was a good move. We’re seeing astonishing results 

there. People are signing up to be able to transfer their benefits to 

232 

their children. We now need to talk about transferring to grandchildren. I know this is not the healthcare piece. But, I had a National Guard guy from South Carolina say, ‘‘You know, I got three 

grandkids. Why can’t I transfer my GI benefits to my grandkids?’’ 

That shows you that, in the Guard and the Reserve, you have some 

people who’ve been around a while. [Laughter.] 

They may not be many, but I want to help them if we can. 

Thank you all. Together maybe we can find some rational way 

to move forward to reform healthcare within DOD. 

Senator WEBB. Thank you very much, Senator Graham. 

As always, it’s been great working with you on this subcommittee. 

Secretary McCarthy, welcome. 

STATEMENT OF HON. DENNIS M. MCCARTHY, ASSISTANT 

SECRETARY OF DEFENSE FOR RESERVE AFFAIRS 

General MCCARTHY. Mr. Chairman, Senator Graham, and members of the subcommittee, I can say without hesitation that it’s always an honor to appear before a committee of the U.S. Senate, 

and especially since this is probably my last opportunity to do so. 

As always, I thank the committee and your staff for all that 

you’ve done for the men and women in uniform, especially for those 

whose it’s my responsibility to serve, the members of the Reserve 

and National Guard. They have benefited greatly from the concern 

and the expertise that you’ve brought to bear on their behalf. 

As I believe you know, the 2010 Quadrennial Defense Review directed what it called a Comprehensive Review of the Future Role 

of the Reserve Component and the Balance Between Active and Reserve Forces. That review was completed earlier this year. Secretary Gates has just approved the report and directed that its 

analysis be part of the budgetary review for fiscal year 2013 and 

beyond. I believe this report will be extremely valuable in describing the ways that the National Guard and Reserve can contribute 

to our defense in coming years. 

Clearly, the Reserve components are at a point of transition. The 

last 10 years have been dominated, as you pointed out, Senator, by 

a demanding period of sustained mobilization that was never previously envisioned. Congress, DOD, and the military departments, 

and, most importantly, the men and women of the Reserve and 

Guard, and their families, have all adjusted to this reality. But, 

now as we draw down our forces in Iraq, and with a relatively 

small RC footprint in Afghanistan, the demand on Guard and Reserve for combat service is declining, at least temporarily. 

We can use this opportunity to move in one of two directions. We 

can return the Reserve and Guard to their pre-September 11 role 

as a Strategic Reserve, or we can find ways to continue to judiciously use the Reserve component as a part of the operational 

force. Having spent many years in direct and personal communication with the men and women serving in the post-September 11 Reserve components, I can tell you that most of them do not want to 

go back on the shelf as a purely strategic Reserve. Several of the 

Service Chiefs’ posture statements indicate that they agree with 

their troops on this issue. 

233 

Everyone serving in the Guard and Reserve today either enlisted 

or reenlisted since September 11, knowing full well the demands 

and expectations flowing from that decision. I believe we will all 

agree they’ve performed magnificently and have become accessible, 

well trained, and resilient. Their families and their employers have 

also demonstrated resolve and perseverance that some once doubted. 

The question before us now is, How can the Nation best preserve 

and utilize this hard-earned capability? Maintaining training and 

equipment readiness, balancing accessibility with judicious use, 

both will be essential. Continuing work on both law and policy will 

be necessary. But, the human capital that’s resident in the Reserve 

and Guard is of such high quality that any failure to use their talents would be wasteful and destructive of the capability that they 

have achieved. 

Although I’ll be leaving active service, I know that the team at 

Personnel and Readiness will continue to support this committee’s 

efforts to develop legislative tools that our citizen warriors need to 

succeed. 

Thank you again for the opportunity to testify, and I look forward to your questions. 

[The prepared statement of General McCarthy follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT BY HON. DENNIS M. MCCARTHY

EXSUM

Chairman Webb, Ranking Member Graham, and members of the subcommittee; 

I thank you for your invitation to participate in this hearing. This is my second appearance before this committee in my current role, and I welcome the opportunity 

to give you my perspective on what I perceive to be a roadmap to the future of your 

Reserve components (RC). 

After a decade of sustained engagement in combat operations, the Reserve components of our Armed Forces have transformed, from a strategic force of last resort 

to a dependable operational force that provides full-spectrum capability to the Nation. Today there are over 100,000 National Guard and Reserve men and women 

on active duty around the world and at home, serving in missions ranging from combat in Afghanistan to defending the air space here in Washington, to humanitarian 

relief efforts in Japan. 

In order to best utilize the Nation’s 10 year investment in your Guard and Reserve Forces, they must be: 

1. Accessible: Expansion of 12304 enables future planning for an era of 

persistent conflict where augmenting the AC force in specific missions can 

occur without an authority gap. 

2. Used Judiciously: The RC are highly capable and possess many of the 

same capabilities as the AC, and have volunteered to serve at an incredible 

rate. Many of these individuals have the time and desire to serve more than 

the traditional standard for Guard and Reserve personnel; and the Department should find a way to leverage this willingness. In many cases, the 

Guard and Reserve Forces should be the first choice for recurring or predictable missions within their capability, which will contribute to the sustainability of both the Active and Reserve components. Putting in use rotational availability models allow for continued movement towards the Department objective of 1 year mobilization for 5 years dwell time for the RC. 

3. Ready: Our RC forces need to continue to be maintained at the highest 

level of readiness, to include not only servicemember training and medical 

readiness, but also family and employer readiness. Our dedicated Guard 

and Reserve servicemembers receive support in a holistic manner, and we 

have worked, through both the Yellow Ribbon Reintegration Program and 

the Employer Support of Guard & Reserve Programs to give access to community, State, and Federal level assistance programs to servicemembers 

and their support networks before, during, and after deployments. This includes resilience training. 

234 

Programs like these that ensure support during a servicemember’s continuum of service assists our Reserve components in attracting the best and 

brightest to join. The Services have implemented recruiting, retention, and 

force shaping policies that you have authorized, and will achieve end 

strengths for fiscal year 2011, which provide the RC with forces necessary 

to meet strategic demands and maintain dwell consistent with policy. 

RC readiness also includes being able to work and train in quality facilities, and maintaining the current level of equipment that is available for 

training and preparation. Current funding for reset and maintenance of RC 

equipment comes out of Supplemental appropriations, but as we move away 

from dependence on these funds, it is important to include funding in base 

budgets to maintain and repair the equipment that is currently accessible 

to the RC. 

Chairman Webb, Ranking Member Graham, and members of the subcommittee; 

I thank you for your invitation to participate in this hearing. This is my second appearance before this committee in my current role, and I welcome the opportunity 

to give you my perspective on what I perceive to be a roadmap to the future of your 

Reserve components (RC). The Senate Armed Services Committee has always been 

very supportive of our National Guard and Reserve Forces. On behalf of those men 

and women, our Citizen Warriors, their families and employers, I want to thank you 

for all your help in providing for them as they have stepped up to answer the call 

to duty. We will do everything in our power to merit your continued support. 

After a decade of sustained engagement in combat operations, the Reserve components of our Armed Forces have transformed, from a strategic force of last resort 

to a dependable operational force that provides full-spectrum capability to the Nation. Repeated combat deployments, as well as peacekeeping and humanitarian relief missions, have produced an operationally resilient force that fully expects to be 

utilized on a periodic basis. This new force represents a 10-year investment in 

resourcing the Nation’s commitments and the personal sacrifice of servicemembers, 

their families and employers. That investment can reliably provide the Department 

of Defense (DOD) with essential operational capabilities and strategic agility in a 

cost-effective manner well into the future. Good stewardship demands that we continue to capitalize on this investment in order to maintain Guard and Reserve readiness, relieve stress on the Active component, and provide the widest array of force 

structure options in a resource constrained future. 

AN INDISPENSABLE FORCE

Today there are over 100,000 National Guard and Reserve men and women on 

active duty around the world and at home, serving in missions ranging from combat 

in Afghanistan to defending the air space here in Washington. They serve alongside 

Regular component personnel, civilians, and contractors. They are experienced; 

many having served multiple tours in combat and are now leading people in combat. 

They are skilled; bringing many needed civilian skills to the military such as cyber, 

agriculture, law enforcement, and medical. We would not have been able to do what 

we have done over the past 10 years without them and I don’t believe we can do 

what lies ahead of us without them. 

There are three key fundamentals going forward for the RC. They must be accessible, they must be used judiciously to best advantage, and they must be ready. 

Accessibility 

With experienced, ready units and individuals, and the prospect of persistent conflict access to the RC in the future will be a key successful employment of the RC 

in the Total Force. 

PROPOSED CHANGE TO 12304

Future planning envisions an era of persistent conflict where some type of RC activation authority will be required to augment the Active component (AC) to maximize effectiveness and efficiency of the Total Force. At present, we have sufficient 

authority to mobilize RC forces for current operations. However, as directed (by the 

Senate Armed Services Committee conference report S. Rept. 111–201, page 138), 

we have analyzed our access authorities to support long term utilization of the RC 

as part of the operational force. We foresee an authority gap when the Nation is 

faced with persistent demands on the Total Force but does not have specific named 

operational missions, a national emergency or war situation. This authority gap exists for some, but not all, of the full spectrum of military missions, including training, peacekeeping, and building partnership capacity, that our RC is specifically well 

suited to perform as a complementing part of the Total Force. Closure of this auVerDate Aug 31 2005 09:55 Jan 25, 2012 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00240 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6621 Y:\BORAWSKI\DOCS\68089.TXT JUNE PsN: JUNEB
235 

thority gap will help increase dwell for the Active component while maintaining RC 

readiness and could be accomplished by the following: 

In response to your request and the request of the Services for ‘‘assured access’’ 

to the RC, we propose expanding the existing authority in title 10, U.S.C., section 

12304, commonly referred to as the Presidential Reserve Call-up statute. Our proposal does not change the requirement for Presidential action to invoke the access 

authority, nor does it change the number of personnel affected or the frequency and 

duration of active duty. Our modification enables use of the existing statute for the 

full spectrum of military missions while adhering to the existing policy of no more 

than 1 year activated out of every 6. The proposal also limits the number of Reserve 

personnel who can be involuntarily activated for purposes other than an operational 

mission or threat or attack by terrorists or weapons of mass destruction. Our proposal includes a requirement for the Department to identify the manpower and associated costs of known RC utilization in the President’s budget justification materials, providing Congress final oversight on any implementation of the expanded authority to access the RC. 

Judicious Use 

With increased use comes an equal demand to make sure we use the RC judiciously and to best advantage. Every member of the RC has volunteered since September 11 with the expectation that they will be judiciously used and given meaningful work to do. DOD and the Services should continue to meet this expectation. 

The Reserve components are highly capable and possess many of the same capabilities as the AC, but we have to be conscious of family and employment obligations. We believe that missions that are predictable can be accomplished on a rotational basis, and missions that are more enduring are best suited for the RC. We 

are encouraged by the inclusion of the RC in these models and believe it will reduce 

stress on the force overall, AC and RC, preserve readiness gains in the RC, provide 

a cost effective way to maintain Total Force capability, and preserve the All-Volunteer Force. 

Volunteerism 

Every day for the past several years over 20,000 Reserve component servicemembers have served on active duty as volunteers. These individuals have the time 

and desire to serve more than the 1 weekend per month and 2 weeks per year that 

have long been considered standard for Guard and Reserve personnel. The Department is investigating methods to leverage this willingness to serve in order to fulfill 

the part-time and temporary demands of the combatant commands, major command 

headquarters, and the Defense agencies. One consideration is for DOD to create Reserve component units staffed by personnel willing to volunteer to serve more frequently or for longer periods of time in order to support such tasks as Theater Security Cooperation, Building Partner Capacity, Homeland Defense, Defense Support to 

Civil Authorities, and the Services’ institutional support missions. 

This type of differential service commitment has been used successfully in high 

OPTEMPO units such as aviation for some time, but with the Reserve component 

now playing a larger role in many ongoing mission areas, expanded utilization of 

differential service contracts would be useful. Such differentiation within the Reserve component would provide an additional sourcing option for units, teams, and 

personnel for contingency operations or emergencies. 

ALL-VOLUNTEER TOTAL FORCE POLICY

Dwell 

The RC provides both operational capability and strategic depth in support of the 

national defense strategy. It is imperative that predictability in the use of RC forces 

be maximized. On January 17, 2007 the Secretary of Defense established planning 

objectives for involuntary mobilization of Guard and Reserve units at 1 year mobilized to 5 years dwell time (1:5). Today’s global demands require a number of selected Guard/Reserve units to be remobilized sooner than this standard. The intention is that such exceptions will be temporary, and that we move to the broad application of 1:5 as soon as possible. 

Reduce Stress 

The processes by which roles and missions are assigned to the Nation’s Guard and 

Reserve Forces should be characterized by a belief that those forces and individuals 

can, and in many cases should be, the first choice for recurring or predictable missions within their capability. Such strategic planning will provide more efficient and 

effective utilization of defense assets. 

236 

Assessing Departmental requirements in this fashion will also contribute to the 

sustainability of both the Active and Reserve components. Utilizing the Guard and 

Reserve in this manner, to best advantage, increases the capacity of the Total Force 

and will reduce the burden on all forces by relieving Active-Duty Forces that would 

otherwise execute the mission, by increasing their dwell to deployment ratio and by 

sustaining that force for future use. 

Rotational availability models in use today are essential to ensuring that the 

Guard and Reserve are trained and ready when needed. Using the Reserve component on a rotational basis maintains their readiness and expands their availability 

and capabilities. The Services should continue to refine rotational availability models to achieve improved predictability for the Total Force in accordance with stated 

Department deployment to dwell objectives. 

REALIGNING AND PROVISIONING THE RESERVE COMPONENT AS PART OF THE

OPERATIONAL FORCE

Realigning capabilities (High Demand/Low Density Missions) 

Balancing and aligning capabilities within and between components is an ongoing 

process. In recent years, the Department has realigned over 180,000 positions and 

has plans to realign roughly another 120,000 over the coming years. The RC has 

been a full partner in this realignment, assuming roles in the missions that are currently in demand across the Department. The RC is well suited for roles and missions that are recurring and predictable, and the typically more permanent assignments of RC members lend themselves to missions that benefit from establishment 

of habitual relationships, long-term planning and engagement. This approach also 

helps reduce stress on the Active Force while preserving readiness and capability 

within the Total Force. 

The Army, Navy, Marine Corps, and Air Force Reserve are currently adding or 

are planning to add capability to high demand, low density areas such as Civil Affairs, Intelligence, Cyber, Special Forces, and Military Police. These capabilities 

have been in high demand over the past 10 years, and all indications suggest they 

will continue to be in high demand in the future with Security Cooperation/Building 

Partner Capacity potentially moving to the forefront of Department missions. The 

RC is particularly well suited for these types of missions and capabilities. 

READINESS

Readiness Requirements 

One of my key priorities is to preserve the readiness gains made in the RC. These 

gains can be sustained by continued use of the RC as a rotational operational force. 

Periodic, predictable deployments will further enhance the RC’s capabilities, maintain their readiness over time, add value to the Total Force and provide future capability and capacity. 

To meet the full spectrum of DOD missions and maintain RC readiness gains, the 

RC needs to be appropriately resourced as requested in the fiscal year 2012 budget 

to provide continued access to training equipment, facilities, ranges, and to be recapitalized with the same types of equipment and systems that reside in the AC. 

Individual Member Readiness 

At the most basic level, readiness starts with the servicemember. Our personnel 

receive the same individual and basic training as all military members, so we start 

out on equal footing. Our members also receive effective and efficient skill training 

matched to their mission. We are continuously reviewing and adjusting these training requirements in order to make most efficient use of our traditional member’s 

limited time during monthly unit training assemblies. Pre-mobilization training 

makes RC individuals and units as ready as any AC unit going into a deployment. 

However, now that the department depends on RC assets for many missions there 

is a need to be medically ready to serve in any operational capability; whether in 

an overseas contingency or locally in the homeland. Medical and dental readiness 

levels can be maintained with adequate funding, support, facilities, and alternative 

approaches. 

Individual Medical Readiness 

We continue to monitor the Individual Medical Readiness of the National Guard 

and Reserve to ensure availability of ready Reserve component members for deployment, as it continues to be a priority for the Department. Additionally, as of the 

first quarter of fiscal year 2011, the RC has a Fully Medically Ready rate of 63 percent, which is below the DOD goal of 80 percent. The lower RC Medically Ready 

rate is due to a significant number of members who are deemed Not Medically 

237 

Ready (17 percent) for numerous reasons of which disqualifying dental condition is 

a principal factor. However, DOD is diligently working to make medical and dental 

services more available to RC members. Although we still need to improve, as of 

the first quarter of fiscal year 2011, all components have met or exceeded the Dental 

Readiness goal of 75 percent, which will have a positive impact on overall medical 

readiness. 

We support the Integrated Disability Evaluation System (IDES) to assess the fitness and care of wounded RC members ensuring they are appropriately identified 

and processed in a timely manner. We continue to support our RC wounded warriors enabling a swift return to their civilian lives. 

Reserve Component End Strength 

Meeting Reserve component end strength objectives is a priority of the Department. The following table depicts the current prescribed and actual end strengths 

for the Reserve components. The Department’s Continuum of Service efforts have 

contributed to the six DOD Reserve components remaining within the variance allowed for their congressionally-mandated end strength objective. The Services have 

implemented recruiting, retention, and force shaping policies and programs to 

achieve end strengths for fiscal year 2011. We appreciate the congressional support 

of the fiscal year 2011 end strength levels and the legislative initiatives that assist 

in recruiting and retaining Reserve component servicemembers. These end 

strengths will provide the Reserve components with the forces necessary to meet 

strategic demands while maintaining a dwell consistent with departmental policy. 

FISCAL YEAR 2011 RESERVE COMPONENT END STRENGTH OBJECTIVES 

Service Objective Actual as of 

January 2011 

Army National Guard ............................................................................................................... 358,200 363,995 

Army Reserve ........................................................................................................................... 205,000 205,849 

Navy Reserve ........................................................................................................................... 65,500 64,677 

Marine Corps Reserve ............................................................................................................. 39,600 39,949 

Air National Guard .................................................................................................................. 106,700 106,643 

Air Force Reserve .................................................................................................................... 71,200 70,359 

Total ............................................................................................................................... 846,200 851,472 

Of the end strength figures outlined above, there are servicemembers in the training pipeline for the Reserve components who are not immediately available for mobilization. 

Recruit Operational Ready Reserve Strength 

Thus far, for 2011, Reserve recruiting efforts show continued success. Through 

January, all Reserve services have met or exceeded both quantity and recruit quality objectives. Notably, for the third year in a row, the Reserve components exceeded 

the DOD Benchmark of 90 percent of new recruits being High School Diploma Graduates, with 93 percent of Reserve component recruits holding that credential. 

238 

It is important that we have a military that reflects the society it defends, both 

in the enlisted ranks and our commissioned officers. This is particularly important 

as less than 1 percent of the American public serves in uniform. To that end, we 

are pleased that some of our most prestigious colleges and universities are now rethinking their previous positions with regard to ROTC programs. This will provide 

more opportunities for college students to think about seeking commissions in the 

U.S. military. 

We continually review our recruiting programs to align funding and policies with 

current realities. Each of the Services has made significant adjustments to recruiting programs in light of our austere fiscal environment, and continues to look for 

additional cost savings—but we must be cautious and resist the temptation to cut 

too deeply and too fast. Stable adequate investments in recruiting resources are necessary to maintain long-term success. Although enlistment incentives can be adjusted quickly to meet market fluctuations and force management needs, history has 

shown that the time required to redeploy advertising/marketing campaigns and/or 

qualified recruiters is significant. I cannot emphasize this imperative enough. 

The Montgomery GI Bill-Selected Reserve (MGIB–SR) has been a cornerstone of 

our military recruiting efforts since 1985, and a major contributor to the success of 

the All-Volunteer Force. We are now in the second year of the new Post-9/11 GI Bill, 

the most extensive restructuring of post-service education benefits since the introduction of the original World War II GI Bill. The Post-9/11 GI Bill appears to enhance our recruiting efforts even more. We hope that the provision in the new program that allows career servicemembers to transfer their unused GI Bill benefits 

to immediate family members, long requested by both members and their families, 

will prove widely beneficial. Although full utilization data is not yet complete, early 

results look favorable. For example, through fiscal year 2009, the VA has received 

and processed over 578,000 enrollment certifications and 237,000 changes to enrollments for Veterans attending school under the Post-9/11 GI Bill. In 2010, the VA 

was able to increase its daily completions of PGIB enrollment certifications from an 

average of 1,800 per day during October to nearly 7,000 per day. 

As indicated earlier, the benefit may be transferred to the member’s dependents. 

As of April 2010, a total of 240,888 dependents have been identified for transfer 

(based on applications submitted by servicemembers) since the program began accepting applications in June 2009. The potential transfer population includes 

spouses, children, stepchildren, and pre-adoptive children. As of February 2011, apVerDate Aug 31 2005 09:55 Jan 25, 2012 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00244 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6621 Y:\BORAWSKI\DOCS\68089.TXT JUNE PsN: JUNEB

504per18.eps
239 

proximately 181,144 Post-9/11 GI Bill transfer applications submitted by 

servicemembers have been approved by their respective Service component. 

On January 4, 2011, the President signed the Post-9/11 Veterans Educational Assistance Improvements Act of 2010—providing additional benefit options that include the eligibility of National Guard and Reserve members who were inadvertently omitted from the original Bill, vocational and other non-college degree training, and living stipends for those enrolled in distance learning programs. This 

makes the Post-9/11 GI bill the most comprehensive educational benefit in our Nation’s history, making it an appropriate benefit for our service men and women supporting the ongoing overseas contingency operations. 

TRAINING AND RECRUITING THE RESERVE COMPONENT AS PART OF THE OPERATIONAL

FORCE

Initial/Individual Training/Skills Training 

The Reserve components are working with the Services to ensure that training 

institutions and facilities are resourced to meet the needs of the total force, with 

resident, nonresident or distance learning, to include RC personnel. Much improvement has occurred in this direction, but we will continue to monitor implementation 

until institutionalized. 

Regional Integrated Training Environment 

The Regional Integrated Training Environment (RITE) concept is a joint initiative 

that identifies and matches Service training requirements to a network of local 

training facilities and resources. Still in the formative stages, the purpose of the 

RITE initiative is to help sustain the Total Force readiness posture, and surge capability as determined by Service rotational readiness models while reducing overhead 

training costs. This is done through innovative management of facilities, existing 

training assets, simulators and Joint Live, Virtual, Constructive capability, pools of 

shared equipment, and coordination through a web-based visibility/scheduling system. As the concept matures, collaboration will expand with key internal and external DOD stakeholders. 

Innovative Readiness Training (IRT) 

The Innovative Readiness Training (IRT) program is an outstanding volunteer 

training opportunity for our National Guard and Reserves. IRT’s focus is to provide 

varied and challenging training opportunities that exercise the Mission Essential 

Task List (METL) requirements of combat support and combat service support units 

and individuals. Each year new training opportunities are presented by Federal, 

State, or local government agencies or nonprofits to the Services. Military units are 

provided METL training in a realistic, hands-on setting while providing quality 

services to underserved communities throughout the Nation. Examples of IRT activities include infrastructure development, constructing rural roads and runways, 

small building and warehouse construction; and providing medical and dental care 

to medically underserved communities. These opportunities result in interoperability and readiness training, ensuring our Nation always has a fully capable National Guard and Reserve. 

Training and Intelligence 

The Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) led the Joint Reserve Intelligence Program 

(JRIP) to restructure 398,000 square feet of classified workspace and 4,035 

workstations in 28 sites throughout the United States. These sites enable drilling 

reservists to provide real world operational support to the COCOMs, Combat Support Agencies and Service Intelligence Centers, concurrently enabling training to be 

supplanted by real word intelligence support, the highest possible form of training. 

In fiscal year 2010, the JRIP averaged over 4,500 people per month using just one 

of the 28 sites. COCOM support was further enhanced by the infusion of $11 million 

of DIA-man-day funding and $16 million of COCOM/Service man-day funding for 

duty at the JRIP sites. These efforts resulted in even greater savings in reduced 

travel and per diem costs, coupled with improved quality of life for Reserve component members by serving in their local region. 

Equipment Procurement, Reset 

Unlike other areas of the Defense budget, there currently is no Reserve-specific 

appropriation for equipment that mirrors the active force. The RC relies on the Active procurement account and congressional action in the National Guard and Reserve Equipment Appropriation (NGREA). Yet it is usually difficult to determine 

how much of the active procurement appropriation is specifically intended for the 

Reserve components and tracking subsequent execution. We currently use the 

240 

Equipment Delivery Report to help us follow the money from appropriation to delivery. At that point the DOD Directives should ensure equipment movement between 

the Reserve and Active are appropriately documented. Full transparency and accountability can only be achieved through a full life cycle, enterprise approach to 

Reserve equipping. The life cycle includes requirements determination, budget requests, appropriation, purchase, and delivery of hundreds of thousands of pieces of 

equipment. Plans to return borrowed RC equipment are included as key deliverables 

in this process. All Services have made tremendous strides in coming together to 

equip the Total Force. 

Line Item P–1R 

The P–1R is the Reserve component allotment of the overall DOD Procurement 

Program (P–1). Congress requires each P–1 budget submitted by the President to 

Congress to specify amounts requested for procurement of equipment for the National Guard and Reserve components. However, the P–1R has historically been 

treated as a non-binding projected subset of the service Procurement Programs. To 

achieve Congressional and DOD mandated transparency, the Services should develop comprehensive and accurate projected funding and equipment quantities in 

the P–1R and include this as a separate budget line in their request. 

Resetting 

Currently, funding for reset of equipment returning from theatre for the Guard 

and Reserve comes from a supplemental appropriation. As we prepare to move away 

from reliance on these supplemental funds, it is important to have a continued 

source of funding built into the budget for RC equipment reset. It is critical that 

the Guard & Reserves are able to continue to train on high quality equipment for 

which funds have already been allocated. 

Military Construction 

There is a direct correlation between readiness and facilities, particularly in the 

Reserve component. The move from a Strategic Reserve to an Operational Reserve 

doesn’t change the fact that we owe our Guard and Reserve members quality facilities in which to work and train. The combined fiscal year 2012 RC Military Construction (MILCON) program request of $1.2 billion is less than last year’s request; 

however, it will help alleviate some of their most urgent facility deficiencies. Despite 

Congress’ generous RC MILCON appropriations in the past, future fiscal realities 

suggest that future budgets will decline. Therefore, we must approach future construction with the intent to exploit joint use military construction projects as much 

as possible. We are currently leading an effort to revise current DOD guidance that 

will facilitate smarter consolidation and joint use of RC facilities. 

FAMILY AND EMPLOYER READINESS

Family 

Prepared and resilient family members are a vital support system for each 

servicemember. Our dedicated military men and women require support in a holistic 

manner. Support for our servicemembers should come from both the Federal and 

State levels and this support needs to include well-established family support programs. Since September 11, over 802,000 Guard and Reserve members have mobilized resulting in America’s most experienced, best-trained, best-equipped Reserve 

component ever. To sustain this force, we need continued support for the families 

of those in uniform, and their employers. We are working aggressively to sustain 

continued community support from neighbors, relatives, churches, local businesses 

and State-based Federal programs—such as those from Department of Labor, Small 

Business Administration, and Veterans Affairs. 

Reserve Affairs is also pleased that the Presidential Report on Strengthening Our 

Military Families highlighted a program for implementing a one-stop resource to 

handle State-wide military family issues using Inter-Service Family Assistance 

Committees (ISFACs). These locally-based committees work to build community capacity and strengthen networks of support. DOD has built on these grassroots efforts to benefit geographically dispersed Active, Guard, or Reserve servicemembers 

and families utilizing the Yellow Ribbon Reintegration Program (YRRP). 

Throughout a servicemember’s continuum of service, YRRP strives to put in place 

a viable support system. A coordinated network of support with defined processes 

serves the needs of military families in geographic locations closest to where they 

reside. The work to strengthen and support military families is never complete and 

DOD continually strives to identify gaps in our support and to link appropriate resources from all stakeholders. It is important to note that Yellow Ribbon ReintegraVerDate Aug 31 2005 09:55 Jan 25, 2012 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00246 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6621 Y:\BORAWSKI\DOCS\68089.TXT JUNE PsN: JUNEB
241 

tion Program is not a ‘‘war time only’’ requirement, but must remain an enduring 

mission to ensure the continued resilience of servicemembers and their families. 

Employer 

Employer Support of the Guard and Reserve (ESGR) engagement has grown significantly in recent years. The vision is, ‘‘to develop and promote a culture in which 

all American employers support and value the military service of their employees 

with ESGR as the principal advocate within DOD.’’ ESGR has a footprint in all 50 

States, U.S. Territories, and DC with over 4,700 volunteers assisting employers and 

servicemembers on a daily basis. In striving to enhance employer support, ESGR 

relies on recognition programs where employers are recognized for outstanding support of Guard and Reserve servicemembers and their families. One example is the 

Secretary of Defense Employer Support Freedom Award, where 15 employers are 

honored for their outstanding support of Guard and Reserve members and their 

families annually during September at the Reagan Center in Washington, DC. In 

this current year 4,049 employers were nominated by servicemembers or their families. This is an increase from the 2,470 that were nominated in fiscal year 2010. 

With current ongoing global operations, combat-related and humanitarian, the support of employers and families has never been more critical to our national defense. 

The data in the following table shows the improving trend of some of ESGR’s programs and activities over the last 3 fiscal years: 

Despite all of the good work already accomplished by ESGR members, I believe 

more must be done. In 2010, I formed the Family and Employer Programs and Policy (FEPP) office within the Office of the Secretary of Defense for Reserve Affairs 

to align ESGR, the Yellow Ribbon Reintegration Program and Family Support Office 

under one directorate to ensure we are working together to create synergy and realize efficiencies for the servicemembers and families served by YRRP, ESGR and 

Family Programs’ missions. In fiscal year 2011, ESGR placed additional emphasis 

on the employment of servicemembers and now assists them throughout the entire 

employment cycle. 

One of the greatest challenges facing our Nation is unemployment and underemployment, and these related problems are severe for those in the Guard and Reserve, or for those leaving active military service. Whether they are soldiers, sailors, 

airmen, coast guardsmen, or marines completing active duty, or members of the 

Guard and Reserve returning from deployment, many of these great men and 

women return home to an uncertain future because of the challenging job market. 

The promise of a secure job provides servicemembers and their families with stability and peace of mind. The December 2009 Status of Forces Survey of Reserve 

component members indicated that servicemembers across six of the seven Reserve 

components (Coast Guard Reserve not included) self-reported a 12 percent unemployment rate. The highest unemployment rate across all components was 22 percent among junior enlisted troops in the rank of E1–E4. As this data is self-reported, many of these younger troops are likely to be students. The total number 

of respondents were 20,238 (from an estimated population of 822,000) RC 

servicemembers. 


504per19.eps
242 

The current employment challenges led to the implementation of the Employment 

Initiatives Program (EIP). EIP is now ESGR’s highest priority and is an outgrowth 

of ESGR’s existing outreach programs already in place, with a focus on employment. 

The overall intent of EIP is to take full advantage of all ESGR, Yellow Ribbon, and 

Family Programs, in partnership with public and private entities, to enhance employment opportunities for servicemembers and their families, especially focusing on 

those completing active duty tours and our Wounded Warriors. During fiscal year 

2010, ESGR conducted several Pilot Programs to determine the activities and best 

practices to support the EIP. Some examples include but are not limited to: Job 

Fairs, Transition Assistance Programs, Strategic Partnering at the State and Local 

levels. 

The EIP will assist our Citizen Warriors and at the same time it will help those 

American businesses that are looking for employees possessing skill-sets, integrity 

and vast experience resident in the U.S. military. 

RESILIENCE TRAINING & PREPARATION

Yellow Ribbon—Understand Psychology of Military Service Family Programs 

The objective of the YRRP is to ensure the readiness and well-being of National 

Guard and Reserve servicemembers and their families by providing dynamic events, 

information, services, referrals, and proactive outreach opportunities throughout the 

entire deployment cycle. Resiliency is a priority of the YRRP mission. Since its inception in 2008, there has been an ever increasing focus on resiliency building and 

training for the National Guard and Reserve Forces. In response to growing awareness regarding the connection between post-traumatic stress (PTS), substance 

abuse, criminal activity or suicide and ‘‘bounce back’’ ability, Reserve component 

members and their families are being offered training to enhance their resiliency 

skills. 

As part of the YRRP, services and information that foster resiliency are provided 

at the pre-deployment, during deployment, and the 30, 60, 90 day post-deployment 

events. The Yellow Ribbon Reintegration Program implemented a Cadre of Speakers 

program, hiring facilitators who specialize in resilience training and who are available to YRRP event planners across the country. These facilitators also work with 

Military and Family Life Counselors and chaplains to provide critical support 

around resilience issues at YRRP events, ensuring individual assistance is available 

for each family or servicemember as required. 

Additionally, other sessions and resources focus on marriage and children, substance abuse awareness, financial counseling, anger management, employment assistance and Department of Veterans Affairs’ information regarding benefits and 

medical care eligibility. To find an event or additional resources, an RC member, 

commander, planner, or family member can access information at http:// 

www.yellowribbon.mil/. 

Resilience and Suicide Prevention 

Suicide prevention is a very important issue for Reserve Affairs. The loss of even 

one life to suicide is heartbreaking and has a profound impact on both the unit and 

the family members left behind. As noted by the DOD Task Force on the Prevention 

of Suicide by Members of the Armed Forces, many factors contribute to the military 

suicide rate. One factor relates to leadership. Each Service acknowledges the important role those leaders, both Officers and NCOs play in building resiliency among 

those under their command. In 2010, there were a total of 294 active duty 

servicemembers (including 26 Active Reserve) who committed suicide, which is down 

from 310 in 2009. However, among our non-active National Guard and Reserve, 

there were an additional 178 suicides in 2010. For the Army National Guard, this 

was a doubling of their suicide rate from 2009. The Services, along with Reserve 

Affairs, have taken these rates very seriously and have committed resources to significantly reduce this trend. The National Guard currently has a Director of Psychological Health in each of our 54 States and territories who acts as the focal point 

for coordinating the psychological support for Guard members and their families. 

Additionally, Reserve Affairs has established a Stakeholder Core Group whose mission is to address suicide prevention, intervention, post-vention and surveillance 

issues across all of the RC. Reserve Affairs has also included training materials on 

resiliency for Yellow Ribbon Reintegration Program events. 

243 

DOD YOUTH OUTREACH PROGRAMS

Science and Technology Academies Reinforcing Basic Aviation and Space Exploration 

I continue to support the President’s education agenda through two youth outreach programs in order to achieve our national security objectives; the DOD 

STARBASE and National Guard Youth Challenge programs. 

The President has stated that it has never been more important for young Americans to be proficient in science and mathematics and he made enhancing the learning of science and math a national priority. The DOD STARBASE program provides 

elementary and secondary school students with real-world applications of science, 

technology, engineering and math through heuristic learning, simulations and experiments. The strength of the program lies in the three-way partnership between 

the military, the local communities and the school districts. Senior military leaders 

such as Admiral Roughead agree that the DOD STARBASE Program is a productive 

investment in the future of our youth, building and enlarging the talented recruits 

we need. 

The fiscal year 2012 budget allows the program to serve over 65,000 students 

from approximately 1200 schools and 350 school districts which includes schools 

from American Indian communities in Mississippi, Oklahoma, and South Dakota. 

Over 605,000 youths have attended the program and pre and post testing shows a 

significant improvement in student’s understanding and interest in math and 

science and in pursuing further education. Currently, there are 60 DOD STARBASE 

Program sites on military facilities in 34 States, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico. 

National Guard Youth Challenge Program 

The President has also addressed the high school dropout crisis. My staff and I 

have been working with the Office of Management and Budget to challenge States, 

industries, and non-profits to invest in intervention programs like the National 

Guard Youth Challenge Program. I am also working with General McKinley, Chief 

of the National Guard Bureau, to provide oversight and management of the Program by collaborating with Governors to eliminate State resident issues; and to ensure every qualified high school dropout has an opportunity to attend the program. 

The Challenge program is currently operating in 27 States and Puerto Rico. Its goal 

is to improve the education, life skills and employment potential of America’s high 

school dropouts. We provide quasi-military based training, supervised work experience to advance the program’s core components. The core components include obtaining a high school diploma or equivalent, developing leadership, citizenship, life 

coping and job skills and improving physical fitness, health and hygiene. Since the 

program’s inception over 100,000 students have successfully graduated from the program. The average cost per Challenge student is approximately $16,000. The fiscal 

year 2012 budget will support increasing annual enrollment and/or start up new 

programs in States that have the fiscal resources to match the cost-share funding 

requirements and to sustain the program’s viability in States that have budget limitations. 

These two successful DOD youth outreach programs provide the Department a 

unique connection to the American public and working with our most valued resource—our young people. 

CONCLUSION

The National Guard and Reserve continue to be a mission-ready critical element 

of our National Security Strategy. The requirement for our Reserve components has 

not, and should not lessen. Our Reserve components must continue their expanded 

role as an Operational Reserve in all facets of the Total Force. To lose the training, 

experience and integration of the Reserve components by relegating them to a strategic Reserve would squander a resource we can’t afford to waste. The nation continues to call and the Reserve components continue to answer that call. But in answering that call, we shouldn’t lose sight of the need to balance their commitment 

to country with their commitment to family and civilian employers. That is why relieving stress on the force is absolutely essential; utilizing our Guard and Reserve 

as a component of the Total Force is so crucial; and continuing to train and equip 

the RC to maintain our investment and experience is so critical. Predictability will 

enable our families to build resiliency, as well as foster understanding with our employers. I realize the path forward will not be easy, but together with support of 

legislative proposals mentioned above we can ensure an operational, trained and 

fully prepared Reserve component. I have included in the following annexes multiyear (2010–2012) funding levels and justifications for programs within my jurisdicVerDate Aug 31 2005 09:55 Jan 25, 2012 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00249 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6621 Y:\BORAWSKI\DOCS\68089.TXT JUNE PsN: JUNEB
244 

tion and oversight that will enable the Reserve components to achieve these goals. 

Thank you very much for this opportunity to testify on behalf of our great Guard 

and Reserve Force. 


504per20.eps
245 


504per21.eps
246 


504per22.eps
247 


504per23.eps
248 

Senator WEBB. Thank you, Secretary McCarthy. 

Secretary Woodson, welcome. 

STATEMENT OF HON. JONATHAN WOODSON, M.D., ASSISTANT 

SECRETARY OF DEFENSE FOR HEALTH AFFAIRS, DIRECTOR 

OF TRICARE MANAGEMENT ACTIVITY 

Dr. WOODSON. Thank you very much. 

Mr. Chairman, members of the committee, thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today to discuss the future of the 

military health system, and in particular our priorities for the coming year. 

This is my first appearance before this committee in my role as 

Assistant Secretary of Defense for Health Affairs. I want to first 

express my deep gratitude for the warm and helpful guidance both 

you and your staffs have privately offered me in my first 4 months 

in this position. 


504per24.eps
249 

Our fiscal year 2012 budget for the Defense Health Program and 

related medical activities supports the priorities of our strategic 

framework, the quadruple aim: improving readiness, improving 

population health, the patient care experience, and responsibly 

managing our costs of care. 

First, from the perspective of medical readiness, I want to acknowledge the performance and courage of our military medical 

professionals serving in combat theaters. I recently returned from 

Afghanistan, 2 days ago, and can attest to the skill, commitment, 

courage, and patriotism of our medics serving in harm’s way. 

These attributes were exemplified by Captain Joshua 

McClimans, a 31-year-old nurse, husband, father of two young children, on his second deployment, assigned to the 352nd Combat 

Support Hospital. On April 22, he was killed by indirect fire and 

gave his last full measure of devotion to this country, as Lincoln 

once said. 

I attended his memorial service at Forward Operating Base 

Solerno and talked with fellow unit members. Although deeply saddened by the events, these true professionals soldiered on and continued their medical mission, in support of other brothers and sisters in harm’s way. 

I ask that we all here today remember Captain McClimans, the 

eight Air Force personnel and the one civilian killed last week, as 

well as their families, in our thoughts and prayers. 

The military health system has achieved historic reductions in 

disease and injuries through improved public health and preventative medicine strategies. For servicemembers wounded in combat, 

their likelihood of survival after a medic arrives remains at historic 

and unmatched levels. My responsibility is to ensure that we sustain the high level of performance. 

Our budget continues to support the foundation which our 

achievements have been built on: a robust medical research and development program that focuses on battlefield illnesses and injuries, to include prevention, diagnosis, treatment for traumatic brain 

injury, post-traumatic stress, and depression. 

Second, we improve the health of populations we serve. The fiscal 

year 2012 budget focuses resources on efforts to increase our behavioral health providers, both within the system and within our 

private-sector partners. We are also targeting funds to improve access to behavioral health providers throughout the country. We are 

investing in preventative-care approaches that are intended to 

lower the rates of tobacco use, alcohol abuse, and obesity. 

Third, we must enhance the patient-care experience. We propose 

continued expansion of the patient-centered medical home, our central initiative to improve access to care, population health, and 

overall patient satisfaction. We continue to invest in modernizing 

our military hospitals and clinics around the world. Thanks to you 

and your unwavering support, our construction programs will allow 

wounded, ill, and injured servicemembers to be treated in the finest medical facilities in the world. 

This year, we look forward to opening two showcase facilities in 

the National Capital area: the new Walter Reed National Military 

Medical Center and our new Community Hospital at Fort Belvoir. 

250 

Finally, we recognize that emerging Federal fiscal policy, combined with the ever increasing healthcare costs, demand that we 

take additional steps to be even more responsible stewards of the 

taxpayers’ dollars. As Secretary Gates and Chairman Mullen have 

repeatedly declared, we, the Department, must tighten our belts, 

just as many Americans have done over the last several years. 

In our proposed budget, we share the responsibility for cost control among all participants. We have first focused on internal efficiencies within DOD, the TRICARE Management Activity, and 

Health Affairs, and then the civilian provider community, and finally, with our beneficiaries, for whom we’ve proposed a very modest change to select out-of-pocket costs. We have gone to great 

lengths to protect patients enrolled in existing programs and beneficiaries who have special needs and circumstances that must be 

considered. We have met with the beneficiary organizations on 

these proposals. I am gratified that many have viewed our proposals reasonable and fair. 

Our proposed budget keeps fidelity with our core principles. We 

will never lose our focus on commitment to a high quality and 

world class healthcare system for all members of the Armed Forces, 

and for their families, who served, past and present, and who will 

serve in the future. 

I am both pleased and proud to be here today with you to represent the men and women who comprise the military health system. I look forward to answering your questions. 

Thank you very much. 

[The prepared statement of Dr. Woodson follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT BY HON. JONATHAN WOODSON, M.D. 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The proposed total funding for the Military Health System (MHS) in fiscal year 

2012—combining both the Defense Health Program (DHP) and other appropriations 

that fund MHS activities—is $52.5 billion, a 4.8 percent increase over the fiscal year 

2011 request. This request reflects investments in the four strategic priorities for 

the Military Health System in the fiscal year 2012 Defense Health Program: Assure 

Readiness; Improve Population Health; Enhance the Patient Experience of Care; 

and Responsibly Manage the Cost of Care. 

I. Assure Medical Readiness 

We continue to invest in medical research and development supporting the full 

spectrum of military medical operations and issues. Particular emphasis this year 

supports a comprehensive DOD/VA research effort aimed at understanding the 

interventions that work to prevent suicide. We also continue our extensive research 

into the early identification diagnosis, and treatment of traumatic brain injury; support for the emerging efforts around regenerative medicine; and other research that 

spans the mental and behavioral health fields. 

II. Improve Population Health 

The fiscal year 2012 budget focuses resources on efforts to increase our behavioral 

health providers, both within the direct care system and with our private sector 

partners. We are also targeting funds in fiscal year 2012 to lower the rates of tobacco use, alcohol abuse, and obesity. This will include initiatives that introduce 

positive patient incentives that reward healthy behaviors. 

III. Enhance the Patient Experience of Care 

MHS proposes over $53 million in new spending for its continued expansion of 

the Patient-Centered Medical Home (PCMH)—our central initiative to improve access to care; population health and overall patient satisfaction. The fiscal year 2012 

budget also requests $1.1 billion in medical military construction funds for 14 paVerDate Aug 31 2005 09:55 Jan 25, 2012 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00256 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6621 Y:\BORAWSKI\DOCS\68089.TXT JUNE PsN: JUNEB
251 

tient care and 3 nonpatient care projects, including replacement of the Landstuhl 

Regional Medical Center in Germany. 

IV. Responsibly Manage Costs 

While we maintain that efforts to control the long-term health care cost trends 

in the Department are more appropriately focused on encouraging healthy behaviors, and reducing unnecessary utilization of health services, there are actions we 

propose to introduce in fiscal year 2012 to begin the process of better managing our 

spiraling health care costs. We have a proposed budget for a set of specific initiatives that will save the department almost $7.9 billion in fiscal year 2012–2016. 

These initiatives can be grouped as follows (and summarized in the Table at the 

bottom of this Summary): 

Internal Efficiencies 

TRICARE Management Activity contractor overhead will be reduced by over $183 

million in savings in fiscal year 2012 alone. This is in addition to other savings from 

aggressive monitoring and pursuit of fraud, waste and abuse; redirection of prescription drug purchases to more economically advantageous outlets through mail order 

or MTF pharmacies; and redirection of medical care from Emergency Rooms to urgent care centers. A national nurse advice line will also be introduced to assist with 

access and redirection of care where appropriate. The MHS will continue to identify 

and implement initiatives that take advantage of joint purchasing, greater optimization of the medical supply chain, and increased shared services across all of the 

Service branches. 

Equity in Programs and Provider Payment 

The MHS is pursuing a more equitable management of benefits across all health 

care programs by aligning our reimbursement policies with Medicare. In fiscal year 

2012, payments for care provided by facilities designated as Sole Community Hospitals will align with Medicare reimbursement levels, saving almost $400 million 

over 5 years. Payment adjustments will be phased-in over 4 years to mitigate the 

impact. 

Additionally, MHS proposes to amend the Uniformed Services Family Health Plan 

(USFHP) enrollment policies so that they align with all other TRICARE providers 

for dual-eligible Medicare/TRICARE beneficiaries. All current enrollees will be 

grandfathered into the current program. Upon reaching age 65, Medicare will become the primary payer for these beneficiaries and TRICARE will be second payer. 

Once Medicare-eligible, these beneficiaries may continue to see the same providers 

that they do today; the reimbursement process by which both Medicare and 

TRICARE contribute payments will be the only change. 

Modest Changes of Beneficiary Out-of-Pocket Costs 

MHS proposes an increase of $2.50 per month (or $5.00/month per retiree family) 

for enrollment in TRICARE Prime—the first increase in enrollment fees proposed 

since the TRICARE Prime benefit was introduced in 1995. For the longer term, 

MHS proposes to index this enrollment fee in order to establish more predictable 

and modest fee changes over time. MHS also recommends minor adjustments in prescription drug copayments that include both reductions and increases in copays, the 

increase or decrease dependent upon the outlet selected by beneficiaries. 

All of the MHS proposals have been carefully considered and numerous safeguards have been incorporated: grandfathering in current enrollees to unique programs; phasing-in new reimbursement methodologies for providers; and excepting 

certain beneficiaries (survivors and medically retired servicemembers) from any 

changes—in order to protect the most vulnerable beneficiaries and providers. 

252 

Mr. Chairman, members of the subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to 

appear before you today to discuss the future of the Military Health System (MHS), 

and in particular, our priorities for the coming year. 

This is my first public appearance before this Subcommittee in my role as the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Health Affairs, and I want to first express my deep 

gratitude for the warm and helpful guidance both you and your staffs have privately 

offered to me in my first 4 months in this position. 

The people who comprise the MHS have a well-deserved reputation for exceptional professional performance and personal courage. I believe deeply that military 

medicine has proven itself time and again as a learning organization, capable of 

self-critical analysis and substantive improvement in those areas where it falls short 

of its own and others’ expectations. 

We begin 2011 on a strong foundation. Our medical achievements on the battlefield, in combat hospitals, and in the air continue to set new standards for medical 

outcomes in war . . . anywhere in the world. 

We are fortunate to have the continued, substantive support of both Congress and 

the White House. This support has been greatly enhanced by the very public effort 

led by the First Lady and Dr. Jill Biden to highlight the contributions of military 

families to our national security, and to focus on how the broader American community can acknowledge this and support military families on the homefront. Within 

the MHS, we are engaged in this effort, and I will illustrate some of our efforts in 

this testimony. 

Even with our successes, challenges remain. First, we continue to provide medical 

treatment to servicemembers in combat in some of the most austere environments 

on the planet. There is nothing routine about this, regardless of how long we have 

been at war. I will not waver from my primary focus to ensure the medical readiness of all of our Armed Forces, and the readiness of the MHS to deliver highly 

trained medical professionals to support them. 

International events and ongoing humanitarian crises also remind us that we 

must be prepared to respond to additional events on a moment’s notice at the direction of national command authorities. Readiness is more than the center of our strategic plan; it’s our fundamental obligation and reason for being. 

A key component of our readiness obligations is to ensure we sustain the confidence of the servicemembers who we support here at home, and who have borne 

the greatest burden of war—the servicemembers with serious wounds, visible and 

invisible, along with their families who sacrifice, who grieve, and who carry their 

own wounds from this conflict. We will continue to dedicate our time and resources 

to our care for wounded warriors and their families. 

Finally, we must also operate in an environment that recognizes financial resources are limited. The Department has put forward specific proposals to address 

the rising costs of military health care. But, it is important to note that this is not 

our first step at cost control. Over the last several years, we have taken a number 

of actions that have produced real savings to the Government and the taxpayer, to 

include: introduction of the Outpatient Prospective Payment System (OPPS), targeted efforts to increase the use of the TRICARE Mail Order Program (TMOP); a 

TRICARE Pharmacy Fraud and Abuse surveillance system; and expanded access to 

urgent and primary care facilities to redirect care away from Emergency Room care 

whenever clinically appropriate. 

Today, I will explain the actions we are taking to address the financial challenges 

we face, and the process by which we selected the proposals put forward in this 

budget. 


504per11.eps
253 

From the broadest overview possible, the proposed total funding for the MHS in 

fiscal year 2012—combining both the Defense Health Program (DHP) and other appropriations which fund MHS activities—is over $52 billion (Table 1). This reflects 

continued investments in readiness, patient care activities, research and development and medical military construction. 

In the pages that follow, I will outline our programmatic priorities for the fiscal 

year 2012 Defense Health Program. I have organized this testimony and our priorities around the MHS’ strategic framework—the Quadruple Aim. This framework 

best captures the core mission requirements of our unique system: Assure Readiness; Improve Population Health; Enhance the Patient Experience of Care; and Responsibly Manage the Cost of Care. Undergirding these four priorities are our 

Learning and Growth requirements, and I will outline our efforts in these areas as 

well. 

IV. ASSURE MEDICAL READINESS

Within the MHS, we have established an Individual Medical Readiness (IMR) 

metric to determine the medical preparedness of each servicemember to deploy. 

Overall, the medical readiness of our forces remains sound, and for the last 2 years 

we have seen continuous improvement in readiness each quarter, across both the 

Active and Reserve components (Figure 1). Within the Reserve component, medical 

readiness is below our benchmarks. We find that, in general, the individual reservists can quickly be elevated to a prepared status during the pre-deployment period 

(e.g., complete health assessments and by ensuring minor dental procedures and immunizations, etc. are quickly performed). We are in the process of engaging with 

commanders, particularly in the Reserve component, to focus attention and corrective action on these matters within their units. 


504per12.eps
254 

In addition to our focus on the medical readiness of our current force, we are also 

building upon our medical research and development programs that are essential 

to our future readiness posture. We are advancing our understanding—and the understanding of the broader American and global health community—of how to prevent, diagnose, and treat scores of military related illnesses and injuries. We are 

transferring our knowledge from the research bench to the battlefield, and lives are 

being saved. 

The MHS medical research and development investment priorities for fiscal year 

2012 are focused on early Diagnosis and Treatment of Brain Injury; Polytrauma and 

Blast Injury Diagnostics and Treatments; Countermeasures against Operational 

Stressors and Optimizing Health, Performance, and Fitness; Definitive and Rehabilitative Care Innovations Required to Reset our Wounded Warriors; Psychological 

Health and Well-Being for Military Personnel and Families; Prevention, Diagnosis 

and Treatment of Wound Infections and Militarily Relevant Infectious Diseases; and 

Military Medical Training Systems and Health Information Technology Applications. 

It is not possible to reflect on every research project or program initiative in our 

portfolio, but I would like to highlight just a few high-interest areas and point out 

where we are seeing particularly promising results and programs that will continue 

to maintain high-level interest and oversight in the coming year. 

Our servicemembers continue to incur more than 20,000 cases of Traumatic Brain 

Injury (TBI) every year. Although the vast majority of TBI incidents are diagnosed 

as ‘‘mild’’ and resolve with rest, the Department of Defense has implemented numerous programs within the last 3 years to provide early identification, diagnosis 

and treatment for those who sustain a traumatic brain injury. 

TBI research continues to be fast-tracked to bring findings from research being 

done into clinical practice as soon as possible. Key areas of promise include understanding injury related blast dynamics, rapid field assessment of mild TBI to include identification of objective biomarkers to be used in the identification and diagnosis of concussion, and TBI innovative treatment modalities such as the ongoing 

clinical trials for neuroprotectants. 

We have recently teamed with the Department of Veterans Affairs and academia 

on the Military Suicide Research Consortium to better understand the interventions 

that are most successful in our suicide prevention efforts. 

We are also planning a comprehensive research effort, spread across 3 fiscal years 

(fiscal year 2011–2013) to study the indicators/predictors of violence in servicemembers. We envision a retrospective and a prospective effort, that will examine 

DOD populations and develop a scientifically based list of behavioral indicators of 

potential violence. 

Our efforts in regenerative medicine are now starting to focus on taking our products out of the science and technology realm and into clinical trials. These efforts 

focus on limb and digit salvage, craniofacial reconstruction, scar-less wound healing, 

burn repair, and compartment syndrome. 

Lastly, we are focusing our efforts on innovative combined pharmacologic and psychotherapeutic approaches to treat Post Traumatic Stress Disorder. 


504per13.eps
255 

V. IMPROVING POPULATION HEALTH

The Department continues to seek ways to mitigate the development of mental 

health disorders, and to reduce the number of suicides in our Armed Forces. We engage in a number of preventive, diagnostic and treatment approaches to reduce the 

incidence of these disorders, if possible, and to identify and treat those impacted. 

Together with the line community, both officer and enlisted, we have undertaken 

a Department-wide effort to reduce and eliminate the stigma associated with seeking mental health care. There are indications that this effort is working. For example, we are seeing that significantly more servicemembers who are referred for mental health care seek it out, and stay in treatment. We are encouraged by this trend 

and will continue to do our part to ensure that these trends continue. 

We know that mental health conditions, like most medical conditions, are treatable. Most patients with Post Traumatic Stress (PTS) symptoms recover without 

treatment in a few months, and many recover with medication and/or psychotherapy. With your help, over the past 2 years we have made a tremendous investment in behavioral health care, adding nearly 2,000 behavioral health providers to 

our military hospitals and clinics, and 10,000 more to the networks (Table 2). By 

embedding mental health providers in our primary care clinics, we have improved 

access to mental health services for all of our beneficiaries. 

The mental health workload has increased across the Military Health System 

(MHS) for both active duty servicemembers and family members. Among the reasons for this increased workload are PTSD, TBI, earlier identification of mental 

health issues, increased suicides and suicide attempts, and reduced stigma of seeking mental health care. This workload has increased the need for mental health providers. Currently, throughout the MHS, there are a total of 7,662 military, civilian, 

and contract employees (full time equivalents) providing mental health care. This 

reflects a shortage of 1,025 which puts the MHS at 88 percent fill compared to requirements. We are pursuing efforts to assist the Services in recruiting and retaining these critical mental health provider positions. These efforts include using Direct Hire Authority and Expedited Hiring Authority that Congress provided the Department to help recruit providers. Additionally, we are implementing the Physician 

and Dentist Pay Plan (PDPP) which will ensure we can pay critical shortage specialties, such as psychiatrists, salaries competitive with the private sector. 

256 

To enhance services available to National Guard, Reserve, and Active Duty families who live in remote areas without easy access to installation-based psychological 

support, military and civilian providers are collaborating to educate local healthcare 

providers on military culture and treatment of psychological problems that military 

families encounter. We have also introduced the TRICARE Assistance Program 

(TRIAP), which offers 24/7 web chat with a licensed counselor, recognizing that family stress can often occur outside of normal provider hours, or in locations that do 

not have readily accessible counseling services. We continue to fund an initiative 

with the Department of Health and Human Services to place 200 Public Health 

Service officers, who are credentialed mental health clinicians, in our military treatment facilities (MTFs). 

We are also working to improve the health and lifestyle behaviors of our beneficiaries, and we will be using funds in fiscal year 2012 to advance this goal. Our 

focus is to lower the rate of obesity, tobacco usage, and binge drinking, and, more 

generally, help beneficiaries make healthier choices. As an example, obesity efforts 

will target children, active duty members nearing retirement (retirees experience 


504per14.eps
257 

marked increases in weight upon separation from the military), and patients with 

identified illness (e.g., diabetes, certain cancers) who will benefit from weight management. This effort includes initiatives with patient-level incentives to encourage 

healthy behaviors as well as partnerships with military bases and communities to 

create healthier work environments and help motivate other beneficiaries to make 

the healthier choice the preferred choice. 

III. ENHANCE THE PATIENT EXPERIENCE OF CARE

The MHS is fully engaged in implementing a new approach to primary care in 

our MTFs. Known as the Patient-Centered Medical Home (PCMH), the principles 

focus on developing a cohesive relationship between the patient and the provider 

team. We view the PCMH as a transformative effort within our system, with the 

potential to positively affect all aspects of our strategic focus—readiness, population 

health, patient experience and per member cost. With approximately 655,000 patients enrolled in developing PCMH practice sites, the results have been very promising—various sites have reported improved preventive service compliance, reduced 

use of the emergency room, and more timely care provided. Continued investment 

in and implementation of the PCMH is a top priority for the MHS. 

One major new program that emerged from the NDAA for Fiscal Year 2011 is a 

new and important benefit in TRICARE—extension of TRICARE coverage to adult 

dependents up to age 26. This provision in the NDAA ensures that TRICARE now 

complies with all elements of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, or the 

national health care reform law. 

The MHS continues its important commitment to upgrade our health care facilities in the Continental United States and throughout the world. Table 2 provides 

a summary of both appropriated and requested military medical construction funds 

from 2008–2012. 

The new Walter Reed National Military Medical Center, the new San Antonio 

Military Medical Center, and the new community hospital at Fort Belvoir will open 

their doors in 2011. These facilities will serve as showcases for leadership in patient-centered care, patient safety standards, environmental responsibility and sustainability, and medical quality and outcomes. These achievements could not have 

occurred without the sustained interest and investments by Congress. 

This year’s budget request includes funding for 14 patient care and 3 non-patient 

care projects. It includes the replacement of one of our largest, oldest, and most critical overseas hospitals, the Landstuhl Regional Medical Center. This project consolidates Landstuhl and Ramstein medical facilities into one convenient location, closer 

to the Ramstein flight line. The new facility will support three theaters and is sized 

to serve the peacetime beneficiary population with an expansion capability to address surge from medium intensity conflicts similar to the current Overseas Contingency Operations. 

Progress continues on vital chemical/bio-defense facilities at Ft. Detrick, MD and 

Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD. The first National Capital Region (NCR) Comprehensive Master Plan project in support of world-class standards begins in fiscal 

year 2012. All of our new clinical construction projects will comply with world-class 

standards and evidence-based design principles. 

I am grateful for your unwavering support of our construction program through 

the last several years that will allow our wounded, ill, and injured servicemembers 

to be treated in the finest medical facilities in the world. 


504per15.eps
258 

V. RESPONSIBLY MANAGE COSTS

Today, we are cognizant that the Federal budget deficits and long-term debt require all Federal agencies to be even more responsible stewards of the taxpayers’ 

dollars. As Secretary Gates and Chairman Mullen have repeatedly declared, we in 

this Department must tighten our belts just as so many Americans have done over 

the last several years. We share the Secretary’s concerns that the exponential 

growth in DOD health care costs can pose a long-term threat to our defense capabilities. 

In our proposed budget, we have included a number of specific initiatives that, 

viewed as a whole, can set us on the right path to long-term financial health. Secretary Gates, Chairman Mullen and the Joint Chiefs have all spoken on this issue 

consistently and with clarity—we will continue to provide the finest health benefit 

in the country for our active and retired servicemembers and their families. 

Table 4 highlights each of the major initiatives we proposed, along with their projected savings over the FYDP. Our initiatives acknowledge there is a shared responsibility for cost control in our system—starting with our own internal operational 

efficiencies, and then including both the provider and beneficiary communities. I 

will explain our rationale for each of these provisions below. 

Internal Efficiencies 

We have benefited from lessons learned in previous efforts to control rising military health care costs. First, the Department has looked internally as our number 

one priority to find and implement efficiencies. In the coming year, we will reduce 

TRICARE Management Activity contractor overhead by a substantial amount—over 

$183 million in savings in fiscal year 2012 alone. Our actions will be carefully considered, and will not detract from any activities that directly support patient care, 

although some management programs will either be eliminated or significantly reduced. 

This is in addition to other actions we have undertaken that include more aggressive monitoring and pursuit of fraud, waste and abuse; redirection of prescription 

drug purchases to more economically advantageous outlets through mail order or 

MTF pharmacies; and redirection of medical care from Emergency Rooms to urgent 

care centers. In fiscal year 2012 we plan to introduce a national nurse advice line 

that will further assist us in this effort, and provide an alternative access point for 

information and referral for our beneficiaries. 

Together with the Surgeons General, we will continue to identify and rapidly implement other initiatives that take advantage of joint purchasing, greater optimization of our medical supply chain, and increased shared services. 

Equity in Programs and Provider Payment 

Second, we are pursuing a more equitable management of benefits across all 

health care programs. 

Congress has long directed us to align our reimbursement policies with those of 

Medicare. We will continue to make the necessary regulatory changes to follow the 

law. In 2012, we will adjust our payments for care provided by facilities designated 

as Sole Community Hospitals to also align with Medicare reimbursement levels, 

saving almost $400 million over 5 years. DOD recently adopted a similar change 

with the implementation of the Outpatient Prospective Payment System (OPPS), 

and successfully implemented a phased-in approach to reduce the impact on our civilian provider network. 


504per16.eps
259 

We recognize that adjustments to payment formulas will have an impact on the 

projected revenue streams of the hospitals covered under this rule change and we 

are sensitive to revenue projections in planning for large capital outlays for construction and major medical equipment purchases. We determined that 4 years provides a reasonable time period for phase-in for the payment adjustments. 

We also seek to ensure all healthcare providers are reimbursed in the same manner regardless of their geographic location. We propose to amend our Uniformed 

Services Family Health Plan (USFHP) enrollment policies so that they align with 

all other TRICARE providers. All current enrollees will be grandfathered into the 

current program. In our budget, we propose that all future USFHP enrollees will 

convert to TRICARE For Life benefits upon reaching Medicare eligibility. 

Future enrollees will still be eligible to enroll in the USFHP if they are not Medicare-eligible. 

Future Medicare-eligible enrollees will be treated the same as all other dual-eligible DOD-Medicare beneficiaries in the country. Upon reaching age 65, Medicare will 

become the primary payer for these beneficiaries and TRICARE will be second 

payer. Once Medicare-eligible, these beneficiaries may continue to see the same providers that they do today; the reimbursement process by which both Medicare and 

TRICARE contribute payments will be the only change. 

Through this proposal DOD will achieve greater equity across the TRICARE program—all Medicare-eligible beneficiaries will be treated the same. Second, the U.S. 

Government will save money, not just DOD. DOD currently pays more than the 

U.S. Government will pay jointly under our proposed plan. 

Modest Changes of Beneficiary Out-of-Pocket Costs 

Finally, for working age retirees, we are proposing minor changes to out-of-pocket 

costs that are exceptionally modest, manageable and remain well below the inflation-adjusted out-of-pocket costs enjoyed in 1995, when TRICARE Prime was first 

introduced. We have proposed an increase of $2.50 per month (or $5.00/month per 

retiree family) for enrollment in TRICARE Prime—the first increase in enrollment 

fees proposed since the TRICARE Prime benefit was introduced in 1995. For the 

longer term, we have also proposed to index this enrollment fee in order to establish 

more predictable and modest fee changes over time. 

When these proposals were first introduced with the submission of the President’s 

budget in February, the administration had not yet selected the appropriate health 

care inflation index. As part of this process, we met with the beneficiary organizations, and we developed a set of criteria that should be used to determine the right 

index. These criteria included: 

• Relevance—an index that most closely aligned with the health care costs 

experienced by this population 

• Independence—an index determined by an independent, external agency 

rather than internally (DOD) established index 

• Transparency—an index in which the methodology is publicly available 

• Clarity—an index in which the calculations are understandable to all 

• Fairness—an index that, when considering all factors influencing health 

costs, is determined to be a fair and accurate model for the costs experienced by the Government and the beneficiary for services delivered 

In recent weeks, working closely with the Office of Management and Budget, we 

considered and evaluated six separate indices in this process, and believe that the 

National Health Expenditures (NHE) per Capita model as best meeting the criteria 

we used above. Figure 4 below highlights the average annual percentage increases 

in health costs using the various options. 

260 

As part of our proposals, we also recommend minor adjustments in prescription 

drug copayments that include both reductions and increases in copays, the increase 

or decrease dependent upon the outlet selected by beneficiaries. We want to offer 

incentives to use the most appropriate and cost-effective outlet for their needs, and 

believe the minor changes to this copayment will be accepted and assist us in this 

goal. I have been heartened by support expressed by leading beneficiary organizations for this change. We have made progress in the last few years in encouraging 

beneficiaries to elect prescription drug home delivery, and we believe this proposal 

will accelerate the adoption of this option as it has demonstrated greater medication 

compliance while saving on overall costs for the beneficiary. 

Our proposals have been carefully considered. We have incorporated numerous 

safeguards—grandfathering in all current enrollees to unique programs; phasing-in 

new reimbursement methodologies for providers; and excepting certain beneficiaries 

(survivors and medically retired servicemembers) from any changes—in order to 

protect our most vulnerable beneficiaries and providers. None of these proposals affect the free healthcare we deliver to our active duty servicemembers. 

LEARNING AND GROWTH

The foundation of our success lies with our training and education systems. Chief 

among these educational institutions is our Nation’s outstanding medical university—the Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences (USU) located here 

in Bethesda, MD. Since the first class graduated in 1980, USU alumni have become 

an integral part of our military health system and many of USU’s graduates are 

assigned in key leadership positions throughout each of our Service Medical Departments. 

The value of a USU education was never more evident than following the recent 

tragic shooting that occurred in Tucson. In the aftermath of this tragedy, it was the 

medical education received at USU that laid the foundation in medical training that 

the University of Arizona Health Science Center’s Chief Trauma Surgeon, Dr. Peter 

Rhee, called upon as he provided the initial care and treatment to Representative 

Gabrielle Giffords. His extensive military experiences proved extremely beneficial in 

providing the best care possible to the Congresswoman. When he needed to consult 

on her care plan to ensure his approach was optimal for her condition, he called 

upon his USU classmate, neurosurgeon Dr. James Ecklund and USU’s Interim 

Chief of Neurology, Dr. Geoffrey Ling. 

USU is a national treasure and its value to our Nation is seen every day in the 

battlefields of Iraq and Afghanistan, in the care we provide worldwide to our very 

deserving service men and women, in the research being carried on in the fields of 

traumatic brain injury and post-traumatic stress disorder, and in the many laboratories conducting research on emerging infectious disease and many other public 

health issues. 


504per17.eps
261 

Our system is also buttressed by a strong and deepening relationship with our 

Federal partners, particularly in our interaction and sharing with the Department 

of Veterans Affairs. We continue to increase the number of sharing agreements between DOD and VA medical facilities, facilitated by the DOD/VA Joint Incentive 

Fund. We appreciate that the NDAA for Fiscal Year 2010 extended this very valuable program until September 30, 2015. 

We are also working closely with the VA to enhance DOD/VA electronic health 

data sharing, and to create a long-term architectural framework that benefits both 

Departments and the people we serve. Beginning with a December 2010 review, led 

by the Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, DOD and VA have made substantial progress in developing a solution that can be implemented in a timely and coordinated manner. The Electronic Health Record (EHR) Way Ahead addresses specific challenges with the current EHR, including outdated legacy technologies; ongoing performance and data availability problems; and difficulty in using healthcare 

industry standards. 

In fiscal year 2012, we plan to introduce elements of the EHR Way Ahead, our 

long-term plan to replace our existing electronic health record. The details of the 

management structure to oversee the Way Ahead, the requirements development 

process and the outreach and engagement with the private sector will follow the important work that is underway now to finalize the details of our strategy. 

CONCLUSION

Our overall proposed budget for fiscal year 2012 reflects our commitment to readiness, population health, an enhanced patient experience of care, and continued responsible management of costs. 

I will never lose our focus on those members of our Armed Forces in combat. I 

will honor the sacrifices of so many servicemembers and families. I have always 

been personally inspired by the commitment and dedication of our soldiers, sailors, 

airmen, marines, and coast guardsmen. The highlight of my career as a surgeon has 

been caring for the wounded warrior on the battlefield. These talented young men 

and women, who have been asked to shoulder the responsibilities for defending this 

Nation and have suffered the consequences of nearly a decade of war, deserve the 

best medical care both at home and abroad. 

I am both pleased and proud to be here with you today to represent the men and 

women who comprise the Military Health System, and I look forward to answering 

your questions. 

Senator WEBB. Thank you, Secretary Woodson. 

As I mentioned, all of your full statements will be entered into 

the record. More importantly, they will be useful to us and to staff, 

in terms of evaluating programs and ongoing staff-to-staff discussions as we move forward with the authorization of the DOD budget this year. 

I’m going to ask a couple of questions, and then I’m going to call 

on Senator Ayotte for any questions that she might have. Then depending on who else comes, I know I will have other questions. 

We’ll just proceed in that manner. 

Let me start by asking Secretary Stanley—you mentioned, in 

your brief opening statement, your oversight of the civilian workforce. Who is in charge of the contracting force? Not just defense 

contractors here inside the Beltway, but contractors writ large, 

such as the hundreds of thousands that we are using in places like 

Iraq and Afghanistan. 

Dr. STANLEY. I know that’s not under my cognizance here. Is that 

acquisition, technology, and logistics (AT&L)? 

Mr. HALE. Well, they would report to the commanders in the installations involved. Oversight of contracting policy would be 

AT&L. 

Senator WEBB. So, who hires, fires, and pays? 

Mr. HALE. It would be the commanders—— 

Senator WEBB. How many contractors are we paying? 

262 

Mr. HALE. I only laugh, because we are much pilloried for our 

lack of full accounting of contractors. We’re getting better. For operation and maintenance (O&M) contractors who are in the 

300,000 range, is our best estimate of full time equivalents. But, 

I would tell you that there are—— 

Senator WEBB. Excuse me, what are the 300,000? 

Mr. HALE. For contractors funded by the Operation and Maintenance account, that’s the operating costs, and it’s the main source 

of funds for them. But, there’s around 300,000—there are others 

working in the other accounts, as well. We haven’t got a full count 

there yet. We were working hard, something Congress directed us 

to do, some years ago. We’re working on it. 

Senator WEBB. Well, we hear wildly varying numbers as to how 

many contractors are being paid each year by DOD, and by whom, 

and how much. Do you know how much of the DOD budget goes 

into independent contracting? 

Mr. HALE. Mr. Chairman, if you want to look at—Ash Carter 

likes to use this number, and I think it’s the right one—about 40 

percent of our money pays for all of our employees, that’s military 

and civilian. The rest goes to contractors in some way, that would 

include all the weapon system cost, but most of that is contracted 

out, eventually, to private companies. But, many people, when they 

think of contractors, are thinking more of what you alluded to, the 

Kellogg, Brown, and Root (KBR) contractors in Afghanistan that 

are performing those services. That would be more—for those funded by Operation and Maintenance, more the 300,000. 

Am I helping? I sense not. 

Senator WEBB.—kind of—we’re kind of getting there. This is a 

really relevant question, in terms of whether or not we get the 

DOD budget under control, as your testimony indicated. It’s one 

that people are having a hard time getting an answer for. 

When I was Assistant Secretary of Defense for Reserve Affairs, 

many years ago, we talked total force as being Active Duty, Guard, 

and Reserve, and then the civilian workforce. We have so many 

people, who are now contracting force, who are doing, at a minimum, quasi-military functions, the types of things that military 

people used to do, who are not actually being counted when we talk 

about the size of the DOD workforce. But, they clearly are a part 

of the DOD workforce. When we start looking at how to trim a 

DOD budget back, I think this is a good place to look. Wouldn’t you 

agree? 

Mr. HALE. Yes, and so would the Secretary of Defense. Out of the 

efficiency initiative have come direction to make some cuts in particular categories of contractors, staff augmentee contractors. But, 

the Services, as they have looked for efficiencies, have chosen to 

make other cuts, as well. So, I think you will see some, I hope, surgical reductions in contractors. 

That said, we couldn’t fight without them. We are, as you suggested, very dependent on contractors for support in the wartime 

theater and many other places. So, we need them to be an important part of our team, we just need to make use of them economically. 

Senator WEBB. Whether or not we could fight without them, we 

deserve to be able to have the same oversight over how they are 

263 

used and the discretion that is put into play, in terms of when 

they’re used. As you mentioned, these are O&M accounts, and 

there’s a lot of money that floats out to the commanding units 

under O&M accounts, where they have an enormous amount of discretion. We’re talking about increasing TRICARE, for instance and 

we’re at a point here where we have to get from the nice-to-haves 

to the needs-to-have. In my experience, I’ve been up here, now, 41⁄2

years—that’s been eluding the oversight of Congress. 

So, we would like to follow up with you on this and see if we 

can’t actually get an accurate count as to where they are and the 

functions that they are performing, to see if we can’t put some of 

the same sort of stringency in these analyses as we do in others. 

Mr. HALE. We’ll do our best. 

Senator WEBB. Thank you. 

Another question with respect to the healthcare system. I believe 

you made a comment that the cost of the DOD healthcare system 

has tripled in the last 10 years. Is that an accurate statement? 

Mr. HALE. Yes, roughly. We went from about $19 billion to $52.5. 

Senator WEBB. How does that compare, say, per capita, with the 

increase in overall health—national health during that period? I 

say ‘‘per capita’’ because the part of it is numbers and part of it 

is per-person numbers. 

Mr. HALE. It would be faster—I don’t have that. We added some 

important benefits, during this period, Mr. Chairman. TRICARE 

for Life stands out, and that’s quite expensive. I mean, it probably 

was the right thing to do, but it was expensive. So, it’s clearly 

grown more quickly. I’ll have to give you for the record the exact— 

unless, Jon, do you know? 

Dr. WOODSON. We have actually looked at this, and we’ve 

mapped it against the national healthcare expenditures index, 

which is one of our proposals. It maps directly, so that if you look 

at the rising costs of healthcare in the civilian—it’s mapping directly. Part of that, of course, is that we pay for retirees who receive their care in integrated networks and on the economy. So, obviously, we’re influenced by those same factors, in terms of the rising costs. 

Senator WEBB. Right. So, the point could fairly be made that this 

is not the result of inefficiencies; it’s the result of a national phenomenon. 

Dr. WOODSON. You’re correct. In fact, we’ve looked at our costs 

and the buckets that they fall into—and I believe this is in my 

written statement—but, in fact, as a healthcare management agency, if you will, we spend far less on administrative costs and contribute much more—80 percent of our costs or so are for the direct 

delivery of care, either within the network or in integrated networks. So, what happens, in terms of the use of technology utilization and the way medicine is practiced in our society at large directly reflects in our costs, just like it does everywhere else. 

Mr. HALE. Mr. Chairman, I’d like to add to that. 

I think most businesses in America are looking to hold down 

healthcare cost growth. We’re in the same situation. Even if the 

growth has been similar, we all need to slow it. 

Senator WEBB. Yes. I wouldn’t disagree with you at all on that. 

It’s just—the way that this has been characterized so often in the 

264 

media has been a DOD issue, and it’s a national issue in which 

DOD is attempting put some efficiencies into, in my view. 

Senator Ayotte. 

Senator AYOTTE. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. 

I want to thank our witnesses for their service to our country. 

Really appreciate your being before the committee today. 

I just wanted to follow up to the chairman’s question, Secretary 

Hale. Have there been any internal DOD analyses or external reports comparing the costs of using, for example, a full-time military 

personnel versus a contractor—to look at—if we needed to perform 

the same function, does it make more sense to expand our force 

versus use the contractor? I just don’t know if that’s already been 

worked—work that’s been done. 

Mr. HALE. I don’t know of any overall study. It’s going to be very 

dependent on the job. Military personnel are fairly costly. They 

move a lot, there’s a lot of training, all of which is good; it’s one 

of the reasons we were able to succeed this weekend. So we need 

to continue to do that. But, if it is a job that’s going to stay put, 

you’re probably better with a civilian employee. Contractors are 

generally, I think probably fair to say, for many jobs, more expensive than civilians. But, they also provide the benefit that you can 

hire them and terminate them, if you need to, more quickly. 

I know I’m not answering your question. I don’t know of any simple study that says one is more costly than the other. I think it 

would be quite dependent on the nature of the work. 

Dr. STANLEY. Senator, if I might add, one of the things that 

weighs in on this, not necessarily directly, but tangentially, is hiring reform. I call it employment reform. Because one of the things 

that’s happened is that the contracting business, at least in some 

areas, not necessarily in all the areas that Senator Webb was talking about in combat or in theater, actually are a direct result, or 

at least tangentially happening, because of the fact that the hiring 

process is so cumbersome. I have to confess to you, that’s just sort 

of some of the things that happen. So, we’re looking at that. But, 

I haven’t seen, as your question asks, any direct correlation or 

studies on this. 

Senator AYOTTE. Secretary Stanley, is there a movement within 

DOD to reform that? 

Dr. STANLEY. Absolutely. 

Senator AYOTTE. Recommend a proposal? I don’t know if it will 

require congressional approval, but I think that’s an excellent thing 

to make it more efficient, in terms of how hiring is done. I also 

think one of the issues we need to address is how contracting is 

done—both in terms of the criteria that are used but also in terms 

of our efficiency in contracting. So, I appreciate that that’s something that you’re already beginning to undertake. 

Dr. STANLEY. Yes. 

Dr. WOODSON. If—— 

Senator AYOTTE. Excuse me, Secretary Woodson? 

Dr. WOODSON. I just wanted to add to the comments that one of 

the issues around contracting, and of course it depends on the specific situation, but you need to look at the tail. So, the issue of retirement benefits, and we’re talking about healthcare here. Sometimes, for limited-purpose projects, it is more cost efficient to hire 

265 

a contractor, because you’re not paying benefits in perpetuity or 

after retirement. So, all of those factors need to be considered into 

whether or not a contractor is a cost-efficient way of doing business. 

Senator AYOTTE. Thank you, Secretary Woodson. I would agree 

with you on that. But, I do think that it would be important to 

have that kind of data as we make these decisions on, number one, 

accountability of contractors, but also whether it makes sense, 

costwise, to either: (a) have more civilian employees; or (b) expand 

our contractor force. I certainly appreciate that there are—situations arise where you don’t need a permanent employee, because 

it’s an immediate short-term project. So, I think that flexibility 

needs to be there. But, reviewing this process when we’re in a difficult fiscal time is very important, in terms of the decisions that 

we have to make here. 

Secretary Stanley or Secretary McCarthy, whoever you think is 

most appropriate to answer this question—the fiscal year 2011 Defense appropriation allotted $16 million to outreach and reintegration services under the Yellow Ribbon Reintegration Program. I understand that this money was actually provided to the Office of the 

Under Secretary of Defense for Reserve Affairs rather than the National Guard Bureau. So, in other words, as I understand it, it was 

provided to the Office of the Secretary of Defense for Reserve Affairs, as opposed to Guard. Can you let me know what the status 

is of these funds, and whether they’ll be provided to National 

Guard programs to focus on outreach and reintegration? 

I signed a letter, among 43 Members of Congress, focusing on 8 

States, 1 of them being New Hampshire. Because, as you’ve already pointed out, Mr. Secretary, we’ve asked so much of our 

Guard and Reserve, in terms of Active deployment. Making sure 

that the programs are in place for the whole deployment cycle and 

reintegration—particularly with our civilian soldiers, though, the 

challenges are even greater because they don’t come back to that 

support system of a base, where everyone’s gone through the same 

thing; they go back into a civilian setting. In the past, before 

Armed Services hearings, I’ve highlighted what I think is an excellent program in the State of New Hampshire and these funds appropriately should go to that purpose. 

So, I wanted to get your take on what will be done with them. 

Will the Guard have an opportunity to apply for those? How will 

that move forward? 

General MCCARTHY. Senator, those funds, recently released with 

the passage of the Appropriation Act, are actively being worked. 

The Yellow Ribbon Reintegration Program Office, which reports to 

me, is actively engaged with those eight particular States to fund 

those programs, through the National Guard, in each of those 

States. So, I checked on that just today. I know that—— 

Senator AYOTTE. Thought I might ask that. [Laughter.] 

General MCCARTHY. Absolutely. 

But, Ron Young, who leads that effort, is directly engaged.He 

tells me that he expects that, within the next few weeks, they will 

have completed working with each of those eight States. 

Senator AYOTTE. Well, we really appreciate your efforts in that 

regard. Certainly, as I’ve said in the past, New Hampshire has a 

266 

program that we’ve been measuring the metrics of, in terms of reintegration. The fact—it’s been measurable progress. I really appreciate your work on that, given what we’ve asked of our Guard and 

Reserve. 

General MCCARTHY. Dr. Stanley and I met with the Adjutant 

General of New Hampshire, about 3 or 4 months ago, and talked 

about that program specifically. So, we’re on target with that. 

The Yellow Ribbon Reintegration Program is, frankly, one of the 

most important things that we can do. If we’re going to continue 

to use the Reserve component as a part of the operational force, 

that can’t be seen just as a wartime-only effort. That’s something 

that we have to continue to do, to keep faith with the men and 

women of the Reserve component and their families. 

Senator AYOTTE. Thank you very much. 

One of the things I do think when you—is going forward, how do 

we handle this reintegration issue with the Guard, that I think is 

important from our program, is that it’s a public/private partnership. So, we’re able to actually reduce costs because we’ve engaged 

the private sector, as well. Because in very difficult fiscal times, we 

have to look at ways we can do this. The private sector wants to 

engage on this. So, I appreciate what you’ve said today. 

Also wanted to follow up, Secretary Stanley, in your statement, 

you say that some of the prestigious universities are now rethinking their policies that exclude Reserve Officers Training Corps 

(ROTC) on campus. I think you’ve said—I noted Stanford University recently voted to invite ROTC back. They hadn’t had them on 

campus since Vietnam. I’m really please about that. Can you tell 

me, are there any other universities that receive Federal funding 

that—who still prohibit ROTC programs or recruiters on campus? 

Dr. STANLEY. I have to take the question for the record, in terms 

of the actual universities. 

[The information referred to follows:] 

Currently, no universities are in violation of the Solomon Amendment for Reserve 

Officers Training Corps (ROTC) Program issues. However, there are two schools, the 

Vermont Law School and William Mitchell College of Law, which are in violation 

of the Solomon Amendment for denying recruiter access. 

All Ivy League colleges are in compliance with the Solomon Amendment and all 

have ROTC affiliation either through host or cross-town agreements. DoD is obliged 

to enforce the Solomon Amendment, which denies Federal funding to institutions 

that either prevent ROTC from being on campus or that interfere with participation 

by their students in ROTC on campus or at another institution. 

Dr. STANLEY. I have a little history in this, in that, in the 1980s, 

as a major on Active Duty, I actually went around to a bunch of 

schools—— 

Senator AYOTTE. Oh, were you? 

Dr. STANLEY.—trying to get ROTC back on the campuses. Over 

the years, for different reasons, different schools decided not to 

have ROTC on campus. Things have changed, this is a new day, 

and now they’re welcoming back. 

So, I’d like to take, for the record, to get the specific schools, because I’m certain there are some out there, as they start looking 

at the issues again about service to our Nation. 

Senator AYOTTE. I appreciate that and look forward to your answer on that, Secretary Stanley. 

267 

I remain very concerned that, I think, that it’s really important 

that ROTC be allowed on campuses, and particularly campuses 

that are going to accept Federal funds, because they need to allow 

access to our recruiters, and their students to be able to have access to those recruiters. So, I appreciate that, very much. 

Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. 

Senator WEBB. Thank you, Senator Ayotte. 

I tend to agree with your comment, too, by the way, on ROTC, 

have for a long time. 

I have a series of questions here. I don’t know, would you like 

to rotate? Senator, are you finished or—— 

Senator AYOTTE. I do have a couple more, but we could—— 

Senator WEBB. Okay, let me—— 

Senator AYOTTE. It’s up to the chairman. 

Senator WEBB. Okay, let me ask a couple, and then I’ll give back 

to you, if you like. 

Secretary Hale, what’s the size of the accrual accounts now in 

DOD? 

Mr. HALE. The accrual for military retirement would be, I think, 

about $25 billion. You let me fix that for the record. 

There’s about $10 billion for the trust fund for TRICARE for Life. 

Jon, have I forgotten any? 

Mr. HALE. I think those are the main ones. 

Senator WEBB. Are you still at about 51 cents on retirement account accruals? 

Mr. HALE. Oh, per dollar of pay? 

Senator WEBB. Right. 

Mr. HALE. I don’t think it’s that high. I think it’d be—$20–$25 billion, and we got about 100 and—$100 billion. It’s more like 25 

to 30 percent. 

Senator WEBB. Okay. It’s gone down significantly since I was in 

the Pentagon. 

Mr. HALE. You probably have the numbers sitting there from 

your staff. 

Senator WEBB. No, no. [Laughter.] 

Mr. HALE. Okay. 

Senator WEBB. Actually, that was just from my time in the Pentagon. 

Mr. HALE. I was waiting, Mr. Chairman. 

Senator WEBB. I think we were putting 51 cents out on the accrual accounts when I was in the Pentagon. So, it was a considerable shift, when they decided to do that, back in the 1980s. 

Mr. HALE. It was 1976, actually. 

Senator WEBB. It was pay-as-you-go retirement program, when 

they started requiring the accrual accounts that—— 

Mr. HALE. I helped the late Les Aspin, while I was at the Congressional Budget Office—— 

Senator WEBB. Yes, I remember—— 

Mr. HALE.—work that out. Twenty-one billion to—$20 billion— point—$20.9 billion in fiscal 2012 for the retirement accrual. 

Senator WEBB. This was an Aspin initiative, I remember that. 

Mr. HALE. Yes, it was. 

Senator WEBB. Secretary McCarthy, I can’t resist asking you a 

couple of questions, sort of as you’re approaching departure in your 

268 

job, just some thoughts from you on the structuring of your office, 

from the time that I held that same position many years ago, I 

think there were two major differences, and I want to get your 

thoughts on this, from the time that I was Assistant Secretary for 

Reserve Affairs. The first is that there was no Under, and I met, 

every morning, with the Secretary of Defense, in a staff meeting, 

which was very valuable, in terms of articulating Guard and Reserve issues. 

The second is that the relationship with the National Guard was, 

I’m sure, different, because the Chief of the National Guard had 

just been elevated to a three-star position and now it’s a four-star 

position. If you look at the job description of the current Chief of 

the National Guard and his official page, it says he is responsible 

for formulating, developing, and coordinating all policies, programs, 

and plans for all National Guard personnel, principal advisor to the 

Secretary of Defense, through the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, on 

National Guard matters; principal advisor to the Secretary Chief of 

Staff of Army, Secretary Chief of Staff of Air Force on all National 

Guard issues. 

So, two questions for you. As you are departing, having been an 

incumbent here, how comfortable are you that the policy issues, 

with respect to Guard and Reserve, are under the rubric of your 

office in a line to the Secretary of Defense? What’s your relationship with the Guard, since that position’s been elevated to a fourstar? 

General MCCARTHY. If I could, the second one’s easier than the 

first, so I’ll start with that, if you don’t mind. 

The relationship that I’ve had with General McKinley, in his role 

as the chief of the National Guard Bureau, and, frankly, with all 

of the Reserve component chiefs, has been nothing short of spectacular. It’s certainly, a part, due to personalities, theirs and mine, I 

guess. But, we’ve had a cordial and professional working relationship, without conflict, as I could have imagined. Structurally, 

you’re absolutely right, it may not always necessarily be that way, 

but that’s certainly the way it’s been during my tenure. 

With regard to the larger question of the position of Assistant 

Secretary of Defense, one thing’s been very clear to me, and that 

is that, when Congress insisted on having a Senate-confirmed civilian appointee with specific responsibility for Reserve Affairs, they 

knew what they were doing. 

I’m going to be leaving office in 3 weeks, or something like that, 

and I’m in the process of preparing an out-brief for both Secretary 

Stanley and Secretary Gates. Frankly, I think in my duty of loyalty 

to them, I ought to tell them first what I think about that. I intend 

to. I would like to be able to come back to you, either formally or 

informally, and share my views. They’ll be exactly the same views 

that I’ll give to the Secretary. But, I, frankly, if you will permit me, 

I would prefer to give my report to him first, before I share it even 

with the Senate of the United States. 

Senator WEBB. By all means. Again, I appreciate your many 

years of service, in and out of uniform, and wish you well. 

Senator Brown. 

Senator BROWN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

269 

Secretary Hale, I was wondering if you could comment on the 

DOD’s plan to terminate the USFHP. 

Mr. HALE. Well, Senator, we’re not terminating the plan at all. 

It would continue. Those in it would be welcome to continue using 

it. What we propose is to have the same rules applied to the 

USFHP as apply to all other military retirees; namely, the retirees 

would be required to join Medicare, Medicare Part B, and the hospitals involved would receive the same claims payments. But, the 

program would continue. 

Senator BROWN. Well, it’s one of the highest-rated healthcare 

plans, though, in the military health system in 2010, isn’t that 

right? 

Mr. HALE. I’ll accept your word. I hear very good things about 

it, and so we have no reason to terminate it, and have no plans 

to terminate it, that I’m aware, now or in the future. I’d ask either 

Dr. Stanley or Dr. Woodson to speak out. 

Dr. WOODSON. That’s exactly correct. We don’t have any plans to 

terminate it. I think what we plan to do is bring payment in line 

with other beneficiaries. So, for example, the average cost for a 

Medicare-eligible beneficiary in the USFHP is about $19,000 

there’s a range but about $19,000. Other beneficiaries that exercise 

the use of Medicare, we pay about $4,500. The real issue is that, 

over the years, these hospitals were given special benefits. They 

are on solid plans, in terms of the delivery of care, so we don’t want 

to lose them. It’s just that, in 2011, we need to change our business 

model to remain solvent and keep the benefit of health insurance 

solid for the future—future retirees. We can’t afford to pay these 

excessive amounts for these Medicare-eligible—— 

Senator BROWN. So, you’re looking at, what, saving $3 billion 

over a 5-year period? 

Dr. WOODSON. Right. 

Senator BROWN. Is that accurate? 

Dr. WOODSON. Right. 

Senator BROWN. So, if—the proposed legislation, is enacted, it 

would basically force future retired members of the military to 

disenroll from the program that they—apparently is the highestrated healthcare plan in the military health system, into, quite 

frankly, a plan that is not as high rated. 

Dr. WOODSON. Well, they could keep their same doctors and go 

to the same hospitals. About 92 percent—— 

Senator BROWN. Right but they don’t get the same plan and the 

same benefits. 

Dr. WOODSON. The care should be the same. About 92 percent of 

the doctors in the USFHP do accept Medicare. Of course, they may 

not be accepting new Medicare individuals, but these would be old 

patients. They could keep their doctors and—— 

Senator BROWN. Are you sure of that? So you’re guaranteeing the 

people that are listening that when they’re forced to disenroll, that 

they will absolutely be able to enroll and keep their same doctors? 

Dr. WOODSON. Well, I just came out of practice a few weeks ago, 

before assuming this position, and I would, personally, never send 

a patient who has been with me away after I’ve established a relationship with them over years, because their insurance changed. 

So, the issue is that the payment scheme would be different for 

270 

these doctors, under the proposed changes. But, the beneficiaries 

could keep their same doctors. 

Senator BROWN. Well, you’re saying there’s going to be a payment-scale difference between—with the doctors. 

Dr. WOODSON. Right. 

Senator BROWN. So you’re basically saying that you have a group 

of retirees who are getting the best healthcare, according to the 

highest-rated healthcare plan in the military health system. 

They’re on that system, they’re marching along, they’re enjoying it. 

Then, all of a sudden, at age 65, when they potentially need it the 

most, they’re going to be forced to disenroll and go into a plan, 

where obviously, you would never kick them out, but there are others that would say, ‘‘You know, what I’m not going to let them in 

because I’m not getting the reimbursements.’’ I mean can you, any 

of you, guarantee that, in fact, every retiree, or the majority of the 

retirees, will get that same care and attention that you would do? 

Dr. WOODSON. Well, we would certainly work with them to make 

sure that the beneficiaries were protected. The issue is that, actually, the health plans would do fairly well under the proposals that 

we are putting forth because, in fact, TRICARE for Life, which 

would be the copay, would pay 20 percent, Medicare would pay 80 

percent, so they would get 100 percent of the payment. So, I think 

the incentives for dismissing these patients would be extraordinarily small. 

Senator BROWN. Mr. Chairman—just to shift a little bit—well, I 

have to be honest with you, a lot of the complaints and comments 

I get about Medicare and the care that they get, people are, they 

don’t go, and they don’t like it, for a reason. Whether it’s the patient or the doctor—and the fact that we’re going, from the highestrated healthcare plan in the military system to something that 

could be dramatically worse, it concerns me. 

Dr. WOODSON. Yes, and I appreciate your concern, Senator. But 

in 2011, we have to look at all participants, plans, providers, and 

ask, What is the best value? Excessive payments to a certain segment, really, in a time of efficiencies—— 

Senator BROWN. Well, wouldn’t you merely just address the payment scheme or this payment situation, instead of shifting them 

onto a Federal system that is going to be, I think, quite frankly, 

overburdened at that point in time? 

Mr. HALE. Senator, I’d like to add. I think you have to ask yourself, and Congress does, whether or not we want to treat one group 

of retirees totally different than we treat everybody else in the military. Is that the right thing to do? We think not. We are treating 

them different 

Senator BROWN. Based on what? 

Mr. HALE. We don’t require that the people in the Family Health 

Program enroll in Medicare, and we pay the hospitals a good deal; 

the claims payments are much higher. It doesn’t seem right to us 

that the care throughout the system is good. 

Senator BROWN. Can’t you negotiate a better payment arrangement with them, instead of closing down, then shutting down and 

transfer—— 

Mr. HALE. Well, I don’t think we’re closing them down. As Dr. 

Woodson said, the doctors would stay there—incidentally, we fully 

271 

grandfather everybody who’s currently over 65, or that is our proposal, so that it would affect them only as new people reached age 

65. So, we do this very gradually. We just don’t think, in this period of time, it’s appropriate to single out a group and say, ‘‘We’re 

going to treat you better.’’ It just seems wrong to us. 

Senator BROWN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Senator WEBB. Thank you, Senator Brown. 

Senator Ayotte, do you have follow-on questions? 

Senator AYOTTE. Two followups, Mr. Chairman. 

One was, Secretary Stanley, in your written statement, you’ve 

highlighted the large percentage of American youth who are ineligible to enlist in the military, due to either a medical disqualification or drug and alcohol abuse, a criminal background, lack of an 

education. Going forward, especially as the economy improves, how 

concerned are you about the relatively small pool of young Americans to be eligible to serve in our armed services? 

Dr. STANLEY. Well, thank you, Senator, for the question. Very 

concerned, first of all. Actually, part of our strategic plan, as we’ve 

been working with the Services, is to actually focus early on—I 

mean, we’ve already started working, quite frankly, from elementary school and on up, in a number of areas, from science, technology, engineering, and mathmetics education, things like that. 

Some of the things we’ve already talked about, in terms of programs, even from Yellow Ribbon Reintegration, how we take care 

of our wounded warriors right now, that actually fits in part of the 

picture of taking care of our people. 

But, having people in the population that are qualified to enlist 

is a very big concern. So, being able to not only keep the people 

that we have—because one of the things the data also tells us is 

that we have a lot of people in a world or a society where so many 

people don’t serve, many of the people who are serving actually are 

prodigy of people who have served. So, there are things that we can 

do on Active Duty or when you’re dealing with Active or Guard and 

Reserve that actually help that part of the population. So, we’re 

looking at it holistically, working closely with the Services—working relationship—but definitely working long-term. 

Senator AYOTTE. What’s your view on the National Guard Youth 

Challenge Program as one of the methods to address some of the 

challenges of reaching out to young people that want to enlist? 

Dr. STANLEY. I’m going to make one comment and then ask Secretary McCarthy to say something. 

What I’ve heard about the program has been phenomenal. I have 

not seen it personally. But, what it has done, in terms of the data 

points I’ve seen, it’s made a difference and turned some lives 

around. 

Secretary McCarthy. 

General MCCARTHY. I certainly agree with that. The Youth Challenge Program has been a huge success. But, frankly, it’s a kind 

of a stopgap. It’s getting people very late in the process. It’s usually 

best directed toward kids who are already in some degree of difficulty. So, it’s not the answer, by any stretch of the imagination, 

but what it has done is very impressive and very remarkable. 

Senator AYOTTE. Thank you. 

272 

Secretary Hale, we’ve been talking a lot about healthcare costs 

today, which is a big concern, not only within the Defense budget, 

with our overall fiscal state of the country. In a GAO report, there 

was a recommendation that estimated that realigning DOD’s military medical command structures and consolidating common functions could increase efficiencies and result in cost savings. 

I would ask, I guess, the whole panel and would start with you, 

Secretary Hale, whether you support realigning the DOD’s military 

command structures? Was this something that has already been 

considered during the development of the efficiency initiatives? 

Mr. HALE. The answer to both, at least speaking personally, is 

yes. I should say, yes, it was considered. We didn’t go forward with 

it at the time. I think it needs to be looked at again. Like all organizational changes, it has its contentious parts, and we need to 

work through them and make sure that we don’t damage the quality of management in the healthcare system. But, I think it is 

something that we need to look at, and will look at. 

Dr. STANLEY. I’d just make a comment. We are looking at it, but 

to go much further than that statement right now would probably 

not do the process very much good, because we’re going to work 

with the Services, work with the Joint Staff, and work with the Office of the Secretary of Defense staff as we move forward in looking 

at how we organize, medically. 

Senator AYOTTE. I can’t help myself, but what are the most contentious parts that you have to address, if we were to move forward 

in this? 

Dr. STANLEY. What I’ve seen, personally, has been, Senator, actually, we have service cultures differences. When we get out—and 

I was in theater, about 1 week before Secretary Woodson. Out 

there, they’re doing it, and they’re there. The closer you get to 

Washington, DC, it gets a little bit more challenging. 

Senator AYOTTE. I can understand that. [Laughter.] 

Dr. STANLEY. I was in San Antonio last week, watching, looking 

at what they’re doing there. 

We have cultural issues that have built up over the years—good 

cultural issues—that have helped align and allow our Services to 

do what they do in theater, in combat, the way it should be. What 

we’re looking at now, though, are more efficient ways—from pharmacies to not buying duplicate sets of equipment, to a doctor. There 

are a number of different things to look at in how we train to do 

that in our total force. This is a part of what we’re looking at. 

Senator AYOTTE. Well, I would ask all of you really to give us 

close examination of this. I think that’s something that we would 

all like to hear about. Because, as we look to the fiscal state of 

where we are right now, if we can consolidate in a way that’s going 

to save money and still serve our military appropriately, then we 

need to move forward with that. So, thank you. 

Senator WEBB. Just as one quick follow-on to what Senator 

Ayotte just said, and I’m going to then yield to Senator Graham 

and Senator Chambliss. 

What percentage of the potential enlistment pool in the United 

States is ineligible to enlist or does not qualify to enlist? It’s a very 

high number. 

273 

Dr. STANLEY. Of the people who are out there in civilian life, 

right now? 

Senator WEBB. Of the age cohort, what percentage does not qualify to enlist? 

Dr. STANLEY. I heard three-fourths, Senator. It’s a significant 

number. 

Senator WEBB. I’ve heard around—up to two-thirds—does not 

meet enlistment—— 

Dr. STANLEY. I think you’re probably right. It’s significant. 

Senator WEBB.—criteria, either because of physical or a variety 

of reasons. I find that astounding. 

Dr. STANLEY. Same here. 

Senator WEBB. I mean, if you even look at the Vietnam cohort, 

one-third of everyone in that age group served; 9 million out of 27 

million people in that age group actually served. We’re saying that, 

of today’s cohort, only one-third would even fit the profile in order 

to attempt to enlist? This is the number that I’ve heard. Can anybody verify that? 

Dr. STANLEY. We can verify it. I’ve heard different numbers, yes. 

Senator WEBB. If so, I mean maybe—— 

Dr. STANLEY. That number’s staggering. 

Senator WEBB. I can’t believe two-thirds of America’s youth can’t 

meet the mark. I’m wondering if your might take a look at that 

and see where the impediments are. 

Dr. STANLEY. We’ll take that for the record. 

[The information referred to follows:] 

We have studied this issue in detail. In 2007, we developed an estimator that 

would project the number of 17–24 year-old youth who are qualified and available 

for service. We focused on this group because it comprises about 90 percent of our 

non-prior service accessions annually. 

The number of youth qualified and available for military service consists of youth 

who are mentally, medically, and otherwise eligible for service, and who are free of 

family commitments that would make them unavailable for duty. 

To estimate the number of youth that are qualified, we developed disqualification 

filters for those individuals that would be disqualified based on Department of Defense standards. 

Youth may be disqualified for more than one reason; however, we used a hierarchy of disqualifications so that only one disqualification applied to any one person. 

First, 9 percent of the youth population is disqualified due to a low aptitude score 

on the Armed Forces Qualification Test. Next, 35 percent are disqualified for medical conditions or physical fitness issues owing mainly to asthma, obesity, and other 

childhood maladies. Of the remaining population, 19 percent are disqualified for 

substance abuse (drugs and alcohol). Finally, 6 percent are disqualified based on the 

number of dependents under age 18 they have, and another 5% for questionable 

conduct or law violations. 

Combined, the data demonstrate that only about 25 percent of today’s youth are 

qualified to serve. 

Data also show that of these 25 percent qualified, 11 percent are enrolled in college, and therefore not available to serve. Summed this way, only about 15 percent 

of the youth are qualified and available for military service. 

Senator WEBB. We may want to reevaluate—I don’t want—you 

don’t have to lower the standards, but you may want to reevaluate 

the standards that are being used, or at least take a look at them. 

Dr. STANLEY. Will do, Senator. 

Senator WEBB. Senator Graham. 

Senator GRAHAM. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

That is a stunning statement. I knew it was high, but two out 

of three, three out of four. 

274 

General McCarthy, what do we need to do, if anything, when it 

comes to mobilization legislation, regarding the Guard? What does 

‘‘Operational Reserve’’ mean in the 21st century? 

General MCCARTHY. Senator Graham, we kind of lapsed into this 

term ‘‘Operational Reserve.’’ One of the problems with it has always been there wasn’t a—— 

Senator GRAHAM. To me, it means you’re going to go a lot, yes. 

General MCCARTHY.—there wasn’t a consistent definition. What 

I’ve chosen to say, and what’s contained in the report, is using the 

Reserve as a part of the operational force. I think that resonates 

with people that, when a Reserve—either individual or a unit—and 

obviously I mean Guard or Reserve—either individual or a unit 

comes on Active Duty, they seamlessly integrate with the Active 

component force. That’s what we have to shoot for. We have to do 

that periodically. We have to do it in a right balance so that we’re 

not over—we’re not asking people to do that more than they can 

manage or that they’re families and employers can manage. But, 

that’s the goal, is to get so that we can use a portion of the Reserve 

component as a part of the operational force. 

I believe we do need a slight modification of our authority. The 

Department has sent over a legislative proposal. We’ve talked 

about it with the committee staff and with the staff in the House. 

I’m hopeful that we will expand our authority so that the President 

can continue to call some number of reservists to Active Duty without the necessity of an emergency, because that will enable the Reserve component to serve even when there is not a declared emergency. 

Senator GRAHAM. What are the statutory limitations on service? 

Two years? 

General MCCARTHY. Right now, we can call people only if there 

is an emergency, whether it’s a declared war or a declaration of national emergency or something less. 

Senator GRAHAM. Right. 

General MCCARTHY. The period of service is not to exceed 2 years 

of consecutive military service. 

Senator GRAHAM. Now, I’ve been told, at one point during the 

height of the Iraq/Afghanistan engagement, that 55 percent of the 

people flying the tanker force were Guard members or reservists, 

and about three-fourths those people, if they had not chosen to volunteer, had exceeded their statutory service period, and they just 

agreed to keep working. Is that true? 

General MCCARTHY. Well, I can’t verify the precise number, but 

the Air Force, in particular, has always preferred—both as an institution and the people—always preferred to use volunteers. They’ve 

done remarkably well with that. They can put teams together, allowing people to volunteer as it suits their other schedule. So they 

have made tremendous use of that, where as in the Army and the 

Marine Corps tend more to mobilize as units. 

Senator GRAHAM. Okay. 

General MCCARTHY. But, the high proportion of the tanker force 

from the Air Force Reserve and the Air Guard is a longstanding 

fact. 

Senator GRAHAM. Secretary Hale and Secretary Stanley, the idea 

of drawing the Army down by 40,000, the Navy, 9,000, the MaVerDate Aug 31 2005 09:55 Jan 25, 2012 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00280 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 Y:\BORAWSKI\DOCS\68089.TXT JUNE PsN: JUNEB
275 

rines, 16,000, the Air Force, 10,000, is that a wise decision right 

now, given the uncertainties of where the world is going? 

Dr. STANLEY. Well, first of all, Senator, thank you for the question. The conditions on the ground will dictate, obviously, where 

they actually go to. So, there have been some planning assumptions 

made, now. The Marine Corps actually stepped up and said, ‘‘We 

want to go to that particular level.’’ 

Senator GRAHAM. Okay. 

Dr. STANLEY. But, what we have to look at now is exactly what 

happens in Afghanistan and Iraq, the timing and pace of those. 

Senator GRAHAM. So, this is a work in progress, still. 

Dr. STANLEY. This is a work in progress, as we speak. But, the 

planning has to be done. 

Senator GRAHAM. Sure. 

Dr. STANLEY. The budget, as we are talking here today, actually 

there are things happening now that will affect the budget in the 

future. This is why it’s—you have your planning assumptions. 

Mr. HALE. Let me just add, the drawdown on the Marines is in 

fiscal year 2015 and 2016. 

Senator GRAHAM. Right. 

Mr. HALE. It’s 15,000 to 20,000. The Army is 27,000, also in fiscal year 2015 to 2016. As Dr. Stanley said, it’s conditions-based. 

We have several years to reevaluate those conditions. 

Senator GRAHAM. Okay. 

Mr. HALE. You mentioned the drawdown in the Air Force. I’m 

not familiar with that one. I don’t think, at least from 2011 to 

2012—— 

Senator GRAHAM. I’m sorry, it’s civilian positions in the Air 

Force. 

Mr. HALE. Oh, civilians. Well, yes, that would—— 

Senator GRAHAM. From an Air Force point of view, more and 

more things are being done by civilians, from the time I came on 

Active Duty to now. 

Mr. HALE. Well, we are looking into—the Secretary has directed 

us to find lower-priority missions and activities we can do without 

in order to hold down our support costs. I think that’s what you’re 

seeing there. 

Senator GRAHAM. One last question. The healthcare component 

of the budget. I know you’ve made some proposals about fee increases. From a political point of view, it’s very hard to ask men 

and women in uniform to sacrifice more than they’ve done—the retired force. The way you treat your retirees depends how well you 

can recruit and retain. 

Having said that, there has to be some way forward. I’ve talked 

to a lot of the service organizations out there. There seems to be 

an understanding, by different service groups, that, slowly but 

surely, we need to adjust the reality that this is unsustainable. 

Secretary Hale, how do we get from here to there? 

Mr. HALE. Well, gradually, it seems to me, is the right start. 

That is our proposal. You may remember, 2 to 3 years ago, the administration made much more far-reaching proposals for changes 

in the TRICARE fees. They would have doubled, over a period of 

4 or 5 years. Many hundreds of dollars, over that period. We’re 

276 

talking about $5 a month, for those in the Prime, family care, and 

a gradual indexing to a healthcare index. 

So, I think we all respect the service that men and women do, 

and we expect a very generous plan, and I think they have the 

right to expect it. We are providing that. But, I agree with the implication of your statement, Senator, if we don’t do something, as 

Secretary Gates said, at some point, it will fall of its own weight. 

I think we need a very gradual transition. 

Senator GRAHAM. Secretary Woodson? 

Dr. WOODSON. It perhaps is useful to bring some numbers to 

this, just as illustrations. Since the inception of TRICARE and no 

fee increases, benefits and retirements have increased 50 percent. 

But, if we go forward—and let’s take an example of a lieutenant 

colonel, O–5, whose pension is $48,000 a year in 2011—— 

Senator GRAHAM. What’s an O–6 pension? [Laughter.] 

Dr. WOODSON. It depends on the years of service. 

Senator AYOTTE. I’m married to an O–5, so—— 

Dr. WOODSON. But, assuming $48,000 a year, in 2012, over 10 

years, assuming a COLA of 3 percent per year, the pension will 

grow by $16,000. At the same time, even if you accept the generous 

increase in prime enrollment fees of 6.25 percent, applying the 

same metrics—the price would only grow by about $428. 

So, what we’re saying is that, because we’re indexing the increase in fees to a smaller amount, even if they had a rise, it 

doesn’t eat up the COLA, is what I’m saying. 

Senator GRAHAM. Gotcha. 

Dr. WOODSON. So, it’s about fairness and protecting this very 

generous benefit for the future, for individuals who will serve in 

the future and, in fact, will need healthcare, as well. 

Senator GRAHAM. Thank you. I have a letter from a bunch of 

generals who say we need to be thinking about doing exactly what 

you said. I would like to introduce it into the record. 

Thank you all for your service. 

[The information referred to follows:] 

277 


504per25.eps
278 

Senator WEBB. Thank you, Senator Graham. 

Senator Blumenthal, welcome. Since Senator Chambliss has been 

waiting, I’m going to go ahead and call on him. 

Senator CHAMBLISS. Thanks, Mr. Chairman. It’s always a scary 

thought, to his friends, that Senator Graham is a colonel in the Air 

Force Reserve. [Laughter.] 

Thank goodness you all don’t let him carry a gun. [Laughter.] 

Senator WEBB. For the record, when my dad was a colonel in the 

Air Force, I think he made $14,000 a year. So, we’ve come a long 

way, folks. It’s been a long time. 

Senator CHAMBLISS. Secretary Stanley and Secretary McCarthy, 

I understand there’s been some confusion or lack of consistency regarding how the provision authorizing early receipt of retired pay 

is being interpreted at DOD. Since I’m the author of that provision, 

I want to state my intent, for the record. 

First, my intent was to reward servicemembers who perform Active Duty for significant periods. We had to bound the provision 

somehow, so we set the period during which members would be required to serve an aggregate of 90 days of duty to be the confines 

of a single year—fiscal year 2010 or fiscal year 2011, whatever. The 

intent was not that a servicemember should be rewarded to any agVerDate Aug 31 2005 09:55 Jan 25, 2012 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00284 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 Y:\BORAWSKI\DOCS\68089.TXT JUNE PsN: JUNEB

504per26.eps
279 

gregate duty of 90 days that they served over their Reserve career. 

Now, that’s what we intended, and I’m going to ask you all to comment on that. 

Second, my intent was to reward servicemembers who were activated, mobilized, deployed, or called to duty in support of a contingency operation. In my view, this should include any duty, in the 

continental United States (CONUS) or outside CONUS, that is related to a contingency operation or a national emergency, regardless of the specific type of the order the member is called to duty 

under. 

Now, both Secretaries, with that explanation, I’d just like for you 

all to give me your feedback on how DOD is interpreting the current statute, what ambiguities you believe may exist in that language, and the extent to which the services are interpreting the 

provision differently. Anybody else has a comment, you’re welcome 

to, but I think you two would probably be the most appropriate. 

Dr. STANLEY. Senator Chambliss, I’m not going to say much right 

now, only because I haven’t seen it yet. I’m going to be openminded 

when I look at it. Your explanation actually will help me when I 

receive it, because I know it’s coming my way. 

General MCCARTHY. Senator Chambliss, the main problem that 

I am aware of is the first one that you mentioned, bounding the 

90-day period by saying ‘‘within the same fiscal year.’’ Clearly, the 

statutory language includes that bounding provision. 

Where we’ve run into a problem is where someone serves, for example, 45 days on one side of the fiscal year followed immediately, 

consecutively, by 45 days on the other side of the fiscal year. The 

interpretation of the Office of General Counsel has been, that service doesn’t meet the standards of the statute because it crosses 2 

fiscal years. We’re trying very hard to figure out a way to carry 

into effect your intent of rewarding 90 days of continuous service, 

and to work around this provision of ‘‘within the same fiscal year.’’ 

We have not yet found a solution that everybody can live with, in 

part because there’s money associated with it, appropriation associated with it. But, I think that everybody is working in good faith 

to try to figure out a way to solve that. 

Senator CHAMBLISS. Okay. Actually, Senator Tester and I have 

an amendment that we’re going to offer in the authorization bill 

this year that I think will clarify that. Because that can happen, 

and obviously it has happened, and we want to try to straighten 

that out. It’s the 90 consecutive days that’s the most important 

thing, rather than the fiscal year. So, I think, with what he and 

I are going to try and do in the authorization bill this year will get 

that clarified. 

General MCCARTHY. Thank you. 

Senator CHAMBLISS. Thanks, Mr. Chairman. 

Senator WEBB. Thanks, Senator Chambliss. 

Senator Blumenthal. 

Senator BLUMENTHAL. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

I just want to say, at the outset, I thank Senator Chambliss for 

his legislative proposal, which I have supported, on Reserve retirement credit. 

Thank you—even more important, thank you gentlemen for your 

service, both now and in your past, and the men and women who 

280 

are sitting behind you in this room and who are serving under you, 

or with you, in DOD. I think all of us in the Senate, all of us in 

the Nation—are grateful for the great work that you are doing. 

I want to focus, just briefly, on, first of all, homeownership. Secretary Stanley and Secretary McHale, the stimulus bill in Congress 

greatly expanded the resources available under the DOD Home 

Ownership Assistance Program to help servicemembers who are 

changing their duty station, particularly in light of the Base Realignment and Closure Commission process. I wonder if you could 

speak, today, to the resources available to continue that program, 

what DOD is looking to do to make it more sustainable. 

Also, equally important, I am very concerned about issues relating to mortgage fraud and foreclosures, both inside and outside of 

the military community, but particularly as it affects the military 

community. I wonder if you could comment on both the home ownership program and the susceptibility of the military community to 

that kind of fraud, whether it’s related to the homeownership program or not, and what the Defense Department is doing to aid the 

military community. 

Thank you. 

Mr. HALE. Well, I’m going to have to give you specifics for the 

record, Senator, on the HAP Program—homeowner. 

I think we’re okay, financially. We were worried, because we had 

no experience, or not much experience, with this kind of program, 

and this is quite extensive. We formulated a set of rules which we 

thought were reasonable and, I believe, have kept within the 

bounds of the money that Congress appropriated. I don’t know exactly how much has been obligated as of now. We’ll get it for you, 

for the record. But, I think we’re okay. I’m certainly not hearing 

any financial problems with the program. 

[The information referred to follows:] 

Congress appropriated $555 million in the American Recovery and Reinvestment 

Act of 2009 for the Expanded Homeowners Assistance Program (HAP). The Department has obligated 100 percent of those funds. Additionally, Congress appropriated 

$300 million in fiscal year 2010 for Expanded HAP benefits, which the Department 

continues to execute. The Department continues to evaluate the Expanded HAP and 

may seek future appropriations as necessary. As part of the HAP, the Department 

has authority to purchase homes from eligible servicemembers and surviving 

spouses and then re-sell those properties. Proceeds from the sale of those homes are 

then deposited into the HAP in order to provide benefits to additional eligible personnel. In fiscal year 2011, the Expanded HAP account has received $44.8 million 

in proceeds from the sale of government-owned homes. 

Dr. STANLEY. Senator, I’ve been personally engaged on the fraud 

end of it, even before we got to just the mortgage piece, of taking 

care of our service men and women, and the Servicemembers Civil 

Relief Act, working with Department of Treasury, looking at ways 

to ensure that our service men and women are not taken advantage of in lots of different fora, and not just homeownership. So, it’s 

a big issue, from the readiness standpoint, because if you’re not 

ready at home, you are not going to be ready when you go forward. 

So, it’s a significant readiness issue that we’re focused on. I agree 

with Secretary Hale, we’ll get back to you on specifics. 

[The information referred to follows:] 

In order to address the situation, legal protections for military personnel were established. Specifically, the Servicemembers Civil Relief Act (SCRA) (codified at 50 

U.S.C. App. §§ 501–597b) offers servicemembers protections from the improper foreVerDate Aug 31 2005 09:55 Jan 25, 2012 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00286 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6621 Y:\BORAWSKI\DOCS\68089.TXT JUNE PsN: JUNEB
281 

closure practices that are not available to the general public. This provides 

servicemembers who have a qualifying mortgage obligation (one created pre-service) 

with protections not available to the public at large, at least in those States that 

would allow non-judicial foreclosure. 

Section 533 of SCRA protects against the non-judicial sale, foreclosure, or seizure 

of the property of a servicemember that is secured by a mortgage obligation that 

originated before the period of the servicemember’s active duty. This means that a 

court must enter a valid order before the sale, foreclosure, or seizure of such property can take place, and such an order cannot be entered absent a return of service 

(proof to the court that the servicemember has been served with a copy of the foreclosure lawsuit) and an opportunity for the servicemember to be heard by the court. 

Furthermore, section 521 of SCRA provides additional protections against default 

judgments when a servicemember does not appear before a court, and section 522 

provides the servicemember the opportunity to delay a proceeding when he or she 

does appear but cannot proceed because of military service. The default judgment 

protections of section 521 are particularly important in the foreclosure context. It 

provides an interlocking protection with section 533. 

As noted above, for a qualifying pre-service mortgage obligation, no sale, foreclosure, or seizure can take place against a servicemember unless there is a valid 

court order. To issue a valid order, a court must comply with section 521, which indicates that if the respondent does not appear and there is reason to believe he or 

she is a servicemember, then the court must appoint an attorney to represent the 

absent servicemember. A key element of that representation is that the attorney 

must try to find the servicemember and attempt to delay the proceedings until the 

servicemember can be located and can appear before the court. 

Senator BLUMENTHAL. Well, I appreciate that. Are there measures that we can take that would assist you in stopping this kind 

of fraud, or simply the institutions that are pushing the envelope 

in taking advantage of our military men and women, perhaps just 

barely within the law, but exploiting their vulnerability at a point 

when they’re trying to get ready to serve abroad, and their families 

being at home, and that kind of exigency? 

Dr. STANLEY. Senator, my instincts say yes. Then we’d like to get 

back to you and work closely with you on it, because this is really 

important, from a readiness standpoint. If you’re not ready, as I 

said, you’re not going to fly the plane, you’re not going to shoot 

straight. There’s a whole lot of things that are going to happen. So, 

I’d like to get back to you, on the record, on that and do that. 

[The information referred to follows:] 

Thank you for your offer of assistance. We believe there are areas within the 

Servicemember’s Civil Relief Act that could be amended to help protect our 

servicemembers. We will consult with the Office of Management and Budget and 

submit the necessary legislative proposal for your consideration. 

Senator BLUMENTHAL. Well, I really appreciate that. I would 

very much like to work with you and other members of this panel 

and your staff on this issue, because I regard it as very important. 

I commend and thank you for your interest. 

Mr. HALE. Senator, I do have facts. We have obligated most of 

the $555 million that was appropriated under the Stimulus Act, 

about 98 percent. I think, in most cases, we have completed the periods of time when people could take advantage of it. There’ll still 

be outlays, as folks actually move. But, it’s higher than I thought. 

So, we’ll check. 

I’ll stand by my statement, though. To my knowledge, no one has 

come to me and said, ‘‘We’re going to run out of money.’’ So, I think 

we’re okay. 

Senator BLUMENTHAL. If you develop additional facts, please feel 

free to get them to me. 

282 

I just want to say to Secretary Woodson, for some years, as you 

probably know, the Yale Center for Emergency Preparedness and 

Disaster Response has worked with the United States Northern 

Command to develop national strategies and conduct training for 

civilian military collaboration in integrated medical and public 

health preparedness, and these kinds of activities. Their preparedness and expertise really align with a large number of medical preparedness and response projects across the country. I’d like to see 

that work continue. I think it serves the national interest. I ask 

that you make yourself available to meet with my staff, possibly 

with me, with the director of the program, to see what role they 

may have in working with you to jointly address this continuing 

challenge, and the coordination of civilian and medical resources. 

If you would be available, I would greatly appreciate it. 

Dr. WOODSON. I’d be very happy to meet with you. In a prior life, 

I had something to do with that. So, I would be very happy to meet 

with you. 

Senator BLUMENTHAL. Great. Let me just ask one last, sort of, 

open-ended question, and you should feel free to get back to me on 

this one, as well. Traumatic brain injury, post-traumatic stress disorder, there may have been questions about it before now, but, obviously, as our Reserve engage in more of the front-line battle, they 

will be susceptible to it. We’ve heard various estimates, from the 

Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Admiral Mullen, and others, 

that there’s a very high rate of nondiagnosis or misdiagnosis, as 

high as 30 percent, of those two conditions. So, I wonder if you care 

to comment on it. 

General MCCARTHY. Senator, you’re absolutely right. That is a 

challenge for the Reserve component that, in some ways, is exactly 

the same as the Active component but, in some ways, is very different, because you get some many Reserve component members 

who, after they complete their service in combat, kind of blend back 

into a civilian community and don’t have the day-to-day association 

with military leaders and observers that they would have if they 

were still on Active Duty. 

I believe, personally, that we’re doing a better job on the postdeployment health assessments. Not that we don’t have a long way 

to go, but I do think we are doing better than we were, some years 

ago, on that. I also believe that the Yellow Ribbon Reintegration 

Program, which has these recurring meetings and recurring opportunities for people to come back together and to be exposed to some 

of the science and some of the—frankly, the art of recognizing 

these kinds of problems, is very important, and will remain so. 

So—I’ve made the point already this afternoon—the Yellow Ribbon 

Program, we might have thought of it, originally, as just a shortterm wartime-only program. I think it’s more than that. I think it’s 

something that we should view as a longer-term requirement. Obviously, we won’t be doing it at the same rate we were doing it a few 

years ago, but we will still have the requirement as we deploy 

members of the Guard and Reserve. 

Senator BLUMENTHAL. Well, I appreciate that. I think it’s very 

important, again, if there are ways that members of the committee 

can assist you, particularly with the traumatic brain injury and the 

post-traumatic stress disorder aspects. Sitting where you are, right 

283 

now, Sergeant Major Kent of the Marine Corps—and I know, as a 

marine, you are familiar with his service—commented on the extent and the seriousness of this problem, as did others on that day. 

So, I appreciate your attention to it. Thank you. 

Thank you, again, to all of you for being here today, and your 

very helpful testimony. 

Dr. WOODSON. Senator, if I may make a few comments—— 

Senator BLUMENTHAL. Sure. 

Dr. WOODSON.—in regards to that, because, obviously, in Health 

Affairs, we’ve been very much involved and concerned about the invisible wounds of war and the signature injuries of these last 10 

years of war. 

I just returned from Afghanistan, and I can tell you we have a 

robust treatment protocol in place to pick up just about every concussed soldier who might be within the radius of 50 meters of a 

blast injury, to include an evaluation they go through to assess for 

concussion, and referral at the earliest possible moment, and to 

record that data for longitudinal followup. 

On the other end of behavioral health, we’ve added 12,000 new 

behavioral health specialists to our integrated TRICARE network, 

and then increased, by 2,000, the number of behavioral health specialists on Active Duty. 

We do have some recruitment challenges, particularly in psychiatrists, but the Air Force is about 93-percent full. We continue to 

work strategies, in terms of scholarships, et cetera, to get the behavioral health specialists trained and on Active Duty. 

So, we’ve done a lot, still need to do more, in terms of behavioral 

health specialists. 

But, as it relates to the Guard and Reserve, every State has a 

behavioral health coordinator. There is abundant outreach to identify resources within each State and coordinate the care of any reservist or guardsman that might need behavioral health. Again, 

more to do, but we’re working vigorously to meet the needs. 

Senator BLUMENTHAL. That’s very helpful. I’m glad you added 

that comment. 

Again, thank you for your service and for being here today. 

Thank you. 

Senator WEBB. Thank you, Senator Blumenthal. Just as a followon to that line of questioning, I can say things are incredibly different than they were in the post-Vietnam period, on these issues. 

I was up here as a committee counsel from 1977 to 1981, and the 

casualty flow from Vietnam had been so much higher than what 

we’re seeing now. In fact, the 1 year that I was in Vietnam, 12,000 

Americans died. That’s twice as many as have died in Iraq and Afghanistan, combined in the entire 10 years of war, and the mood 

in the country was different. The level of knowledge was so much 

different. We did a lot of pioneering work, in terms of post-traumatic stress disorder, on the Veterans Committee up here during 

that period. It was a new concept in terms of what people were trying to examine. It was pioneered not by the government, but initially, by the disabled American veterans organization, themselves, 

which had a high percentage of Vietnam-disabled soldiers and marines, particularly. They funded their own project called the Forgotten Warrior Project because they could see that something wasn’t 

284 

right and it wasn’t being examined. The attention that’s being 

given right now, at all levels, is just incredible compared to what 

was going on then. 

The issue of traumatic brain injury is to me something completely new. I think so much of it comes from the improvised explosive devices, where people are inside vehicles and you have this 

echoing impact that a regular blast, in other wars, did not really 

experience. I’m very committed to seeing more research done on 

this, and continuing to do the sorts of things that Secretary Woodson was talking about—monitoring people early on and getting 

some sort of a tracking on that area. 

I have one final question here, and it really goes to how we’re 

measuring some of our special pays and incentives. I don’t know if 

you all are familiar with an article that was in the Washington 

Post on March 18 by an Iraq and Afghanistan veteran named Michael Cummings. It’s called, ‘‘I Didn’t Deserve My Combat Pay.’’ 

Are you familiar with this article? It is not a mean-spirited article 

at all. This is an individual who served in hard combat in Afghanistan, and then had a pretty relaxed tour in Iraq, and basically was 

pointing out some inconsistencies that I think are fair, in terms of 

evaluation. I’d like to get your thoughts on them. In fact, Secretary 

Stanley, maybe you could take this article and give us a response. 

[The information referred to follows:] 

285 


504per27.eps
286 

Senator WEBB. One of the things he points out was that people 

who serve in Bahrain, Qatar, Kuwait earn the same tax-exempt 

benefits as troops in Iraq and Afghanistan. I’m reading from his article, by the way. ‘‘Sailors in Bahrain can bring their families to 

live with them while still earning $225 a month in imminent-danger pay. He mentioned in here a contingent that came in from the 

States for a change-of-command ceremony, where they were on the 

ground for 2 days and they got 2 months of combat pay plus all 

the tax differentials, because it was the end of the month and the 

beginning of the next month. 

I don’t know why that happens. I think we have computers 

now—you can figure out how many days people are in theater, if 

you’re paying these sorts of benefits. But also, it—I think two of 

you are former marines; I’m a former marine—that’s a huge leadership question, too, when you turn around to people who are out 

there really having to do the hard work, and you can turn around 

and say somebody came in for a change of command for 2 days and 

got this huge break. 

He says in this article, ‘‘Military commanders say, ‘Don’t just 

complain about the problem. Offer a solution.’ ’’ He has a whole 

paragraph here with his solution. I’m not saying these are the anVerDate Aug 31 2005 09:55 Jan 25, 2012 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00292 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 Y:\BORAWSKI\DOCS\68089.TXT JUNE PsN: JUNEB

504per28.eps
287 

swers, but I would like to get your thoughts, Secretary Stanley, on 

where some of these things are. If they’re justified, fine. 

[The information referred to follows:] 

I’m familiar with the article by Michael G. Cummings, which states that members 

serving in Bahrain, Kuwait, and Qatar earn the same tax-exempt benefits as troops 

in Iraq and Afghanistan. He also mentions a situation where the dates of visitors 

to a combat zone for a change of command ceremony straddled 2 months and resulted in the payment of 2 months of imminent danger pay and tax free treatment 

of salaries, known commonly as the combat zone tax exclusion. 

A member serving in any area designated by the President as a combat zone is 

eligible for the combat zone tax exclusion. Currently, Bahrain, Kuwait, and Qatar, 

as well as Iraq and Afghanistan are designated as combat zones, and members who 

serve in these locations are eligible for the combat zone tax exclusion. Members 

serving in these locations receive $225 per month. 

In addition to the combat zone tax exclusion, commanders can recommend an area 

as eligible for imminent danger pay based upon conditions on the ground. An area 

may be designated if there is an impending danger of members being exposed to 

hostile fire or explosions, or being subject to the threat of physical harm or imminent danger on the basis of civil insurrection, civil war, terrorism, or wartime conditions. 

The Department and Central Command are both aware of Mr. Cumming’s concern 

and have taken steps to prevent or minimize this type of potential abuse of combat 

zone tax exclusion or imminent danger pay. From our review, we conclude that the 

perceptions of widespread abuse are not supported by the data. All travel into the 

Central Command area of responsibility is screened, pre-approved and conducted on 

official military orders. Thus we have little reason to believe that the identified 

short duration trips, including their timing, were for anything other than mission 

requirements. The Department is, however, currently reviewing policies to ensure 

the potential for abuse is minimized. 

Periodically, the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness conducts a world-wide review and solicits updated threat assessments from commanders in each of the areas to ensure the designation of an area as eligible for 

imminent danger pay remains appropriate. The Department is validating and recertifying all worldwide locations designated for HFP/IDP. Decision to continue or remove the HFP/IDP designation by area are expected by the end of 2011. Furthermore, the Department is on schedule in transitioning the legacy Special and Incentive Pay authorities to the new, more flexible authorities provided by Congress. The 

legacy authority authorizing HFP/IDP is expected to be transitioned to its new authority later in 2011. Under the new authority, the Department will be able to prorate HFP/IDP based upon time actually spent in the HFP/IDP area and will be able 

to implement a more tiered pay structure for HFP/IDP that differentiates pay based 

upon proximity to danger. 

Senator WEBB. But, I think this young veteran deserves an answer. I think he deserves a response. It’s very fair and very supportive of the people who’ve had to serve, in general. 

I appreciate all of you coming today and spending time with us. 

As I said, your full testimony not only will be in the record, but 

will be read carefully by staff. We will probably have other staffto-staff comments, and we appreciate what you’re doing for our 

country. 

Secretary McCarthy, my best to you as you depart. 

I look forward to sitting down and talking with him when you 

feel comfortable doing that. 

Thank you very much. 

[Questions for the record with answers supplied follow:] 

QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY SENATOR JOHN MCCAIN

ARMY AND AIR NATIONAL GUARD—A TOTAL FORCE MULTIPLIER

1. Senator MCCAIN. Secretary McCarthy, I’m interested in your view of the role 

of the Army and Air National Guard in your Total Forces. There is no question that 

Guardsmen have been essential contributors in Iraq and Afghanistan. We need to 

288 

have a clear understanding from the Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD), the 

Army, and the Air Force about how the National Guard should best be employed 

in an era of tight budgets. 

Secretary MCCARTHY. Guardsmen have indeed been essential contributors to operations in Iraq and Afghanistan, and will continue to play key roles in the future. 

Continuing to use the Guard and Reserve as part of the Total Force will allow the 

Department to maintain capabilities and capacities at less overall cost given the increasingly tightened budget environment across the whole of government. 

We recently completed, and the Secretary of Defense reviewed, a report entitled 

The Comprehensive Review of the Future Role of the Reserve component, which was 

directed in the 2010 Quadrennial Defense Review. The review enjoyed strong participation from offices within OSD, the Joint Staff, Services, and combatant commands. The report proposes several options in which the Guard and Reserve may 

be utilized to best advantage in the future. 

In general, these include missions that are predictable, relatively consistent over 

time, and whose success can be substantially enabled by long-term personal and geographic relationships. Such activities include providing forces in support of largescale conventional campaigns, stability operations, steady state engagement activities, humanitarian assistance, and disaster relief, homeland defense and defense 

support to civilian authorities, and institutional support tasks. Using the Guard and 

Reserve for these types of missions, within the Service’s force generation models 

when applicable, will preserve the hard earned experience and training from the 

past 10 years, solidify the country’s investment in the Reserve component, and reduce the operational stress on the Active Forces. 

2. Senator MCCAIN. Secretary McCarthy, I’d like to hear about the objectives of 

the legislation you support on enhanced involuntary mobilization authority. 

Secretary MCCARTHY. Our intent with the enhanced involuntary mobilization authority is to assure access to the Reserve component in an era of persistent conflict. 

Broad authority to order the Reserve component to Active Duty in somewhat limited 

amounts is needed to augment the Active component and cost effectively utilize the 

total force as we continue to pursue our national security objectives in the near and 

foreseeable future. Over the last 3 years, Reserve component personnel on involuntary Active Duty have declined from around 150,000 personnel to 90,000 personnel 

today. As we pursue an end state with many of our high demand missions, we expect to see a further decline, but not an elimination of, demand for Reserve component personnel. Due to the structure of our highly combat experienced total force 

and the expectation that an era of persistent conflict will present the military with 

high demand for limited resources, we project a need for significant numbers of Reserve component personnel to serve on active duty performing a wide variety of 

roles to augment the Active component, thus generating the necessary forces to 

shape and respond to international events. We anticipate an environment with multiple commitments ranging from low intensity military operations against hostile 

forces, presence-based deterrence operations directed towards nation states, to the 

need to engage multiple partners to build theater security around the world. We believe the military will have to sustain, for the foreseeable future, operations somewhere below the level of a national emergency or a contingency operation yet somewhere above the intensity level normally associated with peacetime. The current involuntary mobilization authorities do not adequately support this variety of mission 

sets, nor is it appropriate for the intensity of military operations anticipated. 

3. Senator MCCAIN. Secretary McCarthy, what is your view of the appropriate role 

of the National Guard? Stated differently, what does the term ‘‘Operational Reserve’’ 

look like for the National Guard as it’s implemented in the years ahead? Please describe what the proposed legislation will do if enacted. 

Secretary MCCARTHY. First, it is our view that the term ‘‘Operational Reserve’’ is 

somewhat misleading and restrictive. The key concept is to continue to use the Reserve Component in operational roles and missions in the future and effectively 

manage them as part of the operational force. In the 1990s, as Active component 

and Reserve component end strength drew down and the world continued to be a 

dangerous place, we increasingly relied on the National Guard and the Reserves to 

support military mission requirements in Bosnia, Kosovo, and MFO Sinai as well 

as to meet daily operational requirements in training and other support roles. 

While not fully implementing an ‘‘Operational Reserve,’’ we were nonetheless migrating toward a transformation of the way the Reserve component was being utilized. Recognizing this change, the Department set about transforming the Guard 

and Reserve from a predominantly strategic force to a sustainable Reserve Force 

with both operational and strategic roles. Much like the Active component, it is imVerDate Aug 31 2005 09:55 Jan 25, 2012 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00294 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6621 Y:\BORAWSKI\DOCS\68089.TXT JUNE PsN: JUNEB
289 

portant to note that the Guard and Reserve have strategic forces at one end of the 

spectrum and operational forces at the other end of the spectrum. Our policies on 

mobilization, force structure rebalancing, personnel management, training, readiness, equipping, and family and employer support have changed significantly to facilitate the increased utilization of Reserve component personnel in these operational roles. I believe recent history supports the conclusion that proper utilization 

of the National Guard and Reserve reduces the burden on all forces—a Presidential 

priority. The proposed legislation will enhance the Department’s ability to gain access to Reserve component units and personnel in order to meet operational requirements and national security objectives. 

REDUCING THE COST OF PERSONNEL

4. Senator MCCAIN. Dr. Stanley and Secretary Hale, the cost of manpower in the 

All-Volunteer Force, not surprisingly, has increased significantly over the last 10 

years. Other than reducing the numbers of Active Duty, Reserve, and civilian personnel in the Department of Defense (DOD), we need to understand how you would 

act to reduce the cost of personnel. Do you expect DOD to propose changes to the 

military pay and compensation system, e.g., retirement system, with the objective 

of reducing costs, and what do you consider to be the areas most in need of change? 

Dr. STANLEY. The Department is seizing upon available opportunities to achieve 

greater efficiency in military pay and compensation in order to reduce costs. At the 

appropriate time we will propose changes to the larger components of the military 

compensation based on a carefully analyzed, fully considered, holistic examination 

of the military personnel and compensation systems. 

In light of the fiscal pressures the country faces, the Department is pursuing a 

comprehensive, holistic approach to accomplish more with fewer resources. The Department has committed to the following goals: 

(1) Controlling rising personnel costs 

(2) Restraining entitlement growth 

(3) Leveraging its compensation tools to sustain recruiting and retention success. 

While we consider possible changes to larger components of military compensation, we remain mindful that these types of changes need to be carefully analyzed, 

considered, and studied to ensure that they do not adversely impact our ability to 

maintain a ready force. Additionally, any changes must also take into account the 

military’s up or out system, the need to grow and develop our own leadership internally, and the many additional burdens and sacrifices borne by our military members. 

The retirement system is a frequent target to identify cost savings, and many 

groups have suggested alternatives. The retirement benefits, by not vesting until 

the member has 20 years of service, play an important role in fostering retention. 

Members most influenced by the draw of the retirement system are those in the 

critical, mid-career grades and years. Retaining these members is critical, as the Department has invested significantly in their leadership training and professional development. Any changes to the retirement system must ensure we continue to retain 

these members and protect our investment in them. 

Secretary HALE. Given the current fiscal crisis facing the Nation, and the push 

to find additional savings and efficiencies across the Federal budget, everything, including military compensation, needs to be on the table. Since the late 1990s, significant across-the-board and targeted pay raises coupled with substantial increases 

to housing and subsistence allowances have dramatically improved military compensation. Even without accounting for other cash payments such as special/incentive pays and recruiting and retention bonuses or generous non-cash and deferred 

benefits such as healthcare, education benefits, retirement, and paid time-off, studies have shown that military members across the ranks earn more than at least 70 

percent of civilians with similar education and experience (i.e., military pay ranks 

in at least the 70th percentile for all experience levels, both officer and enlisted). 

Therefore, we believe it is appropriate to conduct a comprehensive review of the 

military pay and benefits structure to include the many in-kind and deferred benefits (e.g., retirement system) that are often very expensive and which may not be 

the right answer for today’s servicemembers. While it may be possible to restructure 

our military pay and benefits in a way that reduces costs, we need to proceed carefully with a clear understanding of how any adjustments will impact the Department’s ability to attract and maintain the All-Volunteer Force. 

290 

REDUCTIONS IN ACTIVE-DUTY FORCES

5. Senator MCCAIN. Dr. Stanley and Secretary Hale, despite ongoing combat operations and concern about dwell time, it appears that budgetary pressures are going 

to force reductions in the number of Active Duty military personnel: Army down 

49,000; Navy down 9,000; Marines down 16,000; and the Air Force will downsize 

10,000 civilian positions and take reduction-in-force measures to bring down the 

number of Active-Duty airmen. What personnel cuts will be imposed, in your opinion, and what will be the time frame to accomplish these cuts? 

Dr. STANLEY. In compliance with Secretary of Defense guidance, the Department 

is working closely with the Services to bring down end strength as outlined in the 

table below while maintaining mission readiness. My staff, in concert with experts 

from the Services, is carefully managing the way ahead in force management to ensure the Services are ready to meet the challenges we face now and in the future. 

The following table indicates Active component end strength through fiscal year 

2016. 

ACTIVE COMPONENTS PROJECTED END STRENGTH (FISCAL YEARS 2012–2016) 

Fiscal Year 

2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 

Army ............................................................................... 547,400 547,400 547,400 533,900 520,400 

Navy ............................................................................... 325,700 322,300 319,900 319,002 320,300 

Marine Corps ................................................................. 202,100 202,100 202,100 192,100 182,100 

Air Force ......................................................................... 332,800 332,800 332,800 332,800 332,800 

Source: Defense Resource Data Warehouse March 11, 2011 

As far as the Air Force civilian workforce, it will continue to grow but the growth 

will be less than previously planned due to OSD directed efficiencies taken in the 

fiscal year 2012 President’s budget request. Currently, the Air Force is conducting 

a strategic review of all civilian positions and this effort is being worked concurrently with fiscal year 2013 budget development. Until their strategic review is completed, the Air Force recently announced that it will use hiring controls as a bridging mechanism in fiscal year 2012. Once the strategic review is complete, the Air 

Force will work to rebalance its civilian workforce by realigning resources from 

lower priority areas to higher priority missions to operate within approved funding 

levels. 

Secretary HALE. 

Army 

In July 2009, the Secretary of Defense announced a decision to temporarily increase the Army’s active-duty end strength by up to 22,000 from 547,400 to 569,400 

for a period of 3 years. This increase was necessary in the short-term to ensure deploying units were properly manned and to eliminate the routine use of stop-loss 

authority prior to the drawdown of forces in Iraq and as an increase in forces in 

Afghanistan was beginning. As planned, the drawdown of this 22,000 temporary end 

strength will begin in the spring of 2012, and the Army will return to its permanently authorized end strength by the end of fiscal year 2013. 

An additional reduction of 27,000 Active-Duty Army end strength is programmed 

to begin in fiscal year 2015. This reduction is based on the President’s and NATO’s 

strategy for Afghanistan, which indicates the number of troops deployed there will 

be significantly reduced by the end of 2014. If this assumption proves incorrect or 

global conditions change, this reduction will need to be reassessed. However, even 

with these reductions, the Army’s end strength will be nearly 40,000 larger that it 

was prior to the war. 

Navy 

The Navy currently plans to reduce its Active-Duty end strength by approximately 

9,000 from the fiscal year 2011 authorized level of 328,700 by the end of fiscal year 

2014. The reductions are planned at roughly 3,000 per year for fiscal year 2012 

through fiscal year 2014 and will be achieved through various efficiency actions to 

streamline operations and headquarters elements, as well as realignments of additional construction battalions and Maritime Expeditionary Security Forces from the 

Active to the Reserve component. 

291 

Marine Corps 

Similar to the Army, current plans call for the Marine Corps to begin reducing 

Active-Duty end strength between 15,000 and 20,000 starting in fiscal year 2015 

based on the strategy for Afghanistan. Again, if this assumption proves incorrect or 

global conditions change, this reduction will need to be reassessed. However, even 

with these reductions, the Marine Corps end strength will be 7,000 to 12,000 larger 

than it was prior to the war. 

Air Force 

The Air Force civilian workforce will actually continue to grow in fiscal year 2012 

to 182,199 compared to the fiscal year 2010 level of 179,044; but the growth will 

be less than was previously planned prior to the development of efficiency initiatives 

included in the fiscal year 2012 President’s Budget. The Air Force is conducting a 

strategic review of all civilian positions to ensure that their future use of civilian 

resources matches their long-term priorities, and they have recently announced hiring controls until their strategic review is completed. 

The Air Force officer corps ended fiscal year 2010 2,335 over authorized end 

strength. The Air Force is reducing accessions and using voluntary and involuntary 

separation programs to get the officer force back to authorized end strength by the 

end of fiscal year 2012. 

6. Senator MCCAIN. Dr. Stanley and Secretary Hale, for the Army and Marine 

Corps, how will these reductions affect dwell time, assuming we are still deploying 

units to Afghanistan? 

Dr. STANLEY. These end strength reductions should not have significant impact 

on Army or Marine Corps dwell time. We are carefully managing the dwell time of 

our forces across the Department, and have limited unit deployments and mobilizations to 1 year. We have balanced the forces for Afghanistan against those coming 

available from the draw-down in Iraq. Comparing 2008 to 2010, we have drawn 

down over 100,000 personnel from Iraq while deploying an additional 64,000 to Afghanistan. The Army is making good progress toward our dwell goal of 2 or more 

years at home for every year deployed with nearly 70 percent of the Active Force 

meeting or exceeding this goal. Similarly, the Marine Corps has approximately 

1,500 fewer personnel deployed in 2010 as compared to 2008 and their Active component’s deployment to dwell ratio is close to the 1:2 goal. 

Secretary HALE. If the number of troops and units deployed to Afghanistan is not 

significantly reduced at the end of 2014, as currently assumed, then the Department 

would likely relook at the Army and Marine Corps end strength reductions programmed to begin in fiscal year 2015 to ensure that dwell times will not return to 

where they were before the grow-the-force initiatives. 

7. Senator MCCAIN. Dr. Stanley and Secretary Hale, how can the Army achieve 

a 1:2 dwell ratio with these kinds of cuts? 

Dr. STANLEY. We have met the Operation New Dawn responsible drawdown plan 

goals. In 2008 the Army had 22 Brigade Combat Teams (BCTs) deployed, and are 

projecting to have 36 percent fewer BCTs deployed in 2012. The Army projects the 

average unit boots on the ground to dwell ratio to improve to approximately 1:2 for 

Active component units and 1:4 for Reserve component units in 2012. 

Secretary HALE. Achieving the Active Force planning objective of a 1:2 dwell ratio 

is highly dependent on the level of demand for deploying troops/units. Planned reductions in Army end strength are scheduled to follow significant reductions in 

troop demand in both Iraq and Afghanistan based on current assumptions. If the 

reduction in the demand for troop deployments does not occur as planned, the risk 

to individual dwell time will need to be assessed as part of any decision to proceed 

with the end strength drawdowns. 

8. Senator MCCAIN. Dr. Stanley, what do we need to do to avoid being accused 

of breaking faith with servicemembers who have served honorably—probably deployed more than once—who would like to stay on Active Duty but may be pinkslipped? 

Dr. STANLEY. The Department has collaborated with Service Force Management 

experts and submitted several legislative proposals for the NDAA for Fiscal Year 

2012 that will provide the Services the flexibility needed to achieve force reductions 

while maintaining readiness and taking care of our servicemembers. Maintaining 

readiness, while fairly restructuring to a post-conflict force, is our goal. 

292 

INTEGRATED DISABILITY EVALUATION SYSTEM

9. Senator MCCAIN. Dr. Stanley, DOD and the Department of Veterans’ Affairs 

(VA) have greatly improved disability processing with the Integrated Disability 

Evaluation System (IDES). Long delays still exist in the Services in performing 

medical evaluation boards and in completing the process. In the Army this is particularly serious because of the thousands of non-deployable soldiers who count 

against Army end strength. This looms as a growing risk to Army readiness. What 

is your office doing to address the Army’s problem, i.e., growing backlog of soldiers 

in IDES? 

Dr. STANLEY. In order to determine the most feasible path forward on this issue, 

the two Secretaries met to directly engage on how to reduce the IDES cycle time 

so the numbers of servicemembers processing through the system can be more efficient and effective. The goal is a more fit and healthy fighting force and the total 

well-being of the force. The following steps were taken: 

(1) We convened a joint IDES Tiger Team to explore improvement opportunities 

to delays and processing, including modifying the IDES proof of concept to test 

a process that might streamline and reduce the amount of days to get through 

the process, and long-term strategic modifications. 

(2) We recommended policy adjustments, as identified by the Tiger Team, that 

could help streamline the IDES. We plan to test those during the proof of concept. 

(3) We worked closely with VA to improve Information Technology (IT) solutions 

which will enhance timeliness and efficiency across all stages of IDES. 

Most significantly, the Department of the Army is now submitting increased budget line items to provide for additional staff, facilities, and equipment to organize 

train, and operate the IDES for their soldiers. 

Work continues on all fronts to improve the IDES—and we are absolutely committed to improvement. In the end, we are confident that a more efficient and effective IDES will emerge, Military Department readiness will be enhanced, and all 

servicemembers will be processed through the IDES at a pace which is less than 

the existing amount of days and appropriate for each servicemember. 

PRIORITIZING QUALITY OF LIFE DOLLARS

10. Senator MCCAIN. Dr. Stanley, every year Congress authorizes modernization 

and construction of new facilities intended to improve the quality of military life for 

members and their families. Along with pay and benefit improvements, this clearly 

has had a positive impact on morale and a high retention rate. What do you consider to be the the highest priorities for modernization and construction of new facilities—barracks, child care centers, family housing, medical clinics, or schools? 

Dr. STANLEY. I agree with the Secretary that direct support of the operations in 

theater is the Department’s highest priority. And only second to that is taking care 

of our wounded, ill, and injured servicemembers. While we may not be able to modernize and construct new facilities for all barracks, child care center, family housing, 

medical clinics, and schools at any given time, I will prioritize supporting the operations and taking care our servicemembers as my top priorities. However, we continually identify and address weaknesses or any areas that are insufficient or lacking. In short, we are continuously examining and assessing our needs and how to 

best use our limited resources to best support the war and improve the quality care 

for our servicemembers and their families. 

SEXUAL ASSAULT PREVENTION AND RESPONSE EFFORTS

11. Senator MCCAIN. Dr. Stanley, preventing and responding properly to incidents 

of sexual assault remains a high priority for each of your Services, and progress has 

been made. Is the military a safer place for women to serve than before September 

11? 

Dr. STANLEY. Yes, we believe the military is a safer place for women—and men— 

to serve than before September 11, 2001. In fact, our most recent data indicates 

that: 

(1) In 2010, the data collected by the Department suggests that there were one 

third fewer incidents of sexual assault against women, and half the number 

of sexual assault incidents against men, than there were in 2006. 

(2) Servicemembers may now click, call or text for confidential assistance, available 24 hours a day/7 days a week, from the Department’s new victim assistance hotline called DOD Safe Helpline. 

293 

(3) An overwhelming majority of servicemembers understand the need and desire 

to help prevent fellow servicemembers from harming themselves or others in 

a social setting. 

(4) Over 90 percent of servicemembers are now able to recognize situations that 

may pose a risk for sexual assault and identify an effective action to prevent 

harm to a potential victim. 

(5) More than ever, a greater proportion of servicemembers are now reporting the 

sexual assaults committed against them. 

(6) Sexual Assault Response Coordinators and Victim Advocates are stationed in 

garrison and are forward deployed, providing 24/7 assistance, at every DOD 

installation in the world. 

(7) In 2010, of the cases where DOD has the authority and sufficient evidence to 

take action, over half of alleged offenders had court-martial charges preferred 

against them—up from one-third in 2007. 

(8) Secretary Gates has assigned a General/Flag Officer with operational experience to provide direct oversight of the Sexual Assault Prevention and Response Program office. 

Still there is much work to be done. One sexual assault is one too many. Until 

we achieve our vision, we will continue to integrate sexual assault prevention into 

military culture, improve our assistance to victims, encourage reporting and hold offenders appropriately accountable. 

12. Senator MCCAIN. Dr. Stanley, do you think that new legislation is needed to 

enhance the Sexual Assault Prevention Programs in DOD? If so, what legislation 

would you propose be enacted? 

Dr. STANLEY. At this time, I am firmly of the opinion that we do not need new 

legislation. To date, the Department has received a great deal of assistance in improving its sexual assault prevention and response programs. For example, since 

2004, there have been eight congressional hearings, five investigative body reviews, 

and four Government Accountability Office reviews addressing DOD sexual assault 

programs. Each of these activities has provided greater insight and information, and 

has resulted more than one hundred recommendations that have been incorporated 

into six separate National Defense Authorization Acts. Additional legislation is not 

required; we need time to implement the recommendations already made and that 

are in progress and would be redundant and duplicative at this time. Moreover, the 

Department tracks its progress against each of the 136 recommendations, as well 

as the 744 sub-tasks, required to implement those recommendations. The progress 

has been reported to your Committee, at least twice yearly in March and December, 

in our Annual Reports. 

PROGRESS IN IMPLEMENTATION OF DON’T ASK, DON’T TELL REPEAL

13. Senator MCCAIN. Dr. Stanley, training for Repeal Day is currently underway 

in each of your Services that will pave the way for gay and lesbian individuals to 

serve openly in the Armed Forces. What is your assessment of the effectiveness of 

the training for your Service thus far? 

Dr. STANLEY. Thus far, training has been very effective, especially in emphasizing 

leadership, professionalism, discipline, and respect. I have personally attended this 

training and believe it is where it needs to be to ensure our leaders are ready for 

repeal. In addition, every 2 weeks I receive an in-depth analysis of the progress of 

training. 

14. Senator MCCAIN. Dr. Stanley, the ground combat forces—soldiers and marines, as well as the Special Forces for all Services—registered the greatest concern 

about the effects on readiness and unit cohesion of repealing the Don’t Ask, Don’t 

Tell policy. What problems do you anticipate on ships and in the field when the repeal takes effect? 

Dr. STANLEY. Because I have great confidence in the commanders in the field, I 

do not anticipate major problems. By emphasizing leadership, professionalism, discipline, and respect, we expect that our forces will successfully carry out this change 

in policy. 

JOINING FORCES INITIATIVES

15. Senator MCCAIN. Dr. Stanley, the White House recently announced a national 

initiative that focuses on the employment, education, and wellness of military personnel and their families. First lady Michelle Obama and Dr. Jill Biden announced 

294 

the Joining Forces initiative, which pulls a variety of government agencies, businesses, nonprofit groups, and media organizations in an effort to improve the lives 

of military families. General Stanley McChrystal will lead the effort. What actions 

is DOD taking in response to the Joining Forces initiative? 

Dr. STANLEY. The Department has been coordinating with the White House on the 

Joining Forces initiative since November 2010 and for all White House family support initiatives. Actions taken to date have been to advise the White House on the 

key challenges facing military families, to help facilitate installation visits and visits 

with troops and families of all components, and to participate in numerous working 

groups and events sponsored by the White House that deal with military family support. The Department continues to work closely with the Offices of the First Lady 

and Dr. Biden in an advisory capacity. 

Awareness among Americans who do not wear the uniform about the strengths, 

challenges, and unique needs of our military families and to rally our communities 

to support them in the long-term. Specifically, Joining Forces is focusing on key 

areas impacting our military families which include employment, education, and 

wellness. As DOD cannot provide all the resources our military families may need 

to empower them to thrive, partnerships with other government agencies, businesses, non-profits, and local community groups are key to providing sustained networks of support which in turn will keep our families strong and resilient throughout the military lifecycle. Joining Forces complements the Presidential Study Directive on Military Families, another unprecedented effort where a whole-of-government approach was leveraged to identify and resource the most critical needs of our 

military members and families. 

Much in the spirit of Joining Forces, the Department has been working one program in particular since Fall 2010 which has been socialized with the White House 

and the Congressional Military Family Caucuses and met with great interest: the 

Military Spouse Employment Partnership Program, or MSEP. An extension of the 

very effective program run by the Army since 2003, MSEP will connect corporate 

America to the extremely talented and educated cadre represented by our military 

spouses across all the military Services, including the Coast Guard, for jobs and careers. We are looking forward to a mid-summer launch of the MSEP program. 

16. Senator MCCAIN. Dr. Stanley, what priority areas do you think General 

McChrystal should focus his attention on? 

Dr. STANLEY. The priority areas on which General McChrystal and the Center for 

a New American Security (CNAS) should focus are contained within the intersection 

of the areas of emphasis of the two recent White House-directed efforts that highlight military family support which resulted from collaboration with the Military 

Services and the Cabinet. The first of the initiatives is the Presidential Study Directive on Military Families which points out the following four government-wide efforts: enhance the well-being and psychological health of the military family, ensure 

excellence in military children’s education and their development, develop career 

and educational opportunities for military spouses, and increase child care availability and quality for the Armed Forces. The second is the Joining Forces initiative 

which is a comprehensive national initiative to mobilize all sectors of society to give 

our servicemembers and their families the opportunities and support they have 

earned, especially in the areas of education, spouse employment, and family 

wellness. I support both initiatives and the key elements of the focus areas that the 

White House has already chosen to emphasize through the Joining Forces initiative: 

military family employment, education, and wellness. These are also key elements 

of my fiscal year 2012–2016 Strategic Plan. 

However, if I were to select one priority area within the intersection of these two 

initiatives on which General McChrystal should focus, I would advise that he concentrate on military spouse employment. For too long, the challenges of managing 

a military family have prevented many spouses from securing long-term, fulfilling 

employment. Employers must understand that military spouses possess the necessary skills and attributes that make them excellent hires, especially in management and leadership positions. Offered the right kind of positions—those that are 

flexible, virtual, and portable—in growing, 21st century career fields, our military 

spouses can make an immediate impact on any company they may work for. With 

portable and virtual positions—the trend in today’s global workforce environment— 

they can keep the same job throughout multiple Permanent Change of Station (PCS) 

moves, allowing them to retain seniority, vacation time, and positions of management. For our spouses who are teachers and health care workers for example, challenges with accreditation and certification can prevent seamless movement between 

school districts and states. Addressing these types of issues could allow rapid rehiring and re-employment of spouses in their new location after leaving a similar 

295 

job at their old duty station. We stand by to advise and assist General McChrystal 

and the White House on this matter which directly impacts spouse, family, and 

servicemember wellness. 

QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY SENATOR LINDSEY GRAHAM

DOD SUPPORT FOR MILITARY FAMILIES IN TIMES OF CRISIS

17. Senator GRAHAM. Dr. Stanley, support for military families counts most in 

times of crisis. We have heard reports that military families received little or no assistance or information from DOD in the days preceding the potential shutdown of 

the government last month, and also there was confusion regarding evacuation of 

families and support personnel such as teachers in the wake of the tsunami in 

Japan. What role did your office play in planning for these contingencies? 

Dr. STANLEY. Though there is specific guidance for continuing program operations 

during times of crisis, each crisis is evaluated separately in relation to the gravity 

of the impact on military families. 

Support to Military Families During the Potential Government Shutdown 

DOD developed an internal DOD plan in the event a shutdown was to occur. Several Principal level staff within the Office of the Secretary of Defense were specifically engaged in the plan’s development, although the Comptroller was assigned the 

lead. Because the ultimate goal was to avoid shutdown, plan details were provided 

to the workforce only as necessary, with the objective to minimize alarm to the 

workforce. In preparation for the shutdown, my Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Civilian Personnel Policy (DASD CPP) led the planning efforts associated 

with preparing the Department’s civilian workforce in the event of a shutdown. The 

DASD CPP personally coordinated extensively with the leadership of the Office of 

Personnel Management (OPM) to ensure DOD’s shutdown plan was consistent with 

OPM rules and requirements. The DASD CPP worked in partnership with the Office 

of the USD (Comptroller) to establish guidance to identify personnel excepted from 

the shutdown, and ensured that letters of notification to the workforce were properly staged in the event a shutdown was to occur. Under the direction of the DASD 

CPP, the Civilian Personnel Management System (CPMS) website (http:// 

www.cpms.osd.mil) was updated with answers to Frequently Asked Questions to 

keep the DOD workforce informed. 

There was particular concern during the shutdown planning for how this may 

have affected servicemembers and their families—particularly the commissaries and 

the schools. The Office of Military Community & Family Policy within P&R ensured 

that commissaries would be able to stay open during a shutdown and careful consideration of all consequences of this decision were examined. As soon as the decision 

was made, the information was disseminated immediately. 

Department of Defense Education Activity (DODEA) ensured that schools remained opened and military families were routinely advised through electronic and 

print media. 

Support to Military Families during the Tsunami in Japan 

During the crisis in Japan, P&R quickly established strong working relationships 

with the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the Defense Continuity & Crisis Office, U.S. Forces 

Japan, the Pacific Command, and the Services to provide policies and activities to 

support servicemembers, DOD civilians, and dependants. P&R created a Crisis 

Management Taskforce as well as a Crisis Response Cell to ensure timely and accurate information and support to those in the crisis. Specific examples are highlighted below: 

• The CPMS established a website (http://www.cpms.osd.mil/disasters/ 

japandisaster.html) for civilian employees that listed information on the authorized voluntary departure, travel assistance for families leaving and returning to Japan, as well as, a compendium of other pertinent web links 

to Military OneSource, Services Japan information websites, TRICARE, and 

others. 

• Military Community & Family Policy (MC&FP) Military OneSource 

websites were developed for both military and civilian dependants who 

chose to accept voluntary departure from Japan. 

• DODEA ensured that the correct information about authorized departures was distributed throughout Japan. The authorized departure was only 

for dependents of military and civilian employees. It was not for military 

or civilian employees assigned in Japan. DOD provided the permission to 

authorize single parent teachers, who had school-aged dependents electing 

296 

evacuation, to escort their dependents to the United States, and then return 

to Japan for work. 

A crisis center, which was operational within one day following the disaster, was 

the critical link for sharing information concerning families with the Services and 

involved agencies. Additionally, teams were dispatched to every receiving point for 

incoming aircraft containing Japan evacuees. These teams met the families in the 

terminal and began providing immediate assistance to the families concerning dependent education. 

DOD provided a wide range of student support to those who transited to the 

United States, from working with school districts to relax school boundaries and requirements, to assigning two high school assistant principals to the United States 

to support the students who did not return to Japan. 

18. Senator GRAHAM. Dr. Stanley, looking back, what lessons were learned? 

Dr. STANLEY. The compounded crises of the Japan Earthquake/Tsunami/Nuclear 

incident and the potential government shutdown provided valuable insight into how 

we should prepare for future crises. We have developed a Continuity of Operations 

planning document to support any potential shutdown of government operations in 

the future and will recommend that other DOD components create a similar plan 

of action. In reference to the Tsunami in Japan, my staff involved in the Japan crisis conducted a comprehensive after action review and captured several lessons 

learned that will be included in future internal Personnel and Readiness crisis management planning. These lessons learned include the need to develop stronger avenues of communication with the combatant commands and Services leadership to 

support their needs during a crisis. 

19. Senator GRAHAM. Dr. Woodson, how is DOD ensuring that servicemembers 

and their families are protected from any health risks following the devastating tsunami in Japan? 

Dr. WOODSON. DOD has initiated a series of coordinated actions to protect our 

servicemembers and their families against possible health risks resulting from the 

tsunami. Specifically: 

(1) The U.S. Pacific Command (PACOM), with support from specialized health 

surveillance teams from across DOD, continues to monitor radiation levels and 

evaluate possible toxic hazards throughout the region. 

(2) USPACOM implemented force health protection measures, such as monitoring 

installations for excessive radiation levels, distributing radiation dosimeters to 

those who were most likely to experience elevated radiation exposures (within 

125 nautical miles of the Fukushima plants), establishing maximum radiation 

dose guidelines for individuals engaged in the relief effort, and distributing potassium iodide to mitigate the absorption of radioactive iodine, if required. 

(3) Whole body radiation scans are conducted to measure internal radiation doses 

for those servicemembers considered to have the highest potential for radiation exposure by virtue of having performed duties within the ‘‘hot’’ or ‘‘warm 

zone’’ around the nuclear reactor plant. 

(4) On March 21, 2011, the Under Secretary of Defense (Personnel and Readiness) directed the Services and Defense Agencies to report, retroactive to 

March 11, 2011, the specific, once daily location of each member of the DODaffiliated population on the mainland of Japan. This population included all 

servicemembers and their families, DOD civilian employees and their families, 

and DOD contractors. 

DOD will use the above data, in conjunction with data collected from monitoring 

activities, to develop an exposure registry to link each individual in the DOD-affiliated population in Japan with estimated radiation exposures. The exposure registry 

will be available if needed for diagnosis, treatment, claims adjudication by the Department of Veterans Affairs, or if needed to conduct health studies. 

REDUCING HEALTH CARE COSTS

20. Senator GRAHAM. Dr. Woodson, DOD has proposed five cost-saving initiatives 

which are currently being considered by the subcommittee. In your view, are there 

additional ways to bring health care costs down, beyond those that require a larger 

contribution from beneficiaries? 

Dr. WOODSON. We believe there are additional ways to bring the health care costs 

down that do not involve a larger contribution from the beneficiaries. The Department is currently undertaking a comprehensive and thoughtful review to identify 

additional options to reduce health costs while maintaining and improving quality, 

297 

safety and access. For example, we are currently conducting an extensive review 

and analysis of activities across the Military Health System (MHS), focusing the 

reprioritization of critical mission requirements; consolidation of like/similar activities or support functions across multiple organizational units; opportunities for insourcing, if appropriate; and elimination of non-value added functions. In addition, 

we are implementing the Patient Centered Medical Home model which evidence 

shows also lowers the overall cost of care through improved care delivery, coordination and management of enrolled patients. We have recently joined the National 

Partnership for Patients initiative with DHHS and other partners to reduce hospital-acquired conditions and readmissions. This initiative is the right thing to do 

for patients and has the potential to save money across all health care systems. We 

are working to provide accessible options for patients, whose conditions can be treated in alternative locations, decreasing emergency room utilization and associated 

costs. We are also encouraging increased use of mail order pharmacy to simplify access to medications at an overall lower cost to the MHS. Finally, we continually assess our patient care service contracts to provide best value. 

MENTAL HEALTH AND THE RESERVES

21. Senator GRAHAM. Dr. Woodson and Secretary McCarthy, I am impressed by 

reports of the increased numbers of military and civilian mental health providers 

both within the Services and in the TRICARE networks. How much of the increase 

in mental health capability is reflected in the Reserves? 

Dr. WOODSON and Secretary MCCARTHY. Mental health providers have always 

been fully accessible to our Reserve component members. As with the active Duty 

Services, the members of the Reserve component have also seen an increase in mental health providers throughout the system. The TRICARE network includes 50,000 

mental health providers, while there are more than 6,000 mental health providers 

in our military treatment facilities. This includes tele-mental health treatment of diagnosed mental disorders (medically-supervised, secure audio-visual conferencing 

available online at www.tricare.mil/telementalhealth), as well as the web-based 

TRICARE Assistance Program demonstration project, which covers short-term, nonmedical issues (www.tricare.mil/triap) and uses audiovisual telecommunications systems such as video chat and instant messaging to access existing behavioral health 

centers in the Reserve component member’s region. reservists can obtain information about these benefits and assistance in accessing them from the Department’s 

Yellow Ribbon Program which supports reservists and their families with information on benefits and referrals before, during, and after deployment. Additionally, 

mental health services provided by Department of Veterans Affairs hospitals and 

clinics have improved access to care in areas where the TRICARE and military facilities have a lesser presence. Reserve component servicemembers who are on active duty for more than 30 consecutive days can access these providers through 

TRICARE Prime, and they also have access to them during 180 days pre/post deployment coverage and after that while participating in TRICARE Reserve Select, 

which now has more than 74,000 covered reservists, and TRICARE Retired Reserve. 

In addition, the TRICARE Management Activity (TMA) and its three Regional Offices are in the midst of an initiative to reach out to the Psychological Health Directors assigned the Adjutant General Staff in each of the 54 states and territories to 

provide them with current information about TRICARE and behavioral health. 

Another resource available to reservists for mental health support is Military 

OneSource. Military OneSource helps Reserve component members with a multitude 

of needs and is private and confidential. In addition to 24-hours a day, 7 days a 

week, toll-free access to a consultant, including international calling options, other 

counseling options include face-to-face counseling, telephone, online and email consultations, and financial consulting. Military OneSource also links to the National 

Suicide Prevention Lifeline. The National Suicide Prevention Lifeline is a 24-hour, 

toll-free, confidential suicide prevention hotline available to anyone in suicidal crisis 

or emotional distress. Those requiring counseling for long-term medical issues will 

be referred to TRICARE or a military treatment facility. 

Further, reservists not on Active Duty, but who have previously deployed, have 

access to mental health benefits provided by the Veterans Administration. 

The Defense Centers of Excellence for Psychological Health & Traumatic Brain 

Injury (DCoE) is another source of mental heath support for reservists through its 

Web-based Real Warriors Resilience, Recovery, and Reintegration Campaign. In addition, support is also available for reservists from DCoE’s After Deployment Webbased offering and from its smart phone behavioral health applications. 

298 

22. Senator GRAHAM. Dr. Woodson and Secretary McCarthy, who is looking at the 

question of the requirements for mental health support within the Reserve components in light of a new operational Reserve? 

Dr. WOODSON and Secretary MCCARTHY. The Department fully intends to support 

the mental health needs of our Reserve component servicemembers. It is clear that 

these needs are not static and will arguably increase as continuing operations and 

the multiple deployments that are required by them continue. Reserve and Health 

Affairs are collaboratively reviewing mental health issues and are actively seeking 

ways to meet current and future mental health demands. In addition, the Department has provided the Risk-Adjusted Model for Staffing (PHRAMS) staffing model 

to the Services to assist them in estimating the need for mental health providers 

based on the risk of mental health problems our servicemembers face due to their 

deployment experiences. 

To further support reservists’ mental health, the Reserve component is implementing mental health assessments as prescribed by NDAA 2010, Section 708, to 

identify mental health conditions, including post-traumatic stress disorder, suicidal 

tendencies, and other behavior health conditions that require additional treatment/ 

care. These assessments will be conducted during four time frames: within 2 months 

prior to deployment and three post-deployment assessments, 3–6 months, 7–12 

months, and 16–24 months. The Air Force Reserve and Guard have completed 2,268 

pre-deployment assessments with 3 members requiring referrals. Navy and Marine 

program will be fully functional by August and the Army Reserve/Guard is awaiting 

Army AD electronic form implementation. 

FINANCIAL SYSTEMS FOR THE DEFENSE HEALTH PROGRAM

23. Senator GRAHAM. Secretary Hale and Dr. Woodson, improving DOD’s financial 

systems has been a priority for DOD but not much progress has been made. Does 

the Defense Health Program, which is a single appropriation for all three Services, 

still utilize separate financial accounting systems, and if so, why? 

Secretary HALE. The Department is committed to improving the financial systems 

that supports DOD. Multiple systems are used to manage the Defense Health Program (DHP) appropriation because the funding and resources are divided and managed by the TMA as well as each of the Service components. The DHP funding is 

not the exclusive source of the Military components’ resources and funding to support healthcare activities within each component. When the Defense Health Program was created, it was pulled together from four separate appropriations, Army, 

Navy, Air Force, and DOD. Each of these entities had, and continues to have, different accounting and finance systems. In order to track expenses in the appropriation, the Department has developed a methodology to reconcile, after the fact, an 

execution of funds which is consistent across the Services and TMA. Although we 

have more than one system to manage the DHP via the Service accounting systems, 

having a single appropriation ensures a uniformed benefit. The DHP continues to 

look for ways to unify information, improve resource management and this may 

evolve to single enterprise resource planning (accounting) system. 

Dr. WOODSON. The Department is committed to improving the financial systems 

that support our defense system. Multiple systems are used to manage the DHP appropriation because the funding and resources are divided and managed by the 

TMA as well as each of the Service components. The DHP funding is not the exclusive source of the Military components’ resources and funding to support healthcare 

activities within each component. When the Defense Health Program was created, 

it was pulled together from four separate appropriations, Army, Navy, Air Force, 

and DOD. Each of these entities had, and continues to have, different accounting 

and finance systems. In order to track expenses in the appropriation, the Department has developed a methodology to reconcile, after the fact, an execution of funds 

which is consistent across the Services and TMA. Although we have more than one 

system to manage the DHP, having a single appropriation ensures a uniformed benefit. The DHP continues to look for ways to unify information, improve resource 

management and this may evolve to single enterprise resource planning (accounting) system. 

SUICIDE IN THE RESERVE COMPONENTS

24. Senator GRAHAM. Secretary McCarthy, as you acknowledge in your statement, 

the increase in suicide among non-Active Duty National Guard and Reserve is of 

great concern. According to the Army National Guard, for example, the number of 

suicides increased sharply for 2009 in which 62 occurred, and 2010 in which 113 

299 

occurred. Over half of the Army National Guard soldiers who committed suicide had 

never deployed, and only about 15 percent were unemployed. Yellow Ribbon is not 

solely a suicide prevention program, it is only available to members who have deployed, and according to your testimony in fiscal year 2012 will be the final year 

of funding. What are your thoughts on the adequacy of suicide prevention resources 

available to the Reserve components, and what else needs to be done? 

Secretary MCCARTHY. Concern remains heightened for the Reserve component but 

I am committed to addressing this issue. National Guard and Reserve are given the 

same suicide prevention and resilience training from their respective branches as 

the active duty. However, the ability to take advantage of installation based resources is very limited for the Reserve component servicemembers and their families 

who often live in communities far from their units or installations of assignment. 

The National Guard, which operates in 54 States or territories, have various programs and services available through State or community organizations, but they 

vary based on geographic dispersion, available resources, and staffing levels. Even 

more complicated for servicemembers in the Reserves is that many times they do 

not live in the State in which they drill. So State-based programs, which can benefit 

members of the Guard, might not be readily available to the Reserves. Improved 

alignment and joint sharing of information and resources could benefit members 

across the Reserve component. 

Currently, there is a Director of Psychological Health in our Guard and Reserve 

Headquarters as well as in each of our 54 States and territories who acts as the 

focal point for coordinating the psychological support for Guard members and their 

families. I have established a Suicide Prevention Stakeholder Working Group, which 

has identified several items that would improve services and better support to the 

Reserve component and their families and is working toward implementing these 

reforms. 

Further, I believe we need to look harder at ways in which we can expand the 

access to behavioral health treatment for Reserve component servicemembers, especially in isolated and remote areas and in emergency situations. We also need to 

work closer with the Department of Veterans Affairs to support efforts in suicide 

prevention, intervention, and postvention. 

Finally, we should consider ways in which we can provide behavioral health care 

treatment to Reserve component servicemembers regardless of deployment status. 

DEFENSE CENTER OF EXCELLENCE FOR PSYCHOLOGICAL HEALTH AND TRAUMATIC BRAIN

INJURY

25. Senator GRAHAM. Dr. Woodson, in February 2011, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) published a very disappointing report on the DOD Center of 

Excellence for Psychological Health and Traumatic Brain Injury, which was established in the aftermath of Walter Reed to develop excellence in response to psychological and brain injuries. It found several performance problems as well as lack of 

a clear mission. I understand that a new management team is now in place at the 

Center of Excellence for Psychological Health and Traumatic Brain Injury. What improvements do you see in the future at this Center of Excellence? 

Dr. WOODSON. To address the concerns of the GAO and Congress, the Defense 

Centers of Excellence for Psychological Health and Traumatic Brain Injury (DCoE)’s 

new leadership is working diligently to ensure that it is a functional, disciplined, 

focused and accountable organization that performs at the highest level. The identified management priorities, as well as completed improvements are listed below. 

DCoE management priorities: 

DCoE’s mission and priorities are focused on the following parameters of success: 

• Develop a thorough and comprehensive base of knowledge in the evaluation, diagnosis, treatment and rehabilitation of PH/TBI injuries. 

• Provide consistent, timely, accurate, comprehensive and focused information on PH/TBI to the military Services and DOD colleagues. 

• Develop a thorough and comprehensive analysis of gaps in research and 

aggressively advocate filling those gaps. 

• Leverage DCoE’s knowledge and clinical expertise to improve the system 

of care. 

Improvements that have been made: 

• DCoE’s new leadership has established or improved upon several planning, monitoring, and execution alignment processes since February 2011. 

These improvements are fundamental to ensure DCoE’s future as a disciplined, focused, and accountable organization. 

300 

Future Service Alignment of DCoE: 

• In April 2011, the Department submitted the Report to Congress on the 

DOD Medical Centers of Excellence (CoEs) that described the future strategic direction of the CoEs. 

• The report outlined a plan to establish a Military Health System (MHS) 

CoE Advisory Board, which will be responsible for policy guidance and oversight of the CoEs. 

• The report outlined the decision process to align DCoE under the U.S. 

Army Medical Research & Material Command (MRMC) through a plan to 

be established by the MHS CoE Advisory Board and MRMC Commander. 

EDUCATION OPPORTUNITIES FOR MILITARY CHILDREN

26. Senator GRAHAM. Secretary Hale, I commend the priority Dr. Stanley has established for improved educational opportunities for military children. His testimony 

describes the Partnership Program in which grants are provided to over 60 local 

educational agencies for specific improvements in academic performance of military 

children. According to information provided to the committee, funding for this program was lost as a result of DOD efficiencies initiatives. We had been assured that 

family and education programs were protected in the efficiencies initiatives. Why 

was this grant program eliminated? 

Secretary HALE. The Department determined that it would be more cost effective 

to replace grants to local education agencies (LEAs) with alternative means of outreach during the Department’s Improving Business Operations fiscal year 2012 review. 

The first 2 years of the grant program introduced new opportunities to militaryconnected students attending public schools. The projects funded through the grants 

have brought educational support to raise student achievement, professional development to teachers, and student support services to address the socio-emotional 

needs of military-connected children. The data to date demonstrate that grantees 

are on track to achieve their grant project goals. The lessons learned will assist 

DODEA in providing the alternative means of outreach. 

Although DODEA will no longer fund the grants program as a vehicle for supporting the education of military-connected students attending LEAs, the DODEA 

has requested $4.9 million in the fiscal year 2012 President’s budget to provide an 

alternative means of outreach, by aligning the needs of military children with education programs with proven results. The DODEA will provide targeted support to 

LEAs by building a support and transition team to implement and oversee programs 

that provide targeted support to LEAs and also, whenever possible, comprehensive 

support programs for military children. 

HEALTH CARE COSTS SAVINGS

27. Senator GRAHAM. Secretary Hale, you served as a member of a Task Force 

in 2007 created by Congress to examine the future of military health care, and one 

of the recommendations of that task force was that DOD should commission a study 

and possibly a pilot program aimed at better coordinating insurance practices 

among those retirees who are eligible for private health insurance as well as 

TRICARE. What was the Task Force’s thinking on that approach at the time and 

was this recommendation ever acted upon? 

Secretary HALE. The Task Force believed that resolving issues related to the coordination of private insurance and TRICARE offered the potential to provide retirees with better health care while also helping to control growth in DOD medical 

costs. They identified two general approaches: The government paying all or part 

of the retiree’s premium for the employer’s health plan or employers paying all or 

part of the TRICARE enrollment fees. The Task Force also emphasized that use of 

either option must be strictly voluntary on the part of the retiree. 

The Department conducted an analysis in October 2008, addressing the Task 

Force’s approaches. The analysis looked at four different scenarios and found there 

is a large degree of uncertainty and risk involved in DOD providing an ‘‘other health 

insurance’’ (OHI) subsidy to retirees. The cost impact from fiscal year 2009 through 

fiscal year 2015 was estimated to range from a savings of $4.4 billion to a cost increase of $4.7 billion. All scenarios evaluated led to very large initial cost increases 

to achieve net savings. 

The Department also reviewed the results of the Institute of Defense Analyses 

(IDA) study on providing OHI subsidies that was prepared in January 2008 for the 

Tenth Quadrennial Review of Military Compensation (QRMC). This study concluded 

301 

that due to relative cost of OHI and the continual decline of TRICARE premiums 

and copayments in real terms, DOD costs would increase under such an initiative 

no matter what subsidy amount was used. 

Based on the results of these analyses, the Department did not believe undertaking a pilot program to further explore this issue was warranted. However, it was 

noted that if the TRICARE fee or benefits structure changes, and, depending on the 

impact of national health care reform on the availability and cost of OHI, reevaluation may be warranted. 

28. Senator GRAHAM. Secretary Hale, has DOD considered ways to better coordinate TRICARE and private insurance as a cost saving measure, and would DOD 

be open to ideas to involve civilian employers of military dependents and retirees 

in a shared opportunity to reduce DOD health care costs? 

Secretary HALE. The Department implicitly involves civilian employers of military 

dependents and retirees in helping to lower the cost of TRICARE by actively identifying those TRICARE beneficiaries who have other health insurance and ensuring 

that the other health insurance is the primary payer for the beneficiaries’ health 

care. Our contractors have processes in place to periodically validate the existence 

of other health insurance as a part of their double coverage plan. 

With respect to subsidies, the QRMC, Volume II, July 2008, issued their report 

in which they considered an ‘‘Other Health Insurance’’ subsidy. The QRMC 

conjectured that an ‘‘other health insurance’’ subsidy may be an innovative way for 

DOD to encourage individuals with other health insurance options to opt out of 

TRICARE, thereby reducing DOD health care costs. However, cost analyses revealed 

that DOD costs would increase under such an initiative, no matter what subsidy 

amount was used. We are, however, continuing to evaluate alternatives that would 

involve civilian employees in our efforts to reduce TRICARE costs. 

29. Senator GRAHAM. Dr. Stanley, section 726(b) of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1997 states the following: ‘‘Total capitation payments for 

health care services to a designated provider shall not exceed an amount equal to 

the cost that would have been incurred by the Government if the enrollees had received such health care services through a military treatment facility, the TRICARE 

program, or the Medicare program as the case may be.’’ I understand that each year 

DOD, as directed by this law, determines annual payment rates to the Uniformed 

Services Family Health Plan (USFHP) based on a variety of factors that measure 

what the Government would spend if the Plan’s enrollees were receiving care from 

the other sources mentioned in section 726(b). The methodology that is used includes adjustments for such elements as health status and geographic cost differences. I understand also that a recent independent analysis commissioned by 

DOD concluded that this rate setting methodology complies with section 726(b) and 

is actuarially sound. So it would seem that the President’s budget proposal simply 

shifts costs to Medicare without saving the Government any money. Is this accurate? If not, please clarify any misunderstanding I may have based on what I just 

described. 

Dr. STANLEY. Under this proposal, the administration estimates a net savings to 

the government of $279 million over the next decade. While current law precludes 

DOD from spending more on the USFHP than it would cost the government to provide care through TRICARE for Life (TFL) and Medicare, the law requires negotiation and mutual agreement between the Secretary of Defense and designated providers in determining payments to the USFHPs. Since the inception of this program 

in 1995, the rates provided to these plans have been based primarily on data from 

the general Medicare population. However, since the TFL program began in 2001, 

the Department has been able to gather detailed data specific to the Medicare-eligible TRICARE beneficiary population. The savings estimated for the proposal are 

based on the difference between the historically used rates and estimates derived 

from the actual data accumulated for Medicare-eligible TRICARE beneficiaries. 

30. Senator GRAHAM. Dr. Stanley, recognizing that the ceiling rate for designated 

providers is recalculated annually and that those calculations withstand the analysis required by law, it appears there would be no future savings. Could you please 

explain how DOD is assuming future savings? 

Dr. STANLEY. The administration estimates the proposal will save the government 

$279 million over the next decade. While current law precludes DOD from spending 

more on the USFHP than it would cost the government to provide care through 

TRICARE for Life (TFL) and Medicare, the law requires negotiation and mutual 

agreement between the Secretary of Defense and designated providers in determining payments to the USFHPs. Since the inception of this program in 1995, the 

302 

rates provided to these plans have been based primarily on data from the general 

Medicare population. However, since the TFL program began in 2001, the Department has been able to gather detailed data specific to the Medicare-eligible 

TRICARE beneficiary population. The savings estimated for the proposal are based 

on the difference between the historically used rates and estimates derived from the 

actual data accumulated for Medicare-eligible TRICARE beneficiaries. 

QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY SENATOR SAXBY CHAMBLISS

SERVICEMEMBERS CIVIL RELIEF ACT

31. Senator CHAMBLISS. Dr. Stanley and Secretary McCarthy, the number of service men and women experiencing significant financial problems with their mortgage 

companies and banks is unfortunately well known. While the operational tempo of 

our Armed Forces will hopefully decrease following the withdrawal of our combat 

forces from Iraq, the OPTEMPO will likely still remain high and we will continue 

to rely on our Reserve components to meet operational requirements for the foreseeable future. With this in mind and if private lenders continue to violate or ignore 

the provisions of the Servicemembers Civil Relief Act (SCRA), what adjustments do 

you believe may be necessary to SCRA to protect the interests of our service men 

and women? 

Dr. STANLEY and Secretary MCCARTHY. The SCRA should be amended in two 

ways: 

(1) The SCRA (codified at 50 U.S.C. App. §§ 501–597b) should be amended to 

make it easier for the lending industry to properly apply the 6 percent interest 

rate cap. Section 527 requires the servicemember to provide the lender with 

a copy of his or her official orders to show the period for which the 6 percent 

interest rate cap should apply. These orders, however, can be difficult to understand and interpret. 

Section 535 defines military orders to include ‘‘any notification . . . from the 

servicemember’s commanding officer, with respect to the servicemember’s current or 

future military duty status.’’ This basically allows the commander to write a letter 

clearly stating when the servicemember is or will be on active duty. This definition, 

however, only applies to section 535, and not to the 6 percent interest rate cap section, which, as noted, still requires a copy of the more complicated official orders. 

If the definition of military orders found in section 535 were made applicable to 

the entire SCRA by moving it to section 511—the definition section, which is applicable to the entire Act—then the lending industry could more readily determine 

when a servicemember was eligible for the 6 percent interest rate cap. 

This amendment would also make it easier for the lending industry to determine 

when the interest rate applied to Reserve component servicemembers who had received orders but had not yet reported for active duty. The SCRA extends some of 

its protections and benefits (including the 6 percent interest rate cap) to those with 

orders even though they have not yet reported for duty. Determining when the orders were received can be complicated. But if servicemembers were allowed to provide a letter from their commander, the period of applicability could be stated clearly. 

(2) The SCRA should be amended to extend mortgage foreclosure protections to 

all servicemembers’ mortgages, not just those secured by pre-service obligations. Section 533 provides protections against the non-judicial sale, foreclosure, or seizure of the property secured by a mortgage obligation that originated before the period of the servicemember’s active duty. 

This means a court must enter a valid order before the sale, foreclosure, or seizure of such property can take place, and such an order cannot be entered unless 

and until the creditor files a lawsuit against the servicemember, gets service of the 

suit on the servicemember, and the servicemember has an opportunity to come into 

court and seek relief from the foreclosure. If the property is secured by a mortgage 

obligation created after the period of active duty, then the SCRA does not provide 

these protections. 

Losing one’s home to foreclosure almost inevitably leads to a cascade of financial 

complications. If it occurs while on active duty, these complications are no less painful and disruptive to mission accomplishment just because the obligation was created while on active duty, rather than prior to entering active duty. 

To ensure that servicemembers remain focused on the military mission, the 

mortgage foreclosure protection should be extended to cover all servicemembers’ 

mortgage obligations, not just pre-service ones. 

303 

Such expanded protection would also simplify the process for the lending industry. 

If such an amendment were adopted, the foreclosing creditor would only have to determine whether the servicemember is on active duty at the time of the proposed 

sale, foreclosure, or seizure (or was on active duty within the 9 months preceding 

the sale, foreclosure, or seizure). The foreclosing creditor would not have to sort 

through a possible series of prior mobilizations to determine the status of the 

servicemember at the origination of the mortgage obligation. 

UNIFORMED SERVICES EMPLOYMENT AND REEMPLOYMENT RIGHTS ACT

32. Senator CHAMBLISS. Dr. Stanley and Secretary McCarthy, the Uniformed 

Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act (USERRA) protects millions of 

people, largely National Guard and Reserve members, as they transition between 

their Federal duties and civilian employment. USERRA is intended to eliminate or 

minimize civilian employment disadvantages resulting from service in the Reserve 

components and protect the rights of those members when they deploy. Since September 11, 2001, over 500,000 citizen soldiers have been mobilized to fight the war 

on terrorism. Many American soldiers have served more than one tour of duty and 

may be required to serve more. Additionally, the need for American troops in other 

parts of the world and at home continues, whether for conflict management or in 

response to natural disasters. While some would argue that it is statistically reasonable for the number of employment discrimination complaints filed by service men 

and women during this time period to have increased—based on the number of deployments—the data needed to make such a judgment remains incomplete. Furthermore, data from a 2004 DOD survey showed that at least 72 percent of National 

Guard and Reserve members with USERRA problems never sought assistance for 

their problems, raising questions as to whether complaint numbers alone can fully 

explain USERRA compliance or employer support. Finally, the time it takes to process USERRA complaints, while somewhat improved, remains unacceptable when 

you are speaking in terms of whether or not a veteran and/or his family will lose 

their home due to a negligent or willfully mistaken foreclosure action. In light of 

these factors, do you see the need for any changes to USERRA to address these 

issues or provide additional protection to our Guard and Reserve members? 

Dr. STANLEY and Secretary MCCARTHY. Yes, there is a need to reexamine 

USERRA to ensure the law protects servicemembers and to promote the employer 

support necessary to sustain the Total Force. Based on the heightened operations 

of the last 10 years and anecdotal evidence gathered by ESGR Volunteers and Ombudsman, USERRA in its current form should be reviewed. USERRA has not been 

significantly overhauled since 1994 when it was first enacted. There have been 

minor amendments to USERRA, such as those resulting from the Veterans Benefit 

Improvement Act of 2008, to improve and enhance compensation and pension, housing, labor and education, and insurance premiums. 

Based on ESGR’s view statistically, USERRA complaints and inquiries have risen 

since September 2001, but the number of cases handled by ESGR impact less than 

0.01 percent of all Reserve component members. While the number of USERRA inquiries has increased, the average number of cases has remained fairly consistent 

over the last 3 years. Through the second quarter of fiscal year 2011, ESGR has 

handled 1,470 cases, a slight decline from the same quarters in fiscal year 2010. 

Please refer to ESGR’s fiscal year 2010 Annual report for further details on the 

metrics that measure USERRA Inquiries (page 30). In part, the increase in inquiries 

may be attributed to: 

(1) increased deployments and training in response to global events 

(2) the U.S. economy 

(3) ESGR’s proactive Outreach Programs 

While USERRA does not specifically cover or add protections involving foreclosures, other Federal acts and programs do. The Veterans Benefit Act 2010 addressed some of the concerns associated with mortgages, homelessness and insurance for veterans. As for the timeliness to resolve a USERRA case, ESGR resolved 

cases within 10.27 calendar days during fiscal year 2010. Further details of our historical response rates may also be found on page 30 of the ESGR fiscal year 2010 

Annual Report. 

While the above factors focus on servicemembers, there are some indications that 

employer fatigue from 10 years of continuous combat operations may also be driving 

the need to revisit USERRA. To verify the impact on employers, ESGR is sponsoring 

two efforts: 

304 

(1) The ‘‘2011 Department of Defense National Survey of Employers’’ was sent to 

a cross-section of 80,000 civilian employers across America. The survey currently runs through July 6 with results expected late in fiscal year 2011. 

(2) As a companion piece to this survey, ESGR is sponsoring a study to examine 

the results of the survey and incorporate information gleaned from four regional focus groups of civilian employers. The focus groups will participate in 

questions formulated based on the survey results and used to provide meaningful narrative to a report summarizing both efforts. The collective efforts of 

these employer engagements should be available late in calendar year 2011. 

[Whereupon, at 3:43 p.m., the subcommittee adjourned.] 

(305) 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION 

FOR APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 

2012 AND THE FUTURE YEARS DEFENSE 

PROGRAM 

WEDNESDAY, MAY 11, 2011 

U.S. SENATE, SUBCOMMITTEE ON PERSONNEL, COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES, Washington, DC. 

CONTINUATION OF TESTIMONY ON ACTIVE, GUARD, 

RESERVE, AND CIVILIAN PERSONNEL PROGRAMS 

The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 1:35 p.m. in room 

SR–232A, Russell Senate Office Building, Senator Jim Webb (chairman of the subcommittee) presiding. 

Committee members present: Senators Webb, Blumenthal, 

Graham, and Ayotte. 

Majority staff members present: Jonathan D. Clark, counsel; 

Gabriella E. Fahrer, counsel; and Gerald J. Leeling, counsel. 

Minority staff members present: Diana G. Tabler, professional 

staff member; and Richard F. Walsh, minority counsel. 

Staff assistants present: Jennifer R. Knowles and Breon N. 

Wells. 

Committee members’ assistants present: Nick Ikeda, assistant to 

Senator Akaka; Juliet Beyler and Gordon Peterson, assistants to 

Senator Webb; Jeremy Bratt, assistant to Senator Blumenthal; 

Clyde Taylor IV, assistant to Senator Chambliss; Brad Bowman 

and Adam Hechavarria, assistants to Senator Ayotte; and Andrew 

King and Sergio Sarkany, assistants to Senator Graham. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR JIM WEBB, CHAIRMAN 

Senator WEBB. The subcommittee will come to order. 

I’d like to begin by apologizing to Senator Graham for knocking 

his water over when he was on his way. It had nothing to do with 

the delay in his arrival. [Laughter.] 

Senator GRAHAM. I deserve it; I was late. 

Senator WEBB. We meet today to receive the testimony from the 

Military Services on their Active, Guard, Reserve, and civilian personnel programs, in review of the National Defense Authorization 

Request for Fiscal Year 2012 and the Future Years Defense Program. 

I welcome our witnesses to today’s hearing. The Army witnesses 

are The Honorable Thomas Lamont, Assistant Secretary of the 

306 

Army for Manpower and Reserve Affairs and Lieutenant General 

Thomas Bostick, the Deputy Chief of Staff, G–1, United States 

Army. The Navy and Marine Corps witnesses are the Honorable 

Juan Garcia III, Assistant Secretary of the Navy for Manpower and 

Reserve Affairs; Vice Admiral Mark Ferguson III, Chief of Naval 

Personnel; and Lieutenant General Robert Milstead, Jr., Deputy 

Commandant for Manpower and Reserve Affairs, United States 

Marine Corps. The Air Force witnesses are The Honorable Daniel 

Ginsberg, Assistant Secretary of the Air Force for Manpower Reserve Affairs and Lieutenant General Darrell Jones, Deputy Chief 

of Staff for Manpower, Personnel, and Services, United States Air 

Force. 

Your complete statements have all been received. Without objection, all will be included in the record of this hearing, at the end 

of your oral statements. 

This is the third in a series of hearings, as we prepare to mark 

up the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012. In 

our first hearing, we received testimony from the senior noncommissioned officer of each Service regarding the state of enlisted 

personnel, force readiness, and family readiness. We also received 

testimony from representatives from military service organizations 

on their views of the needs of military personnel and their families. 

In our second hearing, we received testimony from the Under 

Secretary of Defense for Personnel Readiness, the Assistant Secretaries of Defense for Reserve Affairs and Health Affairs, and the 

Department of Defense (DOD) Comptroller. These officials testified 

about the personnel programs of DOD, and discussed efficiency initiatives included in the DOD budget submission. 

During these hearings, it became clear that the contracting workforce was not being evaluated as a part of the total force, even 

though contractors are performing many functions previously performed by military service personnel. The subcommittee has asked 

for more information about this component of the total force. 

Today, we will focus on military personnel policy and issues of 

the military Services, through the testimony of the Assistant Secretaries for Manpower and Reserve Affairs and the military personnel chiefs of each Service. I expect to discuss not only personnel 

policy programs and policies, but specific budget items, in furtherance of our subcommittee’s oversight responsibilities. 

As I’ve said in the other two hearings, I take this oversight very 

seriously. There’s no greater responsibility for Congress, and for 

our military leaders, than to care and provide for our servicemembers and their families. But in doing so we must ensure that 

we are effecting the relationship as stewards of the taxpayers’ dollars, as well. 

As I’ve also said in earlier hearings, our military continues its 

engagement in the longest sustained period of major conflict in our 

Nation’s history. Military personnel are challenged by high operational tempos, the stress of multiple deployments, inadequate 

dwell times, and an inefficient disability evaluation system. Our 

military families, by and large, are successfully dealing with the 

stress associated with frequent and lengthy deployments into dangerous war zones, but many are experiencing serious challenges. 

Because of my own experience, and my family’s tradition of miliVerDate Aug 31 2005 09:55 Jan 25, 2012 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00312 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6601 Y:\BORAWSKI\DOCS\68089.TXT JUNE PsN: JUNEB
307 

tary service, I’m well aware of these challenges. I do appreciate our 

obligations to see the needs of servicemembers and their families, 

and I take that responsibility very seriously. 

The All-Volunteer Force has worked remarkably well over the 

past quarter century. We must ensure that the All-Volunteer model 

continues to produce the world’s best military. It’s important to recognize that we have an All-Volunteer Force, not an all-career force. 

We need to ensure that programs and policies also support those 

who serve in the military for a period less than a career before returning to their civilian communities. The contributions of these individuals are just as important as the contributions of career 

servicemembers. 

We also have entered a new era in the use of our Guard and Reserve Forces. They have played critical roles during this period in 

ways never envisioned at the inception of the All-Volunteer Force. 

This subcommittee will continue to explore changes needed to employ our Reserve component forces as an operational force. 

I look forward to hearing your testimony about the personnel 

issues of your Services. I’m aware that each of the Services are facing challenges in managing its forces over the next few years. Current plans require the Army to reduce end strength by 22,000 in 

fiscal year 2013, and an additional 27,000 by the end of fiscal year 

2016. The Marine Corps is planning to reduce end strength by 

15,000 to 20,000, during the periods 2015 to 2017. Because of unusually high retention rates, the Navy and Air Force are implementing mandatory separation procedures in an effort to reduce 

end strength to authorized levels by the end of this fiscal year. 

As always, I would request that each of you discuss your challenges and how you plan to address these challenges, with particular emphasis on any legislative authorities you believe would be 

needed to shape your forces. Reducing the size of the force is never 

easy. It’s important that it’s done in a manner that respects the 

service of everyone who has given so much during this period of 

continuing conflict. Also, I would encourage you to express your 

views candidly, tell us what’s working well, and raise any concerns 

and issues you may want to bring to this subcommittee’s attention. 

Senator Graham, do you have any opening remarks? 

STATEMENT OF SENATOR LINDSEY GRAHAM 

Senator GRAHAM. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. As always, I enjoy 

conducting these hearings with you. I think our staffs work well together, and we have a lot of experience to offer the Senate about 

how to shape the force. 

Last week was about healthcare. We’re having, I think, an 

unsustainable increase in healthcare cost in DOD. We’re going to 

have to make some hard choices, sooner or later, because it affects 

everything we’d like to do in every other area. 

Disability evaluation systems, General Bostick, Secretary Lamont, I don’t think you mention it in your written statement, if you 

would talk to us about the 20,000 nondeployable soldiers that are 

waiting some type of evaluation. What can we do to expedite their 

decision? How do we deal with the fact—not only are we going to 

reduce the Army, as Senator Webb indicated, but also, if you have 

308 

20,000 nondeployable, that goes into who can go to the fight. To 

me, that is a personnel issue we need to come to grips with. 

As many of you know, I’m a member of the Air Force Judge Advocate General (JAG) Corps. The recommendation to take three 

brigadier-general positions out of key major commands was opposed by General Schwartz and Secretary Donley. Secretary 

Ginsberg, I just want you to know, from my point of view, that’s 

a decision that I think I have to push back on, because I’m fairly 

familiar with how the Air Force legal community operates. I think 

it would do more harm than good to reduce those brigadier general 

spots that serve the Air Force well. 

On the Navy-Marine side, we have a manning of 830 military attorneys. An independent review said we need 950. I’d like to know 

how we solve that problem. 

Basically, we’re going to reduce the force, with the view that 

there must be some peace dividend that I don’t see coming anytime 

soon. I do hope we can reduce our forces in Afghanistan, slowly but 

surely. We’re going to withdraw most of our forces from Iraq. But, 

at the same time, just because of the operational tempo that we’ve 

experienced in the last decade, when you draw your forces down, 

that means those who are left are going to have to do more. I just 

really question, is that a wise decision? I’d like to get comments 

from each of you about how you think that affects retention and 

recruiting. How do we reduce this force? What kind of system do 

we come up with to reduce? Do we tell people they can’t retire at 

15 years? What do we do? 

So, with that, I look forward to hearing your testimony. 

I really appreciate working with you Senator Webb. 

Senator WEBB. Thank you very much, Senator Graham. 

We will begin with Secretary Lamont and just move across the 

table, from my left to my right. 

Secretary Lamont, welcome back, and we’re very interested in 

hearing your testimony. 

STATEMENT OF HON. THOMAS R. LAMONT, ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF THE ARMY FOR MANPOWER AND RESERVE AFFAIRS 

Mr. LAMONT. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Senator Graham, other 

members of the subcommittee. I’m glad to be here. Thank you for 

taking the time to explore these very important topics, so crucial 

to our Nation’s defense today and in the future. 

For nearly 2 years, I’ve served as the Army Assistant Secretary 

for Manpower and Reserve Affairs. During that time, we have 

worked hard to meet the challenges facing the Army and to prepare our force for the future. Our Army is stretched and strained. 

However, the resilience, determination, and values displayed by 

our soldiers, Army civilians, and families is remarkable. I am honored to serve such a committed group of individuals. 

To lessen the strain on our soldiers, we need to make the most 

of the force we have. Maintaining appropriate strength and developing the proper force mix in our Active and Reserve components 

will be critical to the future of our force. Our effort to create a more 

appropriate total force policy continues. We want to partner with 

you and all the other stakeholders to codify the Reserve component 

309 

as an operational force and to develop better career models for our 

soldiers and civilians. 

We will make the changes necessary regarding the realities of 

our fiscal situation as well. We are moving forward with personnel 

efficiencies and aggressively enacting cost-saving measures 

throughout our Army. We are committed to the work associated 

with managing our resources properly, even as we conduct the largest transformation since World War II, the 2005 base realignment 

and closure initiative, as well as fighting two major conflicts and 

completing our modular conversions. The Army personnel community is focused on maintaining the unprecedented quality of the AllVolunteer Force in order to accomplish the missions at hand and 

to prepare the Army for the challenges of tomorrow. 

Please know that the Army is filled with devoted civilian and 

military leaders, committed soldiers, and dedicated families. We 

certainly have challenges, but we have significant opportunities, as 

well. One of our most significant opportunities is to capitalize on 

lessons learned over the past 10 years to create a force that is the 

right size with the right capabilities with the best-developed military and civilian leadership. 

In closing, our Army is a total force that has been tested. We’ve 

been successful, and now we are focused on planning for the future 

while maintaining our strength. We appreciate the subcommittee’s 

support in accomplishing all we’ve done, and we look forward to 

your support in the future. 

Thank you very much. I look forward to your questions. 

[The joint prepared statement of Mr. Lamont and General 

Bostick follows:] 

JOINT PREPARED STATEMENT BY HON. THOMAS R. LAMONT AND LTG THOMAS P. 

BOSTICK, USA 

INTRODUCTION

Chairman Webb, Senator Graham, distinguished members of this subcommittee, 

thank you for the opportunity to appear before you on behalf of America’s Army. 

The U.S. Army exists to serve the American people, and defend the Nation. 

After nearly 10 years at war, our soldiers, civilians, and families are stretched 

and strained, yet still resilient. Their dedicated service and sacrifice deserve the 

very best services, programs, equipment, training, benefits, lifestyle, and leadership 

available. With Congress’ help, the Army has reached its objective end strength, 

which combines ‘‘Grow the Army’’ and Temporary End Strength Increase (TESI). 

This enabled our success in Iraq and Afghanistan. 

With the reduction in forces in Iraq and Afghanistan, the Army must prepare to 

draw down our forces in a deliberate and careful manner. Thank you for your steadfast commitment to our soldiers, their families, and our civilian workforce. By supporting our personnel initiatives you ensured sustainment and well-being of our AllVolunteer Force. 

STRATEGIC OVERVIEW

More than 1.1 million soldiers have deployed to combat, impacting not only those 

soldiers, but their families and employers as well. Additionally, Army civilians 

shoulder a majority of the Generating Force mission, and 30,000 civilians have deployed into harm’s way. 

Despite this unprecedented operational demand, the Army is on track to achieve 

a sustainable deployment tempo for our forces and restore balance to the Army beginning in fiscal year 2012. We will continue to face challenges on multiple fronts 

including an ever increasing nondeployable population resulting from multiple deployments. This problem, coupled with an inefficient disability system, does not effectively support Army Readiness, our soldiers, and their families. 

310 

We must continue to work a solution between the Services, the Department of Defense (DOD), and VA to streamline the disability system with improved coordination 

for health care, compensation, and benefits. We remain aware of the difficult economic conditions at home. These conditions will give greater impetus to our efforts 

to seek ways to improve efficiency and reduce overhead expenditures that demonstrate wise stewardship of our taxpayers’ dollars. With the continued support of 

the American people and Congress, we remain committed to the readiness, health, 

and well-being of our soldiers, civilians, and family members. As the strength of the 

Nation, the American soldier is the centerpiece of everything we do. Our efforts 

must remain focused on the preservation of our most precious resource, our people. 

In fiscal year 2012, the base military personnel appropriation comprises the largest portion of the Army’s budget at $60.68 million or 42 percent. The table below 

shows the fiscal year 2010 execution (excluding OCO) and the fiscal year 2011 and 

fiscal year 2012 base budget requests for military personnel for all three components. The increase from fiscal year 2011 to fiscal year 2012 is due primarily to 

changes in inflation rates for military basic pay and personnel allowances. 

[In millions of dollars] 

Military Personnel Account 

Fiscal Year 

2010 1 2011 2012 

Personnel (AC, NGB, and USAR) .................................................................................. $53,381 $53,994 $55,606 

Medicare-Eligible Retiree Health Care ........................................................................ 5,035 5,057 4,972 

Total .................................................................................................................... $58,416 $59,050 $60,578 

1 Not depicted in fiscal year 2010 Military Personnel Cost of War was $12.2 billion. 

Fiscal year 2011 OCO request is $11.9 billion and fiscal year 2012 OCO request is $8.1 billion. 

Fiscal year 2010 figures represent execution amounts. 

END STRENGTH

The congressionally-approved growth of the Army was completed ahead of schedule in 2009. However, after a decade of persistent conflict, a number of other factors—nondeployable soldiers, temporary requirements in various headquarters and 

transition teams, our wounded warriors, and elimination of Stop-Loss—have impacted our ability to adequately man units for deployment. As a result, the Secretary of Defense approved an additional temporary end strength increase of 22,000 

soldiers, 7,000 of whom joined us in early fiscal year 2011. Army end strength will 

return to the congressionally-approved Active component end strength of 547,400 by 

the end of fiscal year 2013. For fiscal year 2012, the Army National Guard end 

strength will remain 358,200 and the USAR will maintain 205,000. 

As of April 2011, the last soldier retained under Stop Loss for deployment purposes was separated. This reflects an overall reduction from the January 2009 baseline of 13,217 stop-lossed soldiers. TESI and the implementation of voluntary stabilization programs for each component enabled us to eliminate Stop Loss, while 

minimizing the impact on unit readiness. 

[In millions of dollars] 

Fiscal Year 

2010 2011 2012 

Temporary End Strength Increase Request ................................................................. $1,108 1 $1,245 $1,143 

1 Fiscal year 2010 includes TESI and overstrength execution. Fiscal year 2010 figures represent execution amounts. 

We continue to make significant progress in our efforts to restore balance. Increasing time between deployments for our soldiers and building greater predictability for soldiers and families continues to be one of our key concerns. Despite the 

short-term impact of the recent surge of troops to Afghanistan, we expect the ratio 

of Boots on Ground (BOG) time to dwell time to improve as demand decreases. This 

will ease the constant pressures on our forces as they move through the rotational 

cycle of the Army Forces Generation (ARFORGEN) model. 

RECRUITING AND RETENTION (OFFICER AND ENLISTED)

Our soldiers are the Army’s most important resource, and our ability to meet the 

challenges of the current and future operational environment depends on our ability 

to sustain the All-Volunteer Force. The pace and demand of the operational environment over the last several years has caused us to focus on high-volume recruiting 

311 

with an emphasis on quality benchmarks. The shift in the economy combined with 

our initiatives in marketing, advertising, and hard work of our recruiters has allowed us to be more selective. 

Despite the challenges of an Army engaged in two protracted conflicts, the Army 

exceeded its enlisted recruiting and retention missions for fiscal year 2010 and is 

confident it will meet its goals for fiscal year 2011. The Army National Guard reduced their accessions in fiscal year 2010 to remain under the congressionally-mandated end strength ceiling. The Army met its quality benchmarks for new recruits 

in fiscal year 2010. We are projected to build the fiscal year 2012 entry pool to as 

much as 50 percent of the fiscal year 2012 mission by the end of fiscal year 2011. 

We will continue to monitor trends and make adjustments as required. In fiscal year 2010, with congressional support, the Army spent $4.4 billion on re- cruiting and retention. In fiscal year 2011, the Army plans to spend $4.4 billion to 

fund contracts written between fiscal year 2007 and fiscal year 2010 due to continued obligations of anniversary payments to soldiers. 

Recently, incentive contracts have dropped dramatically for new accessions. Aver- age recruiting bonuses dropped from over $13,000 in fiscal year 2009 to just under 

$3,000 in fiscal year 2011, and are only used to incentivize longer-term enlistments 

in a small percentage of critical skills. These incentives are only used to ensure the 

success of the total Army recruiting and retention missions and to shape the force 

to meet specific grade and skill requirements. Our fiscal year 2012 request of $3.7 billion reflects the efficiencies undertaken in 

these activities based on a more favorable recruiting and retention environment 

with a high percentage of the budget dedicated to prior year payments. The amount 

budgeted for contractual payments is anticipated to decrease until fiscal year 2015, 

when requirements will likely increase due to a stronger economy. 

The reductions/efficiencies taken in recruiting and retention are in support of the 

Secretary of Defense’s plan to reallocate funding to more critical programs. These 

reductions went primarily to resource the increased number of field grade officers 

that the Army is currently growing. Additionally, increases were made to medical 

special pays to ensure that shortages in high demand specialties were addressed, 

and finally, resources were aligned to fully fund the more senior force structure that 

the Army is experiencing. 

In fiscal year 2010, the Active Army accessed the highest percentage of high 

school diploma graduates since fiscal year 1992 (increasing from 94.7 percent in fiscal year 2009 to 98.3 percent in fiscal year 2010). The Army met its skill-set needs, 

achieving over 99 percent Military Occupational Specialty (MOS) precision. We entered fiscal year 2011 positioned for continued success, with 33,276 future soldiers 

in the delayed entry pool. The last time the delayed entry pool topped 33,200 was 

in 1996. 

The Army also has developed valuable new tools to screen non-high school graduates and other applicants for attributes indicating potential for success in a military career. Assessment tools such as the Army’s Tailored Adaptive Personality Assessment System (TAPAS) offer the Army the option to consider high potential soldiers regardless of their educational background. The TAPAS instrument enhances 

the selection of soldiers regardless of their education credentials by screening out 

low motivated, high attrition risk applicants and provides a scoring of applicants to 

predict the likelihood of success as a soldier. The TAPAS is under development by 

the Army but has already been used as a screening tool to evaluate and screen out 

a small number of low motivated CAT IV Army applicants. To date, more than 

157,000 Army and Air Force applicants have been tested with the Army’s TAPAS 

instrument and the Navy expects to begin to use the instrument with their recruits 

before the end of the second quarter of fiscal year 2011. 

Additionally, recruits scoring in the upper range (50–99 percent) on the Armed 

Forces Qualification Test (AFQT) remain well above the Department of Defense 

(DOD) policy (DODI 1145.01, September 20, 2005) on quality marks of 60 percent, 

and recruits who scored in the lower range (30 percent and below) on the AFQT 

decreased 0.7 percent. The Army collectively decreased the number of ineligibility 

waivers provided for enlistments and appointments by 4.20 percent from the previous fiscal year. 

Despite our success in recruiting, the Army and the Nation face a silent epidemic 

with increased obesity and decreased graduation rates in certain parts of the country. Currently, less than one in four 17–24 year-olds are eligible, primarily due to 

physical and educational requirements. One in five youths fails to graduate high 

school. Increased obesity rates among young people also provide fewer potential recruits that are eligible to serve. One in five youths, 12–19 years old, is currently 

overweight, compared to 1 in 20 in the 1960s. This trend is projected to grow to 

1 in 4 by 2015. 

312 

The Army continues to retain soldiers at tremendously high levels, while engaged 

in the longest period of conflict for our All-Volunteer Force. The Army surpassed the 

total Army retention goal, each year, since 2002. Soldiers reenlist for three top reasons which include their current command climate, job satisfaction, and the quality 

of life in the Service. 

Additionally, retention rates within the last 12 months are slightly higher due to 

the current state of the economy. In fiscal year 2010, the Active Army reenlisted 

68,105 soldiers towards an annual mission of 60,000. Soldiers extending to complete 

deployments with their units represented 8,100 of the total. The Army Reserve reenlisted 10,921 soldiers, exceeding their annual goals by 6 percent. The Army National 

Guard accomplished their mission as well by achieving 106 percent of their assigned 

mission; a total of 32,156 soldiers. 

During fiscal year 2010 and into fiscal year 2011, retention bonuses were carefully 

monitored and adjusted to ensure that the Army met its retention goals while remaining fiscally responsible. As we posture for future reductions in the size of our 

force, the Army is using lessons learned from past reductions to ensure that today’s 

decisions maintain the viability of tomorrow’s All-Volunteer Force. Retention policies 

will emphasize retention of soldiers with high potential coupled with appropriate 

force alignment and structure. 

The Army’s programs to recruit and retain both officers and enlisted soldiers with 

critical skills have been effective. For enlisted soldiers, the Enlistment Bonus, the 

Selective Reenlistment Bonus, Critical Skills Retention Bonus (CSRB), and the Student Loan Repayment Program (SLRP) are proven tools that remain effective for 

filling critical skills. The SLRP is especially effective in attracting high potential recruits who have some college experience or plan to attend college after the Army. 

All bonuses are being used very selectively. Projected spending in Army enlistment 

recruiting, retention, and education incentives will decrease 26 percent in 2012. 

The U.S. Military Academy (USMA) and ROTC both continue to offer 

precommissioning incentives. These consist of offering new officers their post, 

branch of choice or graduate schooling. From fiscal year 2006 through fiscal year 

2010, there were approximately 7,500 participants. These incentives have increased 

longevity by 40 percent for newly-commissioned, high-performing USMA and ROTC 

officers, and have improved the historical loss rates of recent years by adding 3 

guaranteed years of active service to these officers’ initial obligated service. This 

specific gain is based on rates for Army Competitive Category officers remaining on 

active duty after 8 years of service from their commissioning date. The historical 

rate for continued service beyond the obligatory 8-year point is 47 percent of officers. 

The projected rates for year groups 2006–2010 who took the incentives cited are between 62 percent and 69 percent across all commissioning sources. In absolute 

terms we are retaining an additional 7,500 officers across these groups. When considering USMA alone, our improvements across these year groups range from the 

historical average of 40 percent (beyond the 8 year obligation) of West Point officers 

to between 54 percent and 59 percent. Again, in absolute terms we will retain an 

additional 1,700 West Point graduates through these initiatives. 

The rapid growth of the Army over the past 10 years to meet the needs of a new 

modular and expeditionary force combined with the requirements of Overseas Contingency Operations in two combat theaters have resulted in an officer structure 

that is not optimally balanced to meet Army needs. Our accelerated growth of personnel to match the manning requirements of new unit designs has been very successful, but we are still working to achieve a balanced inventory of skills and grades 

for the force in a steady state operating environment. 

The Army’s use of the CSRB for captains contributed significantly to officer retention over the past several years. Retention rates within company grade officers, as 

well as majors, allowed the Army to keep pace with officer requirements as we grew 

the force. Our under-accession in the mid-1990’s officer year groups left the Army 

with too few officers in these year groups to attain full manning strength at major. 

Our adjustment of officer force structure, combined with high retention and mandated end strength reductions, will allow us to achieve full manning at Major grade 

much sooner than we originally predicted. The Reserve component continues to 

maximize their use of the CSRB, while the Active component has reduced the overall usage as officer target levels are met. 

In response to adjustments to officer structure, the Army will balance modest reductions in officer accessions across all cohorts over the next 4 years. Both these 

actions will help to mitigate the effects of downsizing on the officers currently in 

career development at company grades, There will be opportunities to cross level 

skills in the Active component, change components from Active to Reserve, and employ some company grade officers in field grade positions wherever there is potential 

for return on that investment. Involuntary separations will likely be used in force 

313 

reductions; however, the Army is committed to utilizing voluntary or incentivized 

separations as available. 

[In billions of dollars] 

Program Description 

Fiscal Year 

2010 2011 2012 

Enlisted Army Incentives ............................................................................................................... $2.1 $2.1 $1.5 

Other Military Recruiting and Retention Programs ....................................................................... 2.3 2.3 2.2 

Army Recruiting and Retention ..................................................................................................... 4.4 4.4 3.7 

Fiscal Year 2010 figures represent execution amounts. 

TRANSFORMING THE ARMY’S RESERVE COMPONENTS INTO AN ‘‘OPERATIONAL FORCE’’ 

(OPERATIONAL RESERVE)

The war-time experiences of the past decade validate the need to institutionalize 

the policies, procedures and legislation conducive to achieving the most efficient utilization of the Total Force, by transitioning the Reserve components into an operational force. Transitioning to an Operational Reserve will require policy decisions 

on additional resources for the two Army Reserve components (RC) within the base 

budget, including additional resources for RC collective training, full-time manning 

and medical/dental readiness. 

The Reserve components make up 51 percent of the Army’s manpower. Moreover, 

many of the capabilities that the combatant command would prefer to use in Theater Security Cooperation either do not exist in sufficient quantities in the Active 

component, but reside in the RC. For example, approximately 90 percent of the 

Army’s Civil Affairs forces are in the USAR. 

In the near term, we must ensure that the RC is capable of providing enduring 

proportional support to the Army’s force generation supply model: 1 Corps, 5 Divisions, 20 Brigade Combat Teams, and 90,000 enablers (1/5/20/90) through fiscal year 

2014. 

Transforming the Army’s Reserve components into an operational force provides 

an historic opportunity for the Army to achieve the most cost effective use of its 

Total Force through investing in and relying on the Army’s Reserve components to 

take on a greater role in our Nation’s defense. Investing in the RC as an operational 

force will position the Army to better manage the risks of declining resources for 

the Army. 

ARMY TOTAL FORCE POLICY

The ASA (M&RA) is developing an ‘‘Army Total Force Policy’’ for the Secretary 

of the Army. The policy will define the role of the Army National Guard and Army 

Reserve as an operational force; 

‘‘The ARNG and USAR provide operational capabilities and depth to rapidly expand and sustain the Army’s capacity to support U.S. defense requirements across the spectrum of conflict (peace to war).’’ (Draft Army 

Total Force Policy) 

The Army Total Force Policy will promote a balanced and integrated Total Force. 

The ARFORGEN process will ensure operating forces are employed as ‘‘integrated 

expeditionary force packages’’. 

Integrating Active and Reserve Forces for training and deployment requires a 

common Active and Reserve ‘‘boots-on-the-ground’’ policy, to be approved by the Secretary of the Army. 

Procedures, processes and authorities for validating pre-deployment readiness of 

Army forces should be consistent and uniform for Active and Reserve Forces. 

Manpower programs will promote a continuum of service, cross-component assignments, and common standards and provide equal opportunities for professional development, regardless of component. 

Training programs will promote common standards and equal opportunity via a 

revised ‘‘One Army’’ school system, while capitalizing on capabilities and investments made in the Reserve component training facilities over the past decade. 

The Army has a historic opportunity to achieve the most cost-effective Total Force 

through transitioning the RC into an operational force. The ‘‘Army Total Force Policy’’ will promote an operational environment in which Active and Reserve Forces 

are able to serve together in peacetime and train and deploy together as an integrated Total Force for operations. 

314 

INDIVIDUAL READY RESERVE MOBILIZATION

The Individual Ready Reserve (IRR) is a category of the Ready Reserve, and is 

composed of those members of the Ready Reserve who are not serving in Selected 

Reserve units or assignments, or in the Inactive National Guard. The availability 

of IRR soldiers is important to the Army’s mission of providing properly trained and 

equipped units of sufficient strength to meet contingency operations or mobilization 

requirements. 

Since September 11, 2001, approximately 538,000 soldiers were members of the 

IRR. Of that total population 31,885 soldiers were mobilized and a total of 12,524 

soldiers deployed to the Central Command (CENTCOM) Area of Responsibility after 

No Shows, Exemptions, and Early Release from Active Duty were factored. 

An effective IRR program is based on several factors, including the soldiers’ understanding of their obligations, access to benefits and support, and time to adjust 

personal affairs prior to mobilizations. 

In an ongoing effort to validate the readiness of the IRR, the Army continues to 

implement the IRR Muster program, and is piloting a new IRR affiliation program. 

Approximately 5 months after entering the IRR program, soldiers will be ordered 

to muster duty. Afterward, soldiers are required to muster each year they remain 

in the IRR. 

Through the muster program, the Army established a partnership with the Department of Veterans Affairs to use VA medical centers as muster sites for the 

added opportunity of connecting soldiers to VA services. During fiscal year 2010, the 

Army spent approximately $2.57 million to muster 12,500 soldiers, contributing 

2,100 soldiers returning to Army Reserve formations. The Army plans to muster 

14,000 IRR soldiers at an estimated cost of $3.01 million in fiscal year 2011 and 

expects to impact 2,500 soldiers returning to Army Reserve formations. In fiscal 

year 2012, the Army plans to muster approximately 20,000 soldiers for a total program cost of $4.8 million. 

The IRR affiliation program affiliates a soldier with a local Army Reserve unit 

(and will potentially include Army National Guard units). While there is no obligation for the IRR soldier to engage with the unit, the potential benefit of established 

communication between the unit and the soldier will enhance HRC’s ability to maintain accountability and reliable contact information on IRR soldiers. Advantages to 

JRR soldiers include the opportunity to participate in unit drills for retirement 

points, SRP annually, and use the unit’s support structure to assist the soldier and 

family as needed while in the IRR. 

QUALITY OF LIFE

The strength of our Army is tied to the strength of Army families. We must provide our Army the best possible care, support and services by establishing a cohesive holistic Army-wide strategy to synchronize and integrate programs, processes 

and governance. One of the programs designed to accomplish this is the Army Family Covenant. 

The Covenant institutionalizes the Army’s commitment to provide soldiers and 

families a quality of life commensurate with the quality of service they provide to 

our Nation. The Army Family Covenant incorporates programs designed to build 

strength and resilience in our Families. These services and programs help mitigate 

stress from multiple deployments and frequent military moves. 

The Covenant focuses on the following: standardizing soldier and family programs; increasing access to and quality of health care; improving soldier and family 

housing; ensuring excellence in our schools and, youth and child care services; expanding education and employment opportunities for family members; improving 

soldier quality of life in recreation, travel, and the Better Opportunities for Single 

Soldiers (BOSS) program; and improving relationships with local communities and 

marketplaces. From fiscal year 2007 to fiscal year 2010, the Army more than doubled its investment in Family programs. These various programs are intended to 

provide a broad spectrum of support and include important programs as Mobilization and Deployment Readiness, Family Advocacy, New Parent Support, Army 

Spouse Employment Partnership, Survivor Outreach Services, Family Assistance 

Centers (ARNG), Yellow Ribbon Reintegration, Army Reserve Teen Panel, Army Affiliated Child Care & Youth Programs and Core Community Recreation Programs 

and Services. 

315 

[In millions of dollars] 

Convenant Program 

Fiscal Year 

2010 2011 2012 

Family MWR Command (FAPC) .................................................................................... $ 60.3 $ 38.9 $ 35.1 

Army Community Service (QACS/VFRA/QPSG) .............................................................. 373.5 434.9 371.9 

Child Care Services (QCYS) ......................................................................................... 426.5 410.1 411.0 

Youth Programs (QCYS) ............................................................................................... 134.5 163.8 154.0 

Community Recreation (QDPC) .................................................................................... 292.4 275.9 257.4 

Family Programs .......................................................................................................... 1,287.2 1,323.6 1,229.2 

Voluntary Ed/Tuition Asst (VACE/VATA) ....................................................................... 395.4 377.4 355.4 

Supplemental/OCO ....................................................................................................... 47.7 53.5 53.5 

Total Family Programs ........................................................................................ $1,730.3 $1,754.5 $41,638.1 

Fiscal year 2010 figures represent execution amounts. 

CIVILIAN PERSONNEL AND WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT

Department of the Army civilian employees provide vital support to soldiers and 

families in this era of persistent conflict. They share responsibility for mission accomplishment by delivering combat support and combat service support—at home 

and abroad. Civilians comprise 23 percent of the Army Force, yet are 60 percent of 

the generating force. This generating force performs support missions of training, 

supplying and engineering the force. Today, the Army Civilian Corps has over 

311,000 appropriated fund employees with 4,130 currently serving in harm’s way in 

the CENTCOM area of operations. 

[In billions of dollars] 

Civilian Pay 

Fiscal Year 

2010 2011 2012 

$24.4 $23.8 $23.3 

Fiscal year 2010 figures represent execution amounts. 

Full-Time Equivalents (FTE) 

Fiscal Year 

2010 1 2011 1 2012 1

Army funded ................................................................................................................. $173,142 $180,107 $178,918 

External funded ............................................................................................................ 47,505 57,267 55,133 

Revolving fund ............................................................................................................. 29,824 27,947 23,317 

Total .................................................................................................................... $250,471 $265,321 $257,368 

1 Civilians funded by OCO and Civil Works appropriations which are not captured as any part of the Army’s budget submission. 

Since September 11, 2001, we increased the civilian workforce in military functions from 222,000 to 286,654 (plus 24,694 Civil Works) due to overseas contingency 

operations, Defense Health Program increases, Family and Soldier Support initiatives, acquisition workforce growth, in-sourcing functions performed by contractors, 

military technician increases, and military-to-civilian conversions. In fiscal year 

2009, the Army saved significant resources by in-sourcing 949 contractor positions 

to Army civilian positions. Overall, 7,736 civilian positions were filled by insourcing, as of February 1, 2011. 

Approximately 25,000 Army civilian positions are affected by BRAC 2005. We expect a large number of transfers and some separations to occur between now and 

September 2011. In fiscal year 2010 over 3,200 employees relocated with their positions; 1,920 employees were eligible for some type of retirement and chose to retire; 

680 employees were placed in positions via the DOD Priority Placement Program 

(PPP); and 800 employees left their positions because they applied and were selected 

for positions within the DOD or other Federal agencies. For those employees who 

are being displaced or separated as a result of BRAC, Army offers an outplacement 

service program to assist them in their transition to other jobs either within the 

Federal service or to the private sector. 

The Department of the Army implemented a Civilian Workforce Transformation 

plan that will invigorate development of the Civilian Workforce by addressing critVerDate Aug 31 2005 09:55 Jan 25, 2012 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00321 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6621 Y:\BORAWSKI\DOCS\68089.TXT JUNE PsN: JUNEB
316 

ical issues of structure, accession, development, retention and succession planning 

to ease the transition from one generation to the next. Examples of the Army’s initiatives in the area of Civilian Workforce Transformation include: 

• Structure. Introduction of an enterprise-based, requirements-driven, civilian structure that will better support all phases on the Civilian Human 

Capital Life-cycle. 

• Acquire. An accessions program for all new Army civilians provided 

through acculturation training, program evaluation and adjustments tailored to requirements. 

• Develop. Progressive, sequential functional/leadership development training for civilians consistent with Army values. 

• Distribute. Central selection and placement of high performing civilians 

against required Army Enterprise positions. 

• Sustain. Fully integrated IT structures that support Army Career Tracker and Civilian Development Programs. 

By the end of fiscal year 2011, the Army will document and promulgate a reformed civilian hiring process, and will implement a comprehensive executive competency-based leadership development program. By second quarter fiscal year 2011 

the path and resource requirements for 100 percent of the workforce will be covered 

by professional career program management. Additionally, by first quarter fiscal 

year 2012, the Army will initiate education, training, and an experiential development program for its enterprise leadership cohort. The Army will also fully deploy 

a competency-based management system for SES talent acquisition, development 

and succession planning. Thus far, funding in support of CWT is executed with current year funding. Beyond that remains pre-decisional. 

The Civilian Workforce Transformation will provide civilian employees with a defined ‘‘roadmap’’ for success with training and development opportunities to assist 

achievement of career goals. It will provide commanders the right workforce with 

the right skills to meet current and future mission needs. It will provide the Army 

a predictable and rational method to articulate requirements and make decisions 

about resourcing in a fluid environment. It will provide the Nation with the investment in human capital required to effectively manage the Institutional Army. 

ARMY MILITARY EQUAL OPPORTUNITY POLICY

The Army is the leader in Military Equal Opportunity (MEO) policy and practice. 

Commanders at all levels are responsible for sustaining positive MEO climates 

within their organizations, enhancing Army Readiness. To remain relevant within 

the ever-changing environment in which we operate, the Army is revising its MEO 

policy by integrating and institutionalizing equal opportunity goals, objectives and 

training practices. This effort will strengthen the foundation of the Army’s Human 

Capital Strategy. Since fiscal year 2009, the Army has invested $3.2 million to include $O.8 million in fiscal year 2011, and expects to invest another $2.0 million 

in fiscal year 2012 for MEO personnel services support, database and survey systems, outreach support, and training contracts for implementation. 

SEXUAL ASSAULT AND HARASSMENT PREVENTION

The Army’s goal is to eliminate sexual assault and harassment by creating a climate that respects the dignity of every soldier. The Army Sexual Harassment/Assault Response and Prevention (SHARP) Program reinforces the Army’s commitment to eliminate incidents of sexual harassment and assault. This will be accomplished through a comprehensive policy that centers on awareness and prevention; 

training and education; victim advocacy; and response, reporting, accountability and 

program assessment. The Secretary of the Army and the Chief of Staff of the Army 

remain personally involved and reinforce to all soldiers and leaders the importance 

of preventing sexual assault and harassment. 

The Army launched a comprehensive sexual assault prevention strategy that requires leaders to establish a positive command climate where sexual assault is 

clearly not acceptable. The strategy further encourages soldiers to execute peer-topeer intervention personally, and to not tolerate behavior that could lead to sexual 

assault. 

This strategy consists of four integrated phases and extends through calendar 

year 2016 as we work to be the Nation’s leader in sexual harassment and sexual 

assault prevention. 

Phase I (Committed Army Leadership) provides training on best practices and allows commands the opportunity to develop prevention plans to support the Army 

strategy. 

317 

Phase II (Army-wide Conviction) includes educating soldiers to understand their 

moral responsibility to intervene and stop sexual assault and harassment. This 

phase has been delivered to installations worldwide. 

Phase III, which the Army is now focused on, is dedicated to ‘‘Achieving Cultural 

Change’’ and fosters an environment free from sexual harassment and sexual assault. 

The final phase is ‘‘Sustainment, Refinement, and Sharing.’’ Here, the prevention 

program continues to grow while motivating national partners to support our efforts 

to change generally accepted negative social behaviors. The end state is the total 

elimination of the crime of sexual assault. 

A key component of I.A.M. Strong is a comprehensive effort to improve the investigation and prosecution of sexual assault cases. The Army formally investigates 

every allegation of sexual assault reported through an unrestricted report. Although 

this practice may contribute to a seemingly high number of investigations, more importantly, it demonstrates the Army’s commitment to eradicate this crime within its 

ranks. 

The Army enhanced its investigation and prosecution capabilities by hiring 30 additional special investigators and adding 15 special prosecutors; and hired 33 of 35 

additional lab examiners at the U.S. Army Criminal Investigation Laboratory which 

supports all of DOD and the military Services in processing forensic evidence. 

During fiscal year 2010, the Army conducted trial advocacy training for approximately 500–600 Judge Advocates responsible for the prosecution and defense of sexual assault cases. This training is delivered to Judge Advocates in the United States 

and in deployed environments. During fiscal year 2011, the Army’s Office of the 

Judge Advocate General (OTJAG) will execute 38 training programs with emphasis 

on the prosecution of sexual assault cases. 

The Army has approximately 774 collateral duty personnel serving as Deployable 

Sexual Assault Response Coordinators (SARCs) in brigades and higher and approximately 17,000 collateral duty personnel serving as unit victim advocates in battalions and below. In addition, the Army has 38 full-time civilian SARC and 171 collateral duty civilian installation victim advocates. 

[In millions of dollars] 

Fiscal Year 

2010 2011 2012 

SHARP (Sexual Harrassment) ........................................................................................................ $53.3 $28.6 $24.8 

Fiscal year 2010 figures represent execution amounts. 

SUICIDE PREVENTION PROGRAM

The loss of any soldier is a tragedy, particularly when it could have been prevented. One suicide is too many and we are working hard to address the suicides 

across the total force. There were 156 suicides by Active-Duty soldiers during 2010, 

a slight decrease from 162 suicides in 2009. However, there were 147 suicides by 

Non-Active Duty members of the Army Reserve and National Guard. This represents an increase of 80 suicides over the 2009 report. The surveillance, detection 

and intervention systems that we use to monitor the Active-Duty Force have limited 

abilities to assist our soldier/citizens—who are not full-time and reside in civilian 

communities away from their units. Approximately 50 percent of these ARNG and 

USAR suicide deaths have no deployment history. 

The Army Health Promotion, Risk Reduction and Suicide Prevention (HP/RR/SP) 

Report 2010 is the foundation for a systemic effort to address suicide. This report 

has identified critical gaps throughout the system that resulted in increased high 

risk behavior and adverse outcomes. Additionally, partnering with national mental 

health professionals refines and improves our programs, including the Army Study 

to Assess Risk and Resilience in Servicemembers. This is the largest study of suicide 

and mental health among military personnel ever undertaken. 

Leaders across the Army are using all of these efforts to improve the health of 

the force, decrease high risk behavior and stem the rate of suicides. Only through 

increased vigilance and attention to each soldier will this problem within our ranks 

cease to exist. 

318 

[In millions of dollars] 

Fiscal Year 

2010 2011 2012 

HP/RR/SP (suicide) ........................................................................................................................ $29.4 $54.6 $52.4 1

1 Fiscal year 2010 figures represent execution amounts. 

ARMY SUBSTANCE ABUSE PROGRAM

The Nation’s persistent conflict has created symptoms of stress for our soldiers, 

including an increase in alcohol and drug abuse. The Army Substance Abuse Program (ASAP) is a commander’s program that uses prevention, education, deterrence, 

detection, and rehabilitation, to reduce and eliminate alcohol and drug abuse. It is 

based on the expectations of readiness and personal responsibility. 

In March 2010, the Army conducted a counselor requirements analysis based on 

each installation’s average daily client census with a ratio of 1 counselor: 30 patients. Patient caseload was as high as 60/counselor at some installations. The 1:30 

ratio is an accepted ratio based on literature and counselor input. Applying this 

ratio yielded a requirement of 562 counselors assuming a 20 percent growth in number of patients. 

An Army priority in this area includes the hiring of more counselors. There is a 

finite pool of qualified substance abuse counselors nationwide and the Army is competing with private industry, the Department of Veterans Affairs, and State and 

local governments. The Army currently has hired 384 of the 562 counselors needed. 

The Army is increasing the use of recruiting, relocation, and student loan reimbursement incentives to attract more qualified candidates, and are developing a 

ASAP Counselor Internship Program which will allow students with Masters degrees to work in a supervised internship for up to 2 years as they attain their licenses and substance abuse counselor certifications. 

The Confidential Alcohol Treatment and Education Program (CATEP), began in 

July 2009 and offers confidential alcohol treatment to qualified soldiers. For these 

soldiers, the chain of command is not informed of the soldiers enrollment as was 

previously customary. This pilot program was initially offered at Fort Lewis, Fort 

Richardson, and Schofield Barracks. An initial assessment was conducted in March 

2010, and the Secretary of the Army directed that the pilot be expanded to include 

Forts Carson, Riley, and Leonard Wood. The initial assessment showed moderate 

success in attracting soldiers and placed more career NCOs and younger officers 

into treatment. Soldiers who participated in CATEP were very positive about the 

opportunity to take care of their issues without commander knowledge and were 

more motivated as patients. Some soldiers informed their commanders about their 

enrollment and these commanders had a high acceptance of the program. The program will be assessed again during April and May 2011 and a decision will be made 

by the Secretary regarding expansion of the confidential treatment and education 

to the remainder of the Army. As of April 8, 2011, 743 soldiers sought CATEP treatment and 519 were/are enrolled, and 150 were referred to alcohol education or other 

services. The increase in funding depicted In the table below is attributable to two 

events: 

(1) transfer of dollars from MEDCOM to IMCOM to pay for counselors, and 

(2) a $41.3 million increase during POM 12–16 for counselor hires, prevention coordinators, and prevention initiatives. 

[In millions of dollars] 

Fiscal Year 

2010 2011 2012 

ACSAP ............................................................................................................................................. $34.6 $36.4 $109.5 

Fiscal year 2010 figures represent execution amounts. 

WOMEN IN THE ARMY

On January 13, 1994, the Secretary of Defense issued the Direct Ground Combat 

Definition and Assignment Rule. The rule remains in effect today and prohibits the 

assignment of women to units below the brigade level whose primary mission is to 

engage in direct combat on the ground. 

The Army’s current assignment policy (Army Regulation 600–13, 27 Mar 92) allows women to serve in any officer or enlisted specialty or position except in those 

319 

specialties, positions, or units (battalion size or smaller) which are assigned a routine mission to engage in direct combat, or which collocate routinely with units assigned a direct combat mission. 

On March 2, 2010, in the context of a changing operational environment, with 

emerging requirements and missions, the Army initiated a routine cyclic review of 

its assignment policy for female soldiers. The purpose of the review was to assess 

the current Army policy alignment with DOD policy. The Army recently completed 

the ‘‘assessment’’ phase of the cyclic review and will submit results and recommendations to Army Senior Leadership for decision. If approved, the Secretary 

of Defense will be the final authority to implement these changes. Congress will be 

notified prior to any implementation. 

Women in the Army have and continue to serve this Nation with honor and distinction in the roles, positions, units, and specialties in which they are allowed to 

serve. They are vital to the readiness and success of the Army, DOD, and the Nation. The Army will continue to honor this service, and move forward as required 

to meet the needs of the Nation and of the Total Force. 

CONGRESSIONAL ASSISTANCE

As the Army prepares for reductions in the force, we will need appropriate legislative authorities to drawdown accurately and appropriately. Reformation of the physical disability system will require continued dialogue and possibly statutory change 

to provide our service members the transition they deserve. Once the economic environment improves, the Army will need to make greater use of incentives, and will 

need congressional help to do so. The continued support of Congress for competitive 

military benefits and compensation, along with incentives and bonuses for soldiers, 

families, and for the civilian workforce are critical in helping the Army be the employer of choice. 

CONCLUSION

With your help, we have invested a tremendous amount of resources and deliberate planning to preserve the All-Volunteer Force. This includes transforming the 

RC into an Operational Reserve. We must maintain vigilance to protect these investitures for the future of the force. We need to sustain the quality of life of our force 

now and in the future. While we begin to transform to a smaller Army, we remain 

dedicated to improving readiness, building resilience and rebalancing the force by 

fiscal year 2012. The well-being and balance of our force are absolutely dependent 

upon your tremendous support. The Army is proud of the high caliber men and 

women whose willingness to serve, is a credit to this great Nation. 

To conclude, I wish to thank all of you for your continued support, which has been 

vital in sustaining our All-Volunteer Army through an unprecedented period of continuous combat operations. With your support, we will continue to work toward restoring balance and sustaining the high quality of our Army for the duration of the 

current fight, and Into the foreseeable future. Chairman Webb, and members of the 

subcommittee, I thank you again for your generous and unwavering support of our 

outstanding soldiers, civilian professionals, and their families. 

JOINT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY BY HON. THOMAS R. LAMONT AND LTG THOMAS P. 

BOSTICK, USA 

After nearly 10 years at war, our soldiers, civilians, and families are stretched 

and strained, yet still resilient. The Army reached its objective end strength, which 

combines ‘‘Grow the Army’’ and Temporary End Strength Increase. Now the Army 

must prepare to drawdown this force in a deliberate and careful manner. Army end 

strength will return to the congressionally-approved active component end strength 

of 547,400 by the end of fiscal year 2013. For fiscal year 2012, the Army National 

Guard end strength will remain 358,200 and the U.S. Army Reserve will maintain 

205,000. The Army is on track to achieve a sustainable deployment tempo for our 

forces and restore balance to the Army beginning in fiscal year 2012. We will continue to face multiple challenges on multiple fronts including an ever increasing non 

deployable population resulting from multiple deployments. This problem, coupled 

with an inefficient disability system, does not effectively support Army Readiness, 

our soldiers and their families. 

In fiscal year 2012, the base military personnel appropriation comprises the largest portion of the Army’s budget at $60.6 billion or 42 percent. In fiscal year 2010, 

with congressional support, the Army spent $4.4 billion on recruiting and retention. 

In fiscal year 2011, the Army plans to spend $4.4B to fund contracts written beVerDate Aug 31 2005 09:55 Jan 25, 2012 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00325 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6621 Y:\BORAWSKI\DOCS\68089.TXT JUNE PsN: JUNEB
320 

tween fiscal year 2007 and fiscal year 2010 due to continued obligations of anniversary payments to soldiers. Recently, incentive contracts have dropped dramatically 

for new accessions. Average recruiting bonuses dropped from over $13,000 in fiscal 

year 2009 to just under $3,000 in fiscal year 2011, and are only used to incentivize 

longer term enlistments in a small percentage of critical skills. In fiscal year 2010, 

the active Army experienced the highest percentage of high school diploma graduates since fiscal year 1992 (increasing from 94.7 percent in fiscal year 2009 to 98.3 

percent in fiscal year 2010). The Army met its skillset needs, achieving over 99 percent Military Occupational Specialty precision. We entered fiscal year 2011 positioned for continued success, with 33,276 future soldiers in the delayed entry pool. 

The last time the delayed entry pool topped 33,200 was in 1996. The Army collectively decreased the number of ineligibility waivers provided for enlistments and appointments by 4.20 percent from the previous fiscal year. 

In fiscal year 2010, the Active Army reenlisted 68,105 soldiers towards an annual 

mission of 60,000. Soldiers extending to complete deployments with their units represented 8,100 of the total. The Army Reserve reenlisted 10,921 soldiers, exceeding 

their annual goals by 6 percent. The Army National Guard accomplished their mission as well by achieving 106 percent of their assigned mission; a total of 32,156 

soldiers. During fiscal year 2010 and into fiscal year 2011, retention bonuses were 

carefully monitored and adjusted to ensure that the Army met its retention goals 

while remaining fiscally responsible. 

From fiscal year 2007 to fiscal year 2010, the Army more than doubled its investment in Family programs. These various programs are intended to provide a broad 

spectrum of support and include important programs as Mobilization and Deployment Readiness, Family Advocacy, New Parent Support, Army Spouse Employment 

Partnership, Survivor Outreach Services, Family Assistance Centers (ARNG), Yellow Ribbon Reintegrate, Army Reserve Teen Panel, Army Affiliated Child Care & 

Youth Programs, and Core Community Recreation Programs and Services. 

Since September 11, 2001, we increased the civilian workforce in military functions from 222,000 to 286,654 (plus 24,694 Civil Works) due to overseas contingency 

operations, Defense Health Program increases, Family and Soldier Support initiatives, acquisition workforce growth, in-sourcing functions performed by contractors, 

military technician increases, and military-to-civilian conversions. 

The Department of the Army implemented a Civilian Workforce Transformation 

plan that will invigorate development of the Civilian Workforce by addressing critical issues of structure, accession, development, retention and succession planning 

to ease the transition from one generation to the next. 

While we begin to transform to a smaller Army, we remain dedicated to improving 

readiness, building resilience and rebalancing the force by fiscal year 2012. The 

well-being and balance of our force are absolutely dependent upon congressional 

support. 

Senator WEBB. Thank you very much, Secretary Lamont. 

General, welcome. General Bostick? 

STATEMENT OF LTG THOMAS P. BOSTICK, USA, DEPUTY CHIEF 

OF STAFF G–1, U.S. ARMY 

General BOSTICK. Chairman Webb, Senator Graham, members of 

the Subcommittee on Personnel, thank you for this opportunity to 

appear before you to represent the 1.1 million soldiers serving 

around the globe, as well as over 300,000 civilians and their families. 

Our All-Volunteer Army is now in its 10th year of continuous 

combat operations. More than 1.1 million soldiers have deployed, 

and over 30,000 Army civilian have also deployed into combat. This 

impacts not only the soldiers and the civilians, but their families, 

as well. 

Our soldiers and families are feeling the stress of repeated deployments, but they remain extraordinarily resilient. The programs, that you have supported, aimed at the health of the force 

and quality of life, are helping to preserve the All-Volunteer Force. 

Despite this unprecedented operational tempo, the Army is on 

track to restore balance by 2012. Increasing dwell time is the most 

321 

important thing we can do to improve the health of the force. Beginning with units that deploy this October and later, they can expect to return home for 2 years, for the Active component, and 4 

years, for the Reserve component. 

As the Army prepares for reducing its end strength, we must 

prevail in ongoing combat operations, prevent and deter conflict, 

prepare for future threats, and preserve and enhance the All-Volunteer Force. There is no doubt that the Army of the future will 

be, and should be, different than the Army of today. There are 

changes in the environment, different threats, and emerging technology that we need to take advantage of, and we must be adaptable enough to do so. We must continue to provide the quality of 

care and support that our Army requires. We will work with this 

Congress as we move forward on a broad front to address the challenges of 10 years of war. 

With this subcommittee’s help, your Army was able to attract, recruit, and retain very talented and committed young men and 

women, and exceeded our recruiting and retention goals once 

again. 

To conclude, I want to thank you for your continued support, 

which remains vital to sustain our All-Volunteer Force through unprecedented periods of continuous combat operations. 

I look forward to answering your questions. 

Senator WEBB. Thanks very much, General Bostick. 

STATEMENT OF HON. JUAN M. GARCIA III, ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF THE NAVY FOR MANPOWER AND RESERVE AFFAIRS 

Mr. GARCIA. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Senator Graham. Thank 

you for the opportunity to speak about the sailors, marines, and civilians who comprise the Department of the Navy. 

At any given time, approximately 75,000 sailors and marines are 

underway aboard ships or forward-deployed. When counting those 

deployed, those actively training and preparing to deploy, and 

those supporting forward operations, 40 percent of the Navy and 

nearly a third of the marines are in involved in maintaining our 

forward presence and supporting contingencies. 

In developing our budget request, we added 6,800 billets to the 

operational forces of the Navy. To source these billets without increasing Navy’s end strength, we reduced or consolidated 8,400 billets, streamlining many staffs and shore activities. The marines 

will face different challenges as they reduce end strength by more 

than 15,000 while ensuring that current missions, particularly in 

Afghanistan, continue to be fully supported. 

Our fiscal year 2012 budget request for recruiting and retention 

represents a reduction from fiscal year 2011. Both Services are performing well in officer and enlisted recruiting. However, accession 

bonuses remain critical to achieving Navy and Marine Corps goals 

for health professionals, nuclear operators, and Special Warfare/ 

Special Operations personnel. Because we’re experiencing historic 

retention rates, we’ve made selected reductions in retention bonuses, although retention behavior indicates we must apply bonus 

programs to critical skill areas that remain relatively insulated 

from changes in the economic environment. 

322 

At a time when 1 percent of this Nation has served in uniform, 

we’re expanding the number universities and campuses with Reserve Officer Training Corps (ROTC) presence, to ensure that the 

office ranks are open to young men and women from all segments 

and all regions of the country. Our fiscal year 2012 education and 

training budget represents an increase from fiscal year 2011. However, the majority of this increase represents investments in critical 

mission areas, such as missile defense, antisubmarine warfare, and 

the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) and 

cyberwarfare—cyberforce. 

Our fiscal year 2012 budget request for servicemember and family programs is an increase from fiscal year 2011 to support our 

continuum of care and address the physical, psychological, and 

family readiness of our sailors and marines. We continue to emphasize suicide and sexual assault prevention programs. 

In the past 12 months, the Navy and Marine Corps have mobilized approximately 12,000 reservists in support of operational requirements. Recognizing the personnel costs are the largest part of 

the Department of the Navy’s budget, we’re collaborating with the 

Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD) and our sister Services to 

review the future role of the Reserve component as part of our integrated total force. 

The Department of the Navy is leading the way in both innovative therapeutic treatments and in civilian hiring of our wounded 

warriors. Naval Sea Systems Command has excelled in bringing 

disabled veterans on board, hired 282 in calendar year 2011 and, 

to date, are half way to their current goal of hiring a wounded warrior per day. 

Despite the challenges, we can think of no more rewarding job 

than to represent and advocate for the nearly 630,000 sailors and 

marines and 190,000 civilian employees. 

To that end, we wish to thank the committee members for their 

support of our great men and women in our Navy and Marine 

Corps, and look forward to your questions. 

Thank you. 

[The joint prepared statement of Mr. Garcia, Admiral Ferguson, 

and General Milstead follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT BY HON. JUAN M. GARCIA, VADM MARK E. FERGUSON III, 

USN, AND LT. GEN. ROBERT E. MILSTEAD, JR., USMC 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The Department of the Navy’s fiscal year 2012 manpower and personnel budget 

request appropriately balances risk in supporting the readiness requirements of the 

fleet and joint force, growth in emerging mission areas, and essential programs that 

provide for the care of our sailors and marines and their families. Our active budget 

request will support an active end strength of 325,700 within the Navy and 202,100 

within the Marine Corps. 

Personnel Efficiencies 

In developing our budget request, we reviewed current operations, our procurement profile, and readiness requirements. This review indicated a requirement to 

add a total of approximately 6,800 billets to the operational forces of the Navy 

across the Future Years Defense Program (FYDP) to support new and current 

warfighting platforms. To source these billets without additions to the Navy’s overall end strength, we identified efficiencies in staff structure and shore activities, and 

reduced capacity in other areas of the force. This review resulted in a reduction or 

323 

consolidation of approximately 8,400 billets in the Fleet, squadron staffs, and shore 

activities. 

The Marine Corps will continue to shape its force to meet ongoing requirements, 

fill critical military occupational specialties and retain vital leadership with combat 

experience. Bonuses will remain critical to this effort, allowing the Marine Corps to 

fill hard-to-recruit positions such as crypto-linguists and reconnaissance marines. It 

is important to note that only 8 percent of new recruits receive an enlistment bonus 

and the Marine Corps budget for enlistment bonuses has decreased from $75 million 

in fiscal year 2008 to $14.7 million in fiscal year 2012. In addition, Selective Reenlistment Bonus funding has decreased from $468 million in fiscal year 2009 to 

$108.6 million in fiscal year 2012. 

Sailor, Marine, and Family Care 

Our fiscal year 2012 budget request represents an increase from fiscal year 2011. 

This increase supports expansion of our comprehensive continuum of care to more 

effectively address the medical, physical, psychological, and family readiness needs 

of sailors and marines and their families, and our continued emphasis on suicide 

and sexual assault prevention programs. 

Recruiting 

Both the Navy and Marine Corps continue to experience strong performance in 

our recruiting programs across both the officer and enlisted force. Our fiscal year 

2012 budget request for recruiting represents a reduction from fiscal year 2011. 

These programs include accession incentives, advertising and recruiter support. Accession bonuses remain critical to achieving our goals for health professionals, nuclear operators, and special warfare/special operations within the Navy. However, 

a favorable recruiting environment has enabled us to reduce the number of those 

eligible for accession bonuses. 

Retention 

Along with current economic conditions, our new policies are encouraging longerterm career behavior, contributing to high retention across the force. Our fiscal year 

2012 budget request represents a decrease from fiscal year 2011. While we have 

been able to make selected reductions in retention bonuses, retention behavior indicates we must continue to apply bonus programs to critical skill areas that require 

significant investments in training and education and remain relatively insulated 

from changes in the economic environment. 

Learning and Development 

Our fiscal year 2012 education and training budget represents an overall increase 

from fiscal year 2011. The majority of this increase represents investments in curricula, training technology, and instructors for critical mission areas such as missile 

defense, cyber and anti-submarine warfare. 

Chairman Webb, Senator Graham, and distinguished members of the subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to speak about the sailors, marines, and 

civilians who comprise the Department of the Navy. 

These are difficult and stressful times for the Sea Services, but our people continue to rise to the challenges. We are pleased to report that both the Navy and 

the Marine Corps are recruiting and retaining high-quality individuals who are excelling at meeting our global commitments whether they are combat operations, or 

humanitarian assistance. It is our distinct honor and privilege to represent and advocate for the nearly 630,000 sailors and marines, both Active Duty and Reserve, 

and 190,000 civilian employees who are always prepared to respond to whatever our 

Nation demands. 

This statement provides details of service-specific initiatives and various supporting data, but it is important to note the Department of the Navy as a whole 

faces many common challenges and shared solutions that we wish to highlight for 

your attention. 

The Sea Services will continue to face myriad operational requirements even as 

we strive to achieve greater efficiency. The Navy, after a decade of declining 

strength, will level out its active duty end strength at 320,300 by fiscal year 2016, 

6,800 billets of which the Navy plans to move from shore support functions to sea 

duty to enhance our operational readiness. This restructuring includes administrative consolidations to eliminate headquarters staffs of a destroyer squadron, three 

submarine squadrons, a strike group, and a carrier air wing. Not only will those 

shifts mean that the important work ashore must be performed by fewer sailors, but 

also that sailors will likely spend more time at sea away from their families. The 

marines will face different but equally challenging issues as they take the initial 

324 

steps toward a reduction in end-strength of more than 15,000 while ensuring that 

current missions, particularly in Afghanistan, continue to be fully supported. 

All of these changes must occur while both Services continue to meet evolving national security threats and complete their many assigned missions. At any given 

time, approximately 75,000 sailors and marines are either underway aboard ships 

or forward-deployed. In fact, including those deployed and those actively training/ 

preparing to deploy or supporting forward operations, 40 percent of the Navy and 

nearly 33 percent of the marines are involved in maintaining our forward presence 

and supporting contingencies, as we speak. 

While these changes will prove difficult, they must be accomplished without sacrificing our highest priorities including the care and the recovery of our wounded, ill, 

and injured servicemembers. The Department of the Navy is leading the way in 

both innovative therapeutic treatments and in civilian hiring of our Wounded Warriors. The Naval Sea Systems Command has excelled in bringing disabled veterans 

on board; hiring 282 disabled veterans in the past year, with a current goal of one 

new hire a day. Both our Safe Harbor Program and our Wounded Warrior Regiments continue to build on lessons learned and to improve the support they provide. 

Along with this top priority, the Department of the Navy is engaged in a wide range 

of other initiatives and projects we would like to highlight for you. 

At a time when 1 percent of the Nation has served in uniform, we are expanding 

the number of ROTC units to ensure that the officer ranks are open to young men 

and women from all segments and all regions of the country. Our two newest host 

programs at Arizona State and Rutgers Universities reach geographic areas not previously covered, and are at large schools with recognized technical and engineering 

programs. At the same time, the anticipated repeal of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell is providing the opportunity to expand ROTC participation at various Ivy League schools. 

In the area of quality of life for our active duty families, we are giving special attention to expanding spouse-employment opportunities and to supporting our exceptional family members. We are also moving forward on the introduction of women 

in submarines. Eighteen female officers have commenced their 15-month nuclear 

training and will report to Ohio-class submarines by the end of this year. 

These and many other initiatives are occurring during a period of intense activity 

for the Sea Services. Not since World War II has the Department of the Navy been 

actively engaged in as many areas of the globe as we are today. In addition to ongoing efforts in Iraq and Afghanistan, we continue to confront pirates in the Indian 

Ocean and drug traffickers in the Caribbean. The recent Japan earthquake and tsunami highlighted the Navy’s ability to quickly execute humanitarian assistance/disaster relief operations while simultaneously evacuating over four thousand dependents and civilian employees to various safe havens. The events comprising what’s 

been called the ‘‘Arab Spring’’ have raised the profile and highlighted the capabilities of our constant presence in that part of the world. However, equally important 

as winning wars, is preventing wars. We are committed to engaging our global partners. DON personnel are executing a variety of humanitarian missions, such as Provide Comfort; and are building multi-national coalitions to improve maritime safety 

and security, as in the Pacific Partnership, Africa Partnership Station and UNITAS. 

Our Service men and women have responded professionally and bravely to all these 

challenges, but the operating tempo is taking a toll. In the past 12 months the Navy 

and Marine Corps have mobilized 11,675 reservists and filled 468 Individual 

Augmentee assignments to keep up with operational requirements. 

We must plan for the future while conducting today’s missions, and anticipating 

emerging threats. In an exceptionally tight fiscal environment, we must find efficiencies and other opportunities to save scarce resources. Recognizing that personnel 

costs are the largest part of the Department of the Navy’s budget, we are collaborating with OSD and our sister Services to review the future role of the Reserve 

component as part of our integrated Total Force. 

An emerging threat that requires new thinking in workforce development is cyber 

warfare. The Department of the Navy is creating small and highly capable communities of military and civilian personnel to serve in our cyber workforce. Given the 

unique nature and pace of cyber warfare, the Department is exploring innovative 

approaches to hiring and retaining active, Reserve and civilian employees. 

We constantly explore manpower efficiencies and cost savings across the Department. Some savings will be difficult, but are needed to ensure the Department can 

focus its limited resources on operational priorities. We have reduced the eligibility 

for and size of bonuses and special pays for our servicemembers; have instituted a 

2-year salary freeze for civilian employees, and have reduced the number of Flag 

and General Officers, and Civilian Executive positions. We are exploring options to 

reduce healthcare cost to the Department without reducing benefits or increasing 

costs to our servicemembers, their families and our retirees. Initial study into opVerDate Aug 31 2005 09:55 Jan 25, 2012 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00330 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6621 Y:\BORAWSKI\DOCS\68089.TXT JUNE PsN: JUNEB
325 

tions for providing medication via mail order indicates significant savings can be 

achieved. 

Finally, let me touch on a topic of great concern throughout the Sea Services and 

the Department of Defense as a whole. Simply put, the rate of suicide among our 

active duty members remains unacceptably high. While we know that in a population as large as ours it will be impossible to prevent every case, our position remains firm that even a single suicide is one too many. The Navy and Marine Corps 

are focusing their efforts on early intervention and in adapting the military culture 

to encourage seeking needed help early. The entire Department of Navy leadership 

team remains committed to finding the most effective ways of preventing suicides 

among our servicemembers. 

Despite the challenges, we can think of no more rewarding job than serving our 

brave sailors and marines. To that end, we wish to thank the committee members 

for their continuous and unwavering commitment to the support of our great men 

and women in our Navy and Marine Corps who, each day, unhesitatingly answer 

the call to duty simply because their nation has asked, and it is the right thing to 

do. 

The following service specific information is provided for the committee. We look 

forward to your questions. 

A READY AND CAPABLE GLOBAL NAVY

On a given day, more than 44,000 sailors are deployed and nearly half of our 288 

ships are underway around the globe. Our Navy has more than 14,000 Active and 

Reserve sailors on the ground and approximately 10,000 at sea in the Central Command (CENTCOM) Area of Responsibility (AOR) supporting joint and coalition operations. 

Overall, the tone of our force remains positive. Our 2010 Navy Total Force Survey 

results revealed sailors are generally satisfied with the quality of their leadership, 

benefits, compensation, and the opportunities Navy provides for personal growth 

and development. With our sustained operational tempo, we remain vigilant concerning stress on our sailors and their families and continue to carefully monitor 

the health of the force. The results of our 2010 Behavioral Poll indicate the majority 

of sailors are coping with stress in positive ways by talking to family members and 

friends, taking advantage of the resources provided by chaplains and Fleet and 

Family Support Centers, and using their chain of command to proactively address 

concerns. Additionally, the majority of sailors report being satisfied with the level 

of support provided by their leadership to help them and their families effectively 

cope with stress, to include both pre-deployment and post-deployment assistance. 

Our fiscal year 2012 budget request will enable us to continue to meet the operational demands of the fleet and the joint force while optimizing personnel readiness. Our active budget request of $29 billion consists of $27.2 billion for Military 

Personnel Navy (MPN) and $1.85 billion in related Operations and Maintenance 

Navy (OMN). Our Reserve budget request consists of $1.96 billion for Reserve Personnel Navy (RPN) and $6.4 million in related Operations and Maintenance Navy 

Reserve (OMNR). Our budget request supports Active end strength of 325,700 and 

Reserve end strength of 66,200. 

To address critical manning challenges for our ships, squadrons, submarines, and 

other operational units, our fiscal year 2012 budget increases manpower at sea and 

reduces manpower assigned to our shore infrastructure. While we believe this transition is manageable, it will present challenges to our ability to maintain sea-shore 

flow for some of our enlisted sailors and sustain manning levels across the force in 

the near-term as we execute these billet shifts. 

Additionally, Navy has placed end strength previously funded by the Overseas 

Contingency Operations (OCO) appropriation into our baseline program for fiscal 

year 2012. We are also projecting a gradual reduction of Individual Augmentee (IA) 

demand in Iraq and Afghanistan as ground forces withdraw. 

NAVY PERSONNEL EFFICIENCIES

In developing our budget request, we reviewed current operations, our procurement profile, and readiness requirements. This review indicated a requirement to 

add a total of approximately 6,800 billets to the operational forces across the Future 

Years Defense Program (FYDP). This requirement includes the addition of 3,900 billets across the FYDP to support new warfighting platforms. In fiscal year 2012 

alone, we are adding billets for a new Riverine Squadron, Littoral Combat Ship 

(LCS) manning, and the E–2D Advanced Hawkeye. 

Our review also indicated a requirement to add approximately 2,900 billets across 

the FYDP to support current warfighting platforms. In fiscal year 2012, we are addVerDate Aug 31 2005 09:55 Jan 25, 2012 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00331 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6621 Y:\BORAWSKI\DOCS\68089.TXT JUNE PsN: JUNEB
326 

ing approximately 1,800 billets to existing platforms. For the submarine force, we 

are adding billets to support information technology, nuclear plant operations, and 

strategic weapons management. For the surface force, we are adding billets to support Ballistic Missile Defense and returning billets at sea to support damage control 

and firefighting capabilities, safety of navigation, preservation, material condition, 

and underway watch-standing. Additionally, this budget adds billets at Regional 

Maintenance Centers for sailors with sea-intensive specialties in response to the 

Fleet Review Panel. These assignments will provide sailors the opportunity to further develop critical craftsmen skills, particularly in the areas of surface engineering, combat systems, and deck ratings. 

To source these billets without additions to our overall end strength, we identified 

efficiencies in staff structure and shore activities, and reduced capacity in areas of 

the force commensurate with anticipated reductions in future demand for ground 

force enablers. This review resulted in a reduction or consolidation of approximately 

8,400 billets in the Fleet, squadron staffs, and shore activities across the FYDP. 

Specific efficiencies will include: 

• Disestablishment of a destroyer squadron staff, three submarine squadron staffs, a strike group staff, and a carrier air wing staff 

• Consolidation of the staff of Commander, Second Fleet with U.S. Fleet 

Forces Command 

• Horizontal staffing reductions across Navy shore activities • Disestablishment of a helicopter anti-submarine squadron and consolidation of two patrol squadron special projects units and two Fleet air reconnaissance squadrons 

• Reductions in recruiting, education, and training staffs, bands and 

NJROTC units. 

Additionally, we reduced both billet seniority and structure in selected Restricted 

Line and Staff Corps communities. This efficiency produced additional billets for the 

operational forces. As part of the Office of the Secretary of Defense flag and general 

officer review, we proposed to eliminate 9 and reduce the seniority of 15 flag officer 

billets, affecting 15 percent of our flag officer billet structure. 

BUILDING RESILIENCE THROUGH A COMPREHENSIVE CONTINUUM OF CARE

Our fiscal year 2012 budget request of $164.2 million for sailor and family care 

supports expansion of our comprehensive continuum of care to address the medical, 

physical, psychological, and family readiness needs of sailors and their families. 

Navy’s Operational Stress Control Program, Navy Reserve Psychological Health 

Outreach Program, Warrior Transition Program, Returning Warrior Workshop, 

Navy Safe Harbor, and our Medical Home Port Program continue to be the critical 

elements of this continuum. 

Navy’s Operational Stress Control (OSC) program addresses the psychological 

health of sailors and their families by encouraging sailors to seek help for stress reactions before they become stress problems, promoting strong leadership involvement, and increasing awareness of support programs and resources. The fiscal year 

2012 budget request supports our continuing focus of helping Navy leaders recognize and respond to stress reactions among our sailors. 

The Navy Reserve Psychological Health Outreach program was established to improve the psychological health and resiliency of Reserve component (RC) sailors and 

their families. Teams of psychological health outreach coordinators and outreach 

team members located at the five regional Reserve commands provide psychological 

health assessments, education, and referrals to mental health specialists. In fiscal 

year 2010, these teams conducted mental health assessments for more than 1,600 

RC sailors, made outreach calls to over 2,400 returning RC sailors, and conducted 

approximately 300 visits to Navy Operational Support Centers (NOSCs) around the 

country, providing basic OSC awareness training to more than 23,000 RC sailors 

and staff members. 

The Warrior Transition Program (WTP) provides a place and time for sailors serving as Individual Augmentees to decompress and transition from the war zone to 

life back home. Small group discussions facilitated by chaplains and medical personnel prepare sailors for resumption of family and social obligations, return to civilian employment, and reintegration with the community. In fiscal year 2010, 376 

WTP workshops for 7,056 sailors were conducted in Kuwait. 

Returning home impacts the sailor, his or her family, employer, and community. 

Returning Warrior Workshops (RWWs) are reintegration events that honor returning warriors and their families for their service, provide information about resources 

available to assist them with reintegration, and raise awareness of symptoms associated with combat stress. Returning Warrior Workshops fulfill the Yellow Ribbon ReVerDate Aug 31 2005 09:55 Jan 25, 2012 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00332 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6621 Y:\BORAWSKI\DOCS\68089.TXT JUNE PsN: JUNEB
327 

1 National Center for Injury Prevention and Control (2007). Standardized U.S. suicide rates 

are adjusted for Navy demographics. 

integration Program statutory requirement for an activity 60 days post-mobilization 

that focuses on reconnecting members and their families with service providers from 

the Initial Reintegration Activity to ensure that members and their families understand the benefits to which they are entitled and resources available to help them 

overcome the challenges of reintegration. RWWs are designed to remove stigma that 

may prevent people from seeking appropriate support during the potentially challenging demobilization and reintegration process. More than 34 RWWs are planned 

through fiscal year 2012 to direct sailors and their families to the support programs 

that best address their needs. 

Navy Safe Harbor remains the Navy’s lead organization for coordinating the nonmedical care of wounded, ill, and injured sailors, coastguardsmen, and their families. Through its network of Recovery Care Coordinators and Non-Medical Care 

Managers at 12 locations across the country, Safe Harbor provides exceptional, individually tailored assistance to an enrolled population of over 600 wounded, ill, and 

injured. Over the past year, we have increased our support for community reintegration through the Anchor Program, which pairs members with volunteer RC sailors 

in their communities, and initiated the Adaptive Athletics Program, designed to 

support long-term recovery and rehabilitation through whole-body training and education. Additionally, we signed Memoranda of Agreement with the Departments of 

Labor and Veterans Affairs (VA) to ensure greater access to employment services 

and support programs and provide assistance in navigating the transition from military medical care to VA medical care. The fiscal year 2012 budget request supports 

our enduring goal to provide the highest quality care to our wounded, ill, and injured. 

We remain committed to ensuring our sailors and their families have ready access 

to high quality health care services. Our Medical Home Port Program is a teambased model focused on optimizing the relationship between patients, their providers, and the broader healthcare team. Mental health providers are embedded 

within our Medical Home Ports to facilitate regular assessment and early mental 

health intervention. This model enables sailors to be treated in the settings in which 

they feel most comfortable and reduces the stigma associated with the care they receive. Additionally, improving early detection and intervention in the primary care 

setting reduces the demand for time-intensive intervention in our mental health 

specialty clinics. 

SUICIDE PREVENTION: ALL HANDS, ALL OF THE TIME

Our sailors face challenges while deployed and at home making suicide prevention 

an ‘‘all-hands—all of the time’’ effort, involving the sailor, family members, peers, 

and leadership. The results of our 2010 Behavioral Quick Poll indicate the majority 

of sailors are confident in their ability to effectively respond to a sailor who talks 

about suicide and the ability of their commands to support sailors seeking help for 

suicidal thoughts or actions. 

In 2010, we conducted more than 25 unit level suicide prevention coordinator 

briefings and training workshops around the world and provided training to more 

than 200 installation suicide prevention coordinators at our first Navy Suicide Prevention Coordinator Training Conference. We remain committed to creating an environment in which stress and other suicide-related factors can be more openly recognized, discussed, and addressed, and where seeking help is a sign of strength. This 

includes maintaining a solid foundation of suicide prevention coordinators, refreshing mental health provider skills, providing installation first responders with the 

skills necessary to respond to behavioral emergencies, and raising family awareness 

of suicide risk, warning signs, and support resources. 

Navy’s calendar year 2010 suicide rate of 10.9 per 100,000 sailors represents a 

decrease from the 2009 suicide rate of 13.3 per 100,000 sailors. Though we recognize 

any loss of life to suicide is a tragedy, this rate is below the national rate for the 

same age and gender demographic of 18.7 per 100,000 1 individuals. 

SEXUAL ASSAULT: NOT IN MY NAVY

The goal of Navy’s Sexual Assault Prevention and Response (SAPR) program is 

to eliminate sexual assault by fostering a culture of prevention, response, and accountability. This includes comprehensive education and training, collaboration with 

the Naval Safety Center on messaging that emphasizes the negative relationship between alcohol and sexual assaults, 24/7 response capability for victim support, 

standardized worldwide reporting procedures, and a system of accountability that 

328 

protects all sailors. We have also issued additional reporting guidance to commanding officers to ensure the first flag officer in their chain of command is aware 

of every sexual assault that occurs, as well as command actions taken to prevent 

future incidents. Although Navy reports of sexual assault increased in fiscal year 

2010, it is possible that this increase in reporting is the result of more sailors coming forward to seek help, providing a preliminary indication that our outreach and 

education efforts are resonating with the force. We continue to monitor this trend 

closely and focus our education efforts on prevention and bystander intervention. 

Our fiscal year 2012 budget request supports an emphasis on sexual assault prevention while continuing compassionate support for victims. This prevention emphasis includes 12 SAPR workshops in fleet concentration areas worldwide, execution 

of a pilot prevention program focusing on young sailors, our most at-risk demographic, and most importantly, a clear and consistent message from leadership at 

all levels that sexual assault will not be tolerated in the U.S. Navy. 

SHAPING MANPOWER FOR THE FUTURE FORCE

Our force stabilization efforts remain focused on maintaining a balanced force in 

terms of seniority, experience, and skills to meet Fleet and joint requirements while 

staying within our authorized end strength. We continue to execute the following 

measures: 

• ‘‘High-Year Tenure’’ separations for sailors at selected pay grades and 

years of service 

• ‘‘Perform-to-Serve (PTS)’’ reenlistment review process that requires conversion to undermanned specialties or separation in Zone A (0–6 years), 

Zone B (6–10 years), and Zone C (10–14 years) 

• One-year time-in-grade retirement waivers for select senior enlisted and 

officers 

• Early transition for enlisted, allowing them to separate up to 12 months 

before the end of their active obligated service 

• Monthly probationary officer continuation and redesignation boards • Annual performance-based continuation boards for senior enlisted in pay 

grades E7–E9 with more than 20 years of service 

Due to high retention, we are experiencing an excess of active senior Unrestricted 

Line (URL) officers. To balance the force and ensure sufficient senior officers are 

available at the right time in their careers to serve in critical fleet billets, we will 

conduct in July 2011 an active Unrestricted Line Captain and Commander Selective 

Early Retirement Board (SERB). This board will consider URL Captains with at 

least 4 years time in grade and commanders who have twice failed to select for promotion to captain. At this time, we project approximately 120 URL Captains and 

120 URL commanders will be selected for early retirement. 

We are projected to meet our fiscal year 2011 authorized Active end strength of 

328,700 and Reserve end strength of 65,500 by the end of the fiscal year. 

RECRUITING AND RETAINING A HIGHLY-SKILLED WORKFORCE

Last year marked the third consecutive year that we achieved officer recruiting 

goals in the active component and enlisted recruiting goals in both the Active and 

Reserve components. The Reserve component achieved 95 percent of our fiscal year 

2010 officer goal. While we anticipate that we will meet our aggregate recruiting 

goals this year, the increased demand for critical specialties in support of operations 

in Iraq and Afghanistan will present a challenge, particularly within the Reserve 

component. The fiscal year 2012 budget requests $292 million for our recruiting programs, a reduction of $41.8 million from fiscal year 2011. These programs include accession 

incentives, advertising, and recruiter support for our active and Reserve recruiters. 

To offset reductions in paid media advertising, we continue to expand our use of social media and other technologies to broaden our outreach efforts and generate recruiting leads. Navy Recruiting Command has over 135,000 active followers across 

19 prominent social media sites, to include 15 Facebook communities of interest. 

However, it is the face-to-face contact with recruiters in the field that is the cornerstone of our sustained recruiting success in attracting high-quality, diverse individuals, particularly as the economy begins to improve. Our budget request ensures 

that the recruiting force remains appropriately sized and has the necessary resources to achieve continued success. 

Accession bonuses remain critical to achieving our goals for health professionals, 

nuclear operators, and special warfare/special operations. To meet increased demands for these skills, we maintained bonus levels for nuclear officers and health 

professionals and continue to offer enlisted accession bonuses to special warfare/speVerDate Aug 31 2005 09:55 Jan 25, 2012 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00334 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6621 Y:\BORAWSKI\DOCS\68089.TXT JUNE PsN: JUNEB
329 

cial operations and other critical ratings. A favorable recruiting environment has enabled us to reduce the number of ratings eligible for an accession bonus from 67 

in 2008 to 6 in 2011. The fiscal year 2012 active budget request of $76.1 million 

for accession incentives represents a decrease of $39.0 million from fiscal year 2011. 

We continue to closely monitor retention behavior across the force and project we 

will meet our fiscal year 2011 overall officer and enlisted retention goals. While we 

have been able to make selected reductions in retention bonuses, sailor retention behavior indicates we must continue to apply bonus programs to critical skill areas 

that require significant investments in training and education and are less responsive to changes in the economic environment. 

RECRUITING—ENLISTED

In this fiscal year to date, we have met or exceeded our Active and Reserve recruiting goals each month. We continue to exceed Department of Defense (DOD) 

quality standards in all recruit categories as shown in Table 1. 

TABLE 1. ACTIVE AND RESERVE COMPONENT ACCESSIONS AND QUALITY 

Fiscal Year 2010 FYTD 2011 

(as of 30 April 2011) 

Attained Goal Percent Attained Goal Percent 

Total Active ............................................. 34,180 34,140 100.1 18,482 18,453 100.2 

Total Reserve .......................................... 6,669 6,654 100.2 4,685 4,659 100.6 

HSDG 1 .................................................... 35,995 95 percent 97.4 20,006 95 percent 98.5 

TSC 2 I–IIIA ............................................. 30,653 70 percent 83.0 17,818 75 percent 87.8 

1 HSDG—High School Diploma Graduate; DOD standard is 90 percent; Navy standard is 95 percent. 

2 TSC—Test Score Category (Aptitude Level); DOD standard is 60 percent; Navy standard is 75 percent. 

Last year, we were successful in meeting our recruiting goals for nuclear and special warfare/special operations ratings and are well-positioned to meet this year’s 

targets as shown in Table 2. These ratings remain our top enlisted recruiting priorities. 

TABLE 2. NUCLEAR AND SPECIAL WARFARE/SPECIAL OPERATIONS 

Fiscal Year 2010 FYTD 2011 

(as of 30 April 2011) 

Attained Goal Percent Attained Goal Percent 

Nuclear Field .......................................... 2,981 2,981 100.0 1,603 1,601 100.1 

SPECWAR/SPECOPS ................................ 2,153 2,144 100.4 1,034 1,022 101.2 

RECRUITING—OFFICER

We achieved our general and medical officer recruiting goals in the active component, but fell short of meeting these goals in the Reserve component as shown in 

Table 3. Although we accessed more Reserve officers in fiscal year 2010 than fiscal 

year 2009, a 13 percent increase in fiscal year 2011 goals and high officer retention 

in the Active component will continue to challenge Reserve officer recruiting. 

TABLE 3. ACTIVE AND RESERVE OFFICER ACCESSIONS 

Fiscal Year 2010 FYTD 2011 

(as of 30 April 2011) 

Attained Goal Percent Attained Goal Percent 

Active General Officer 1 .......................... 1,538 1,518 101.3 1,268 1,359 93.3 

Reserve General Officer 1 ....................... 1,171 1,213 96.5 629 1,414 44.5 

Active Medical Officer 2 .......................... 876 866 101.3 570 843 67.6 

Reserve Medical Officer 2 ....................... 349 387 90.2 203 395 51.4 

1 Does not include accessions from the U.S. Naval Academy or Naval Reserve Officer Training Corps. 

2Medical Officer includes Medical Corps, Nurse Corps, Dental Corps, and Medical Service Corps. 

Health care professionals remain a recruiting priority through fiscal year 2012, 

especially within the Reserve component where several specialties are undermanned. To address shortfalls among Reserve health professionals, the fiscal year 

330 

2012 budget request supports an affiliation bonus for prior service medical department officers, as well as an accession bonus for direct commission nurse corps officers with specific qualifications. Additionally, certain health professionals are eligible for special pays, school loan repayment, and a monthly stipend while pursuing 

a critical wartime specialty. 

RETENTION—ENLISTED

We continue to experience high retention across the force as shown in Table 4. 

TABLE 4. FISCAL YEAR 2010 ACTIVE NAVY RETENTION 

Active Navy Retention 

Fiscal Year 2010 Achievement 

Reenlisted Benchmark Fiscal Year 2010 

(Percent) 

Zone A (0–6 yrs) ........................................................................................ 16,930 12,600 134 

Zone B (6–10 yrs) ..................................................................................... 10,845 8,300 131 

Zone C (10–14 yrs) ................................................................................... 7,750 5,800 134 

Along with current economic conditions, our new policies are encouraging longerterm career behavior. Sailors are committing sooner to stay for longer periods of 

time. In addition, we are experiencing higher retention of female servicemembers, 

especially within our critical technical and warfighting skilled areas. Although this 

behavior affords Navy increased predictability of future personnel readiness, higher 

retention also contributes to increasing competition for reenlistment opportunities. 

Attrition, defined as sailors who are discharged prior to the end of their contract, 

declined for both Active and Reserve. For active duty in fiscal year 2010, we saw 

declines in misconduct-related discharges by 10 percent and training-related discharges by 12 percent from the previous year. Reserve enlisted attrition rates also 

continue to trend lower than the historical average of 28 percent. This is evidence 

of the higher quality force we are recruiting. 

We remain challenged in meeting nuclear retention goals as a result of what we 

assess to be a growing demand for Navy’s highly trained nuclear-qualified sailors 

in the civilian industrial base. We remain focused on retaining sailors with critical 

skills in high demand in the civilian sector, as well as sailors in specialties that continue to experience high operational tempo in support of OCO, such as special warfare/special operations and independent duty corpsmen. Our Selective Reenlistment 

Bonus (SRB) programs remain an important tool to retain these highly-skilled sailors. 

We continue to closely monitor retention behavior and adjust SRB levels in response to observed behavior. Over the past 16 months, we adjusted SRB levels five 

times, reducing the number of skill areas eligible for SRB by 31 percent compared 

to fiscal year 2010, and adjusting or maintaining existing bonus levels for those 

skills eligible for SRB. In fiscal year 2011, only 34 ratings of 84 receive SRB, and 

the pool of eligible sailors is 6.5 percent of our active enlisted force. This represents 

a reduction of over 54 percent in the pool of SRB eligible sailors from fiscal year 

2009. We continue to structure our award plan to target high-demand skill sets that 

remain relatively insulated from changes in the economic environment, to include 

special warfare/special operations, intelligence, medical, cryptology, and nuclear ratings. Our fiscal year 2012 active budget request includes $95.9 million for new SRB 

contracts, a reduction of $35.7 million from fiscal year 2011. 

The SRB budget for Selected Reserve sailors was reduced by 31 percent in fiscal 

year 2011, and further reduced by another 10 percent in our fiscal year 2012 budget 

request, reflecting a total decrease of $875,000. This reduction is the result of a realignment of resources within the Navy Reserve Comprehensive Bonus Strategy to 

target RC officers and enlisted personnel in our most critical specialties. 

RETENTION—OFFICER

Overall, Active and Reserve officer retention rates continue to increase in part due 

to targeted incentive pays, improved mentoring, more flexible career options, and increased emphasis on life-work initiatives. Female unrestricted line (URL) retention 

past the initial minimum service requirement (MSR) has increased in the last 4 

years in both the surface warfare (from 19 percent for Year Group 2001 to 33 percent for Year Group 2004) and aviation communities (from 14 percent for Year 

331 

2 Because Minimum Service Requirement (MSR) is different for Surface Warfare (5 years) and 

Aviation (7 years), two comparable year groups (i.e., includes women who are past their initial 

service obligation) were examined to more accurately capture overall URL female retention. 

Group 1998 to 27 percent for Year Group 2001).2 We continue our efforts to improve 

the health of Selected Reserve (SELRES) officer communities by 2014 through initiatives such as targeted officer affiliation and retention bonuses, increased accession goals, and Continuum of Service programs focused on ‘‘Recruit Once, Retain for 

Life.’’ 

We remain focused on junior officer retention, especially within select communities where we are challenged to meet our retention goals. Retention of junior officers for operational department head tours is a critical metric for monitoring the 

health of these communities. Although the overall loss rate for junior officers increased slightly from fiscal year 2009 to fiscal year 2010, the surface and submarine 

communities met their retention goals for the second year in a row. 

After more than 10 years of war, we are seeing increased stress on our Naval Special Warfare community. Sustained operational tempo, decreased dwell time, and 

deployment unpredictability have contributed to a decrease in junior officer retention, particularly at the lieutenant commander (O–4) level. Mentorship and increased access to family support programs and operational stress control resources 

remain our primary tools to mitigate the effects of stress on these sailors and their 

families. Additionally, our fiscal year 2012 budget request includes $7.4 million for 

targeted incentive pays to retain these critical officers. 

We have experienced slight improvements in medical community loss rates 

trends, largely due to competitive incentives and bonuses. Select subspecialties continue to require attention, to include dentistry, clinical psychology, social work, physician assistants, general surgery, preventive medicine, family medicine, and nurse 

anesthetists. Our fiscal year 2012 budget request includes $253.7 million for special 

and incentive pays to retain these critical medical professionals. 

We continue to conduct comprehensive reviews of many of our special and incentive pay and bonus programs to adjust bonus levels in response to retention behavior. In addition to adjustments to enlisted Special Duty Assignment Pay (SDAP) and 

SRB, we reduced officer bonuses in the aviation, surface warfare, and intelligence 

communities over the last year. Additionally, we restructured our Submarine Support Incentive Pay program to more efficiently address shortfalls at specific career 

points. We anticipate further reductions to retention bonuses for selected officer 

communities in fiscal year 2011 in response to strong retention behavior. As we execute these actions, we will continue to monitor retention rates and adjust our incentive programs as necessary. 

LEARNING AND DEVELOPMENT: NAVY’S ASYMMETRIC ADVANTAGE

Education and training are strategic investments, enabling us to develop a highlyskilled force to meet the demands of the Maritime Strategy and the joint force. Our 

fiscal year 2012 education and training budget of $1.5 billion supports increased investments in curricula, training technology, and instructors for critical mission 

areas such as missile defense, cyber, and anti-submarine warfare. Additionally, we 

continue to focus training investments in LCS to include the Virtual Ship Centric 

Training Strategy. Initiated in 2010, this strategy includes a series of seaframe variant unique and common simulators combined with actual seaframes to address multiple training needs for LCS. Simulators continue to present significant opportunities for increasing training capability, capacity, and effectiveness across the fleet, 

while minimizing stress on equipment and risk to the safety of our sailors. The fiscal year 2012 budget request supports continued investments in simulator technologies. 

We remain committed to the professional development of our enlisted and officers. 

Navy offers several college-focused incentives, including the Navy College Fund, the 

Navy College Program for Afloat College Education (NCPACE), and tuition assistance (TA). We continue to use management controls to remain within our fiscal authority. As part of the transformation of our Voluntary Education Program, we established the Virtual Education Center (VEC) in July 2010. Prior to the VEC, requests for TA were processed at local Navy College Offices around the country. The 

VEC provides centralized management of TA requests, sailors’ academic transcripts, 

and virtual counseling. This transformation has decreased paperwork and processing time while increasing the accessibility of educational opportunities for sailors. 

To guide sailors in their professional development, we created learning and development roadmaps that provide detailed information about required training, education, qualifications, and assignments throughout their careers. Last year, we comVerDate Aug 31 2005 09:55 Jan 25, 2012 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00337 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6621 Y:\BORAWSKI\DOCS\68089.TXT JUNE PsN: JUNEB
332 

pleted all 86 enlisted roadmaps, and officer roadmaps for 4 subspecialties: financial 

management, operations research, education and training management, and foreign 

area officer. We continue to leverage civilian credentialing programs through Navy 

Credentialing Opportunities Online, bolstering the professional qualifications of sailors in all ratings and increasing sailor equity in their professional advancement. 

To develop leaders who are strategically-minded, capable of critical thinking, and 

adept in naval and joint warfare, Navy has a progressive continuum of professional 

military education for E1 to O9. Junior enlisted personnel are able to pursue professional military education through distance learning while senior enlisted personnel 

are afforded the opportunity to attend the Senior Enlisted Academy (SEA) which 

graduated 455 senior enlisted sailors in fiscal year 2010. 

Officers have the opportunity to pursue advanced education through the Naval 

Postgraduate School (NPS), the Naval War College (NWC), other service and joint 

colleges, and several Navy fellowship and scholarship programs. For the 2010–2011 

academic year, more than 1,700 Active and Reserve officers (resident and non-resident) are enrolled in NPS graduate degree programs, including 245 international 

students from 46 countries. We expect that about 304 officers will complete Joint 

Professional Military Education (JPME) Phase I and 235 officers JPME Phase II 

through in-resident courses in 2011. More than 3,000 non-resident opportunities to 

receive joint education are planned for fiscal year 2011 through courses delivered 

in conjunction with graduate degree programs at NPS, Fleet seminar programs offered in 20 fleet concentration areas, and electronically via the web or CD–ROM. 

We continue to increase opportunities for Reserve officers to pursue JPME through 

Fleet seminars and Advanced Joint Professional Military Education (AJPME), a 40- 

week blended academic program to obtain JPME Phase II credit. These non-resident 

opportunities provide the flexibility necessary for Active and Reserve officers to balance joint education requirements with personal and operational demands. 

Cultural, historical, and linguistic expertise remain essential to fostering strong 

relationships with our global partners and enhancing our ability to effectively execute missions in multinational environments. In fiscal year 2010, Navy’s Language, 

Regional Expertise, and Culture (LREC) program provided language and cultural 

training to over 100,000 sailors and 36 flag officers heading to overseas assignments. In addition, we recently expanded the Navy Reserve Language Culture and 

Pilot Program to include all Selected Reserve personnel. The fiscal year 2012 budget 

request supports continuing efforts to enhance foreign language capabilities and regional expertise to include $24.5 million in fiscal year 2012 and $134.9 million 

across the FYDP for Navy Foreign Language Proficiency Bonuses to incentivize proficiency in languages critical to Navy’s missions. Our request also supports expansion of opportunities for overseas study, language and cultural immersion, and professional exchanges with foreign navies for Naval Academy midshipmen and full implementation of an in-country language immersion training program for Foreign 

Area Officers. Additionally, we will continue to participate in Maritime Security Cooperation activities and support the joint force in Afghanistan and Pakistan with 

enhanced language and cultural capabilities through the AFPAK Hands Program. 

COMPETING FOR THE BEST TALENT

We continue our efforts to attract, recruit, and retain the Nation’s best talent to 

meet Navy’s mission through recognition of Navy as a Top 50 organization. Top 50 

organizations encourage innovation and focus on performance, while taking care of 

their people through programs and policies that support a culture of trust, respect, 

and collaboration. In December 2010, Navy received several awards for Business Excellence in Workplace Flexibility from the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation, recognizing 

initiatives introduced in nine different organizations across the Navy to promote 

flexible work options while achieving business goals. For the second year in a row, 

Navy received a prestigious Workforce Management Magazine Optimas Award for 

its ‘‘Navy for Moms’’ program, becoming the first organization to have won back-toback awards in the 20-year history of this award and one of only eight organizations 

to have received an Optimas Award twice. 

Navy continues to receive recognition for its high quality training and development programs. In the 2 years since Navy began participating in the American Society for Training and Development (ASTD) awards program, no organization has won 

more awards for ‘‘Excellence in Practice.’’ Most recently, Navy was honored by 

Training Magazine as one of the premiere training organizations in the country, 

ranking seventh out of 125 organizations that were recognized. We remain committed to seeking out best practices across industry and benchmarking our programs against the best in the Nation. 

333 

We continue to compete for the best talent in our Nation’s colleges and universities. The Naval Reserve Officers Training Corps (NROTC) program has 60 units 

located at 73 host institutions with 86 cross-town institution agreements. Of the 

total 159 NROTC affiliated colleges and universities, 16 schools rank in the top 25 

of U.S. News and World Report’s Best National Universities of 2011, including three 

Ivy League affiliations. While the NROTC program has more than sufficient capacity for our current requirements, the Navy recognizes the value of engagement and 

presence on the campuses of American’s elite colleges and universities and appreciates the high quality educational experience provided to our future military leaders at these institutions. 

We recognize the value of diverse ideas, perspectives, and experiences to remaining competitive in an increasingly global environment, and our Navy draws strength 

and innovation from this diversity. NROTC made significant increases in diversity 

enrollment over the past 2 years. As a result, the NROTC class of 2014 joins the 

U.S. Naval Academy class of 2014 as the most diverse classes in our history. In recognition of our efforts, Navy received DiversityInc’s Top Federal Agency for Diversity Award, ranking number 5 of 30 agencies for excellence in leadership commitment, human capital, communications and supplier diversity. Additionally, Navy’s 

Strategic Diversity Working Group (SDWG) was recognized as one of the Nation’s 

top ten national Diversity Councils by the Association of Diversity Councils. 

Our internal survey data show that organizational support of life-work integration 

and the availability of flexible career options are key to attracting, recruiting, and 

retaining the talent of a new generation entering the workplace. Our sailors and 

their families continue to benefit from comprehensive parental support programs, to 

include paternity and adoption leave, extended operational deferment for new mothers, and expanded childcare. We thank Congress for their support of these programs. We continue to assess innovative ways to support life-work integration while 

meeting mission requirements through initiatives such as Career Intermission, 

telework, and other flexible work options. 

WOMEN IN SUBMARINES

This past year, the Secretary of the Navy and Chief of Naval Operations authorized the integration of female officers into the submarine force. This will enable our 

submarine force to leverage the tremendous talent and potential of the women serving in our Navy. For the first phase of integration, female officers will be assigned 

to two ballistic missile (SSBN) submarines and two guided missile (SSGN) submarines, which have the space to accommodate female officers without structural 

modifications. The first 18 female submarine officers commenced the standard 15- 

month nuclear and submarine training pipeline in 2010, and will begin arriving at 

their submarines at the end of this year. The plan also integrates female supply 

corps officers onto SSBNs and SSGNs at the department head level. 

We continue to examine the cost effectiveness of design modifications to all classes 

of submarines to accommodate mixed-gender crews without adversely impacting 

habitability standards or operational capabilities, as well as the manning policies 

necessary to maintain a stable and sustainable population of women in the submarine force. 

REPEAL OF DON’T ASK, DON’T TELL

Following the President’s signature of the statute authorizing the repeal of section 

654 of Title 10, U.S.C., commonly referred to as ‘‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’’ (DADT), 

Navy is actively preparing for final repeal. We will carry out the implementation 

process in a prompt, thorough, and deliberate manner. We are preparing the necessary policies and regulations to implement this change in the law and will provide 

training to sailors and leaders at all levels. The central message of this training will 

emphasize the principles of leadership, professionalism, discipline, and respect. 

Training will be provided using a tiered approach to ensure all personnel receive 

the appropriate level of training: 

• Tier 1 training will be provided to experts who may deal frequently with 

repeal issues, such as chaplains, judge advocates, military law enforcement 

personnel, fleet and family support center personnel, personnel support professionals, equal opportunity advisors, recruiters, senior human resource officers, and public affairs officers. Community leaders within each of these 

disciplines will develop and deliver the required training. 

• Tier 2 training will be provided to senior leaders and command leadership. 

334 

• Tier 3 training will be provided to Active and Reserve sailors, Navy civilians who supervise military personnel, and Department of Defense contractors, as required by their position and responsibilities. 

We are providing regular updates to the Office of the Secretary of Defense as we 

execute this training. 

CONTINUUM OF SERVICE

We continue to strive for a continuum of service approach to retention. Our goal 

for the continuum of service initiative is to achieve a seamless transition between 

the Active and Reserve components, and the civilian workforce, to meet mission requirements and encourage a lifetime of service. We are making progress in addressing the barriers impeding a quick and efficient transition between components to 

meet changing workforce demands. Since the establishment of the Career Transition 

Office (CTO) in May 2009, average transition time has decreased from more than 

30 days to 5 days. We recently integrated our Fleet Rating Identification Engine 

(Fleet RIDE) application, a tool that provides a comprehensive assessment of sailors’ 

qualifications for Navy enlisted ratings, with our Perform to Serve initiative. This 

further facilitates the Reserve affiliation process by providing each Active component sailor with information about Reserve opportunities and the ability to apply 

for a Reserve component quota. Additionally, we established an Intermediate Stop 

(I–Stop) to enable transitioning sailors to report directly to their gaining Navy Operational Support Center once they have made the decision to transition from active 

duty to the Reserve component. Finally, we continue to work towards implementing 

a Total Force Integrated Pay and Personnel System. Our goal remains to transition 

sailors between the Active and Reserve components within 72 hours. 

CONCLUSION

Our mission remains to attract, recruit, develop, assign, and retain a highlyskilled workforce for the Navy. We continue to: 

• Align the personal and professional goals of our workforce with the needs 

of the joint force, while ensuring the welfare of our sailors and their families. 

• Deliver a high-performing, competency-based, and mission-focused force 

to meet the full spectrum of joint operations. 

• Provide the right person with the right skills at the right time at the best 

value to the joint force. 

Our fiscal year 2012 Active and Reserve budget requests support the critical programs that will ensure continued success in delivering the human component of the 

Maritime Strategy and key capabilities for the joint force. 


511per1.eps
335 

YOUR MARINES

Americans expect their marines to be ready to respond when our country is 

threatened; to arrive on the scene anywhere in the world with minimal notice; and 


511per2.eps 511per3.eps
336 

to fight and win our Nation’s battles. To this end, the individual marine is the 

Corps’ most sacred resource and, as Deputy Commandant for Manpower & Reserve 

Affairs, marines are my mission. 

The young men and women who fill our ranks today recognize the global, protracted, and lethal nature of the challenges facing our Nation, and their dedicated 

service and sacrifice rival that of any generation preceding them. Marines and their 

families know that their sacrifices are making a difference, that they are part of 

something much larger than themselves, and that their Nation stands behind them. 

END STRENGTH

In fiscal year 2010, the Marine Corps achieved both its accession and retention 

missions and maintained its 202,100 Active component end strength. For fiscal year 

2011, we continue with this success, meeting all recruiting and retention missions, 

and the quality of our force has never been higher. 

Even with our retention and overall end strength successes, the Marine Corps 

must continue to shape our force to meet continuing requirements, fill critical military occupational specialties (MOSs), and retain vital leadership with combat experience. Bonuses remain critical to this effort, allowing the Marine Corps to fill hard 

to recruit positions, such as crypto linguists and reconnaissance. Enlistment bonuses 

also allow us to ship new recruits at critical times to balance recruit loads at the 

depots and meet school seat requirements. Finally, it is important to note that only 

8 percent of new recruits receive an enlistment bonus, and the Marine Corps budget 

for enlistment bonuses has decreased from $75 million in fiscal year 2008 to $14.7 

million in fiscal year 2012. 

Selective Reenlistment Bonuses (SRBs) similarly allow us to shape our career 

force. SRBs target critical MOSs and allow us to laterally move marines to these 

MOSs. There are currently 14 of 211 occupational specialties where the on-hand 

number of marines is less than 90 percent of what is required. It is critical that 

we meet our first-term retention goals. It should be noted that our SRB funding has 

decreased from $468 million in fiscal year 2009 to $108.6 million in fiscal year 2012. 

Your Marine Corps already provides the ‘‘best value’’ for the defense dollar. At 

any given time, approximately 30,000 marines are forward-deployed in operations 

supporting our Nation’s defense. 

MARINE CORPS RESERVE

Our Reserves continue to make essential contributions to our Total Force efforts 

in Overseas Contingency Operations. Over the last few years, as we concentrated 

on building our Active component to 202,100, we fell short of our Reserve component 

authorized end strength of 39,600. In 2009 and 2010, we refocused our recruiting 

and retention efforts toward achieving this end strength. These efforts included increasing our Reserve non-prior service recruiting mission, lowering our attrition, 

doubling our incentives budget from $12 million to $24 million, and expanding the 

population eligible to receive incentives. As a result, we achieved over 99 percent 

of our authorized end strength in fiscal year 2010. Though our incentives budget 

has been reduced to $8.7 million in fiscal year 2011, we project an end strength of 

39,589, less than 1 percent below our authorized level. 

Our focus has now shifted to targeting our incentives to critically short specialties 

and grades within units identified for future deployments in support of operational 

requirements. 

Company grade officer recruiting remains our most challenging area. Historically, 

our Active component has been the exclusive source of senior lieutenants and captains for the Marine Corps Reserve, and it remains a center of gravity in meeting 

our company grade requirements. Through our transition assistance and educational 

outreach programs, we continue to ensure that each transitioning Active component 

marine is educated on opportunities to continue their service in the Marine Corps 

Reserve. 

To compliment the Active-to-Reserve component company grade accessions, we 

continue to offer three recently implemented Reserve commissioning initiatives: the 

Reserve Enlisted Commissioning Program; the Meritorious Commissioning Program—Reserve; and the Officer Candidate Course—Reserve (OCC–R). Since 2004, 

these 3 programs have produced a total of 379 lieutenants for the Marine Corps Reserve. The OCC–R program has been the most successful of the three Reserve commissioning initiatives. It focuses on ground billets with an emphasis on ground combat and combat service support within specific Reserve units that are scheduled for 

mobilization. The Reserve Officer Commissioning Programs and affiliation bonuses 

are keys to meeting grade strength requirements in critical billets by the end of fisVerDate Aug 31 2005 09:55 Jan 25, 2012 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00342 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6621 Y:\BORAWSKI\DOCS\68089.TXT JUNE PsN: JUNEB
337 

cal year 2015. We are also looking at increasing the ceiling for officer affiliation bonuses to attract officers to chronically hard-to-fill units. 

Altogether, these programs, combined with our prior service recruiting efforts, 

should provide for at least 90 percent manning of critical combat arms and engineer 

company grade officer billets by September 30, 2015. 

RECRUITING

The Marine Corps is unique in that all recruiting efforts (officer, enlisted, regular, 

Reserve, and prior-service) fall under the direction of the Marine Corps Recruiting 

Command. Operationally, this provides us with tremendous flexibility and unity of 

command in order to annually meet our objectives. 

Our recruiters continue to make their recruiting goals in all areas in support of 

our Total Force. Our focus is always to recruit quality men and women with the 

right character, commitment, and drive. To meet the challenges in today’s recruiting 

environment, it is imperative that we maintain our high standards both for our recruiters and those who volunteer to serve in our Corps. We also remain mindful that 

the Marine Corps should reflect the diverse face of our Nation and be representative 

of those we serve. 

In fiscal year 2010, we achieved over 100 percent of our enlisted and officer recruiting goals for both the Active and Reserve components. We accessed over 99 percent Tier 1 high school diploma graduates and over 72 percent in the upper Mental 

Groups of I–IIIAs, both exceeding Department of Defense quality standards. 

In fiscal year 2011, we will again meet our annual recruiting mission, to include 

all quality goals. Additionally, we expect to have a strong population of qualified individuals ready to ship to recruit training as we enter fiscal year 2012. 

Filling company grade officer billets for our Selected Marine Corps Reserve units 

is traditionally our greatest challenge. As mentioned above, the OCC–R has proven 

to be the most successful of our Reserve officer recruiting programs. 

We thank you for the generous support you have provided to us and look forward 

to working with you to ensure success in the future. 

RETENTION

Retention complements recruiting as one of the vital elements of building and sustaining the Marine Corps. For enlisted retention, we seek to retain the best and 

brightest marines in both our first-term and career force to provide proven technical 

skills, experience, and noncommissioned officer and staff noncommissioned officer 

leadership needed to meet our demanding mission. 

In fiscal year 2010, the Marine Corps reenlisted 14,265 marines. This achievement represented a 28 percent retention rate among the eligible First-Term Alignment Plan (FTAP) population compared to a historical average of 24 percent. We 

also achieved an unprecedented 79 percent retention rate among the career Subsequent Term Alignment Plan (STAP) population, the highest ever, while maintaining 

all quality standards. 

For fiscal year 2011, retention achievement remains on track and exceptionally 

strong. As of April 12, 2011, we have achieved approximately 96 percent of our 

FTAP and 112 percent of our STAP goals, respectively. 

Our continuing retention success remains largely attributable to two important, 

enduring themes. First, marines are truly motivated to ‘‘stay marine’’ because they 

are doing what they signed up to do—fighting for and protecting our Nation. Second, they understand our service culture is one that rewards proven performance 

and takes care of its own. 

DIVERSITY

The Marine Corps is committed to making concerted efforts to attract, mentor and 

retain the most talented men and women who bring a diversity of background, culture, and skill in service to our Nation. Our diversity effort is structured with the 

understanding that the objective of diversity is not merely to achieve representational parity, but to raise total capability through leveraging the strengths and talents of each and every marine. The success of our pioneering Female Engagement 

Team program in Afghanistan, which is an offshoot of a similar effort we employed 

in Iraq, is one way that the Marine Corps utilizes diversity within our ranks for 

operational benefit. 

We are currently developing a comprehensive, Service-wide strategy on diversity, 

an effort facilitated through our standing Diversity Review Board and a Diversity 

Executive Steering Committee chartered to establish the foundations for diversity 

success in the Total Force. The Marine Corps has established minority officer recruiting and mentoring as the highest priority in our recruiting efforts. Along with 

338 

the other Services, we have provided timely input to the congressionally sanctioned 

Military Leadership Diversity Commission and look forward to release of the Commission’s final report scheduled for March 2011. 

KEEPING FAITH WITH MARINES, SAILORS AND FAMILIES

Just as our marines are required to be in a constant state of readiness, so must 

our families. Our Nation has been at war for a decade, placing unprecedented burdens on marines, sailors, families, wounded warriors and the dependents of the fallen. We know that in order to develop, maintain, and sustain their personal and family readiness and resiliency, we must provide innovative programs and services that 

are timely and relevant. Our approach to caring for marines, families and relatives 

of our fallen marines is based on our unwavering loyalty. This concept also applies 

to single and married marines, families, wounded warriors and marines 

transitioning from the Service. 

In his 2010 Planning Guidance, our Commandant directed us to ‘‘look across the 

entire institution and identify areas that need improvement and effect positive 

change.’’ Specifically, he directed us to evaluate all of our family readiness programs 

to determine which require enhancement and/or expansion and which can be 

streamlined to reduce redundancy. This is not just about efficiencies; it is also about 

effectiveness. As part of that mandate, we have been directed to continue our behavioral health program integration, institutionalize resiliency training, and reorganize 

and improve our Transition Assistance Management Program. 

Family Readiness 

In 2010, the Marine Corps increased baseline funding for family support programs 

by $110 million to ensure an appropriate wartime footing. Programs benefitting 

from this measure include: Unit, Personal and Family Readiness Program; Marine 

Corps Family Team Building Program; Exceptional Family Member Program; 

School Liaison Program; and other miscellaneous Marine Corps Community Services 

Programs supporting remote and isolated commands, deployed marines, and independent duty marines and families. As we continue the process of providing marines 

and their families with the most effective and relevant services, we are assessing 

all of our family support programs, identifying gaps and overlapping or duplicative 

efforts, and looking for opportunities to develop partnership programs and share resources with other agencies. 

Some of our notable accomplishments include the following: 

• Established over 400 full-time civilian Family Readiness Officers to facilitate family contact and provide critical information and referral services to 

support the resiliency needs of marines and their families. 

• Developed an inventory of Deployed Support and LifeSkills Education 

and Training courses to address the challenges of military, personal, and 

family life. 

• Transformed the Exceptional Family Member Program to ensure that enrolled family members are provided a continuum of care, while providing 

the sponsor the opportunity for a successful career. 

• Established school liaisons that form strong partnerships with schools 

and other supporting agencies to improve access and availability to quality 

education. 

• Implemented program and infrastructure enhancements at remote and 

isolated commands, including investments in child care, single marine programming, fitness and recreation centers, and recreational equipment to 

support deployed marines. 

• Increased Marine Corps child care capability from 64 percent to 73 percent with projection to meet 80 percent of potential need by fiscal year 

2012. 

• Partnered with the Marine Corps Recruiting Command (MCRC) to conduct the first online survey of all MCRC personnel and their spouses in 

order to assess their views on key quality of life issues (financial, housing, 

health care, communication, and services) and to determine any perceived 

gaps in support. 

Deployed and Warrior Support 

Deployed support is one of the most important services we provide. Our Exchange, 

Recreation and Fitness, and Communication services not only boost and maintain 

morale but also help to reduce mission-related stress. 

339 

• Exchange. Ongoing missions in Afghanistan include the operation of two 

Direct Operation Exchanges at Camps Leatherneck and Dwyer, and one 

Tactical Field Exchange at Camp Delaram II. 

• Recreation and Fitness. We assist in providing sports, recreational, and 

fitness equipment to units throughout Helmand Province with the joint 

support of USFOR–AJI. This transportable equipment includes sports/recreation cooler kits filled with sports gear and board games, electronic game 

kits, Theater-in-a-Box kits, and fitness equipment for use in austere environments. 

• Communication. Morale satellite services are available to forward operating bases, combat outposts, and other austere locations. We have delivered 13 satellite communications systems to units in Afghanistan. Each system has two phones that provide 6,000 free minutes per month and five 

laptops that allow internet browsing, social networking and chat/video capabilities to deployed marines. 

FAMILY CARE PROGRAMS

Exceptional Family Member Program (EFMP) 

The most tender of our families, those enrolled in the Marine Corps EFMP, have 

strongly endorsed the improvements we have made to their level of support and to 

providing a continuum of care. Year after year since our program expansion, we 

have gained the trust of our families. This is demonstrated through increasing enrollments and reduction in issues experienced by families relocating to new duty 

stations. I am proud to state that DOD and the other Services recognize our EFMP 

as a premier, full-service program based on the quality and efficiency of program 

operations. 

Our EFMP sponsors will always be an advocate for their special needs family 

member, but when families need legal help, our EFMP attorneys are ready to assist 

with obtaining benefits and services under Federal and State education and disability laws, special needs trusts, landlord-tenant issues, and other legal areas. 

In 2001, EFMP had 4,500 enrolled family members. This number has grown to 

over 10,000 today. We believe our enrollments will continue to increase. 

In the past year, we have taken multiple actions to transform the program, including: 

• Utilizing Family Case Workers to support families during relocation, deployments, and life events and to assist families with gaining access to 

medical, educational, and financial support services. 

• Establishing installation-level Training Education Outreach specialists to 

provide training and support for families and the programs that support 

them. 

• Utilizing a Continuation on Location policy that ensures the assignment 

and relocation process is sensitive to EFMP family needs and meets statutory stabilization requirements. 

In addition, the Marine Corps continues to underwrite the cost of up to 40 hours 

of short-term respite care per month for enrolled families. To date, we have provided 

more than 450,000 hours of respite care. Since the cost is underwritten by the Marine Corps, families are able to use their TRICARE Extended Care Health Option 

benefit for needed therapies and equipment. Nevertheless, challenges remain, such 

as: 

• the lack of portability of services for adults with autism; 

• the inability of military families to gain access to Medicaid; 

• the difficulty in accessing therapeutic and mental health support, such as 

adult and pediatric care; and 

• national economic impacts and subsequent State budget cuts, particularly 

at local and State levels, which may impede school districts’ abilities to provide special education services. 

To address some of the State access issues, we have partnered with the National 

Council on Disability to study this problem. Results are under review. 

Children, Youth, and Teen Programs 

Whether parents are working, experiencing family emergencies, or needing respite 

from single parent responsibilities connected to deployments, child care services remain a high priority quality of life requirement. In 2010, we provided 13,431 child 

care spaces and met 73 percent of potential need requirements. Within these totals, 

we are caring for approximately 2,500 special needs children. 

340 

The Marine Corps, with your support, is executing an aggressive military construction program and is opening six new child development centers in fiscal year 

2011 and five more in fiscal year 2012. Nevertheless, as you might expect, the demand for quality child care on-and-off installation continues to grow. To address this 

growing demand and help further define requirements, we are working on a Child 

Development Program and Facility Master Plan. This plan will evaluate on-and-offbase access, unmet need, and will provide prioritized recommendations for meeting 

the need across the Marine Corps. We anticipate results this summer. 

In 2011, we will work with Marine Forces Reserve and MCRC to identify opportunities to enhance availability of child care for marines and their families serving on 

independent duty and at locations that are separated from military bases and stations. In addition, we are partnering with the Boys & Girls Clubs of America for 

developmental youth programs, and working to identify ways to better support our 

youth and teens affected by a parent’s deployment. We have reviewed the results 

of the National Military Family Association and RAND Study related to impacts on 

youth from deployments and are considering ways to address this situation. 

School Liaison Program 

To help school-aged children of marines flourish in new school environments, our 

School Liaison Program partners with Local Educational Agencies (LEAs) to raise 

the educational capacity and academic performance of our military children. Supporting more than 80 school districts surrounding major Marine Corps installations, 

our school liaisons provide LEAs with information on Marine Corps families’ needs 

and access to beneficial training and counseling services. Marine parents have the 

comfort of talking with and being supported by a local education expert who provides meaningful insight and support to new transfers and those with questions on 

local education policies. In addition, school liaisons provide Marine parents with 

connections to online curricular resources that are linked to State standards, permanent change-of-station checklists to assist with pre-relocation planning and registration in the receiving school districts, online tutoring and other resources. 

Personal and Professional Development 

Our Commandant has directed the Marine Corps to conduct a ‘‘bottom up’’ assessment of our Transition Assistance Management Program and our Lifelong Learning 

Program to revolutionize the process, embrace best practices, and ensure we are 

providing the right educational and career assistance to marines leaving the Corps. 

Today, our program is primarily a training event. We have established a goal to 

transform this from an event into a process and to make the Marine Corps’ Transition Assistance Management Program a model for DOD. 

From 2009 to 2010, the Marine Corps conducted functionality assessments of the 

Transition Assistance Management Program and the Lifelong Learning Program 

and noted many deficiencies. In response, we established two Transition Assistance 

Operational Planning Teams in 2010 to assess existing programs. These teams identified issues, stakeholders and a conceptual framework for improved services and 

ways to integrate Marine Corps Community Services transition assets. Key stakeholders involved in this process include servicemember recruiters, commanders, 

Unit Transition Coordinators, and most importantly—our marines and their family 

members. 

With our predominately first-term force, we are committed to reaching our marines at designated touch points, helping them develop roadmaps that support their 

Marine careers, and better equipping them to reintegrate back into civilian life upon 

leaving active duty service. We have developed an end-to-end process improvement 

plan, are initiating actions, and are integrating existing capabilities that directly 

improve the quality of support provided to our marines. In the future, our transition 

assistance will become a personal and professional development process that will reintegrate marines into the civilian sector with the knowledge, skills, and abilities 

to better leverage their Marine Corps time and experience into meaningful careers. 

Some of our actions include: 

• Establishing the new Personal and Professional Development program 

and incorporating ‘‘transition assistance’’ with a continuum of services designed to fully exploit the potential of all marines and prepare them to 

transition to civilian life. 

• Establishing formal processes to initiate periodic lifecycle contact to offer 

education, career, and financial advice/counseling to marines and their families. 

• Creating an Individual Development Plan, with execution and delivery of 

required transition services. 

341 

• Assisting marines with navigating the Department of Veterans Affairs 

benefit process. Based on feedback from surveyed marines, we know they 

want and need this kind of assistance. To address this issue, we will modify 

existing websites to improve access and enhance opportunities for separating marines to speak directly to Marine Corps support personnel who 

are trained to remove benefit processing barriers. 

• Expanding public and private sector employment opportunities. We know 

from our surveys that marines do not expect a ‘‘job handout’’. Rather, they 

want to be leaders and strong contributors to our Nation. They have told 

us that they want to improve their networking skills and learn how to connect with employers and mentors. We are in the process of revamping our 

transition workshops to focus on these needs and are working on ways to 

incorporate more networking opportunities into our job fairs. 

• Connecting and expanding available educational opportunities. The Post9/11 GI Bill provides marines a wonderful educational opportunity. In an 

effort to expand this opportunity, we have initiated a Leader Scholar Program on the west coast which includes academic institutions who value Marines’ service commitment and pledge to provide them special enrollment 

consideration; we now have 75 participating institutions and have a goal of 

100 by the end of this year. 

• Assisting marines with education enrollment processes to enable them to 

gain access to academic institutions that provide business education skills 

that private industry demands. 

• Improving the current Active-to-Reserve transition process to better educate marines on Reserve opportunities to retain the best talent. An enhanced, streamlined transition process will increase the number of valuable, trained marines who consciously choose to affiliate with the Reserves. 

We believe our efforts will result in an innovative program that addresses the 

Commandant’s concerns, assists our families with their education and career goals, 

and meets the needs of our marines as they progress through their military life 

cycle, whether a single enlistment or a lifetime of military service, and transition 

to a successful post-military career. 

Behavioral Health Integration 

Sixty-four percent of our marines are under 25 years-old. Associated with this 

young force are inherent high-risk factors that include relationship and coping 

skills, isolation, combat-related wounds, and substance abuse. Furthermore, since 

September 11, behavioral health needs have become increasingly complex with individuals often requiring assistance in a number of areas at one time. The anticipated 

drawdown of marines deployed to Afghanistan will likely result in additional behavioral healthcare requirements as marines return and readjust to the garrison environment. 

Marines with three or more deployments have been identified as particularly at 

risk. As a result, our Combat Operational Stress Control (COSC) Program is currently developing a policy that will direct commanders to conduct face-to-face interviews with marines who have had three or more deployments. These commanders’ 

interviews will identify marines at some level of elevated risk, allow commanders 

to engage their marines (pre- and post-deployment), and provide an opportunity for 

intervention (medical and non-medical). 

As directed by the Commandant, we continue to move forward with fully integrating our Marine Corps behavioral health programs—Family Advocacy, Combat 

Operational Stress Control, Suicide Prevention, Sexual Assault Prevention and Response, and Substance Abuse. We have established a Behavioral Health Branch at 

our headquarters for Marine and Family Programs, Manpower & Reserve Affairs, 

and are working to ensure that the programs and services that stem from this integration will be seamlessly woven into the larger support network of command structures and the health and human services across the Corps and are in concert with 

building resilience and strengthening marines and families. 

Sexual Assault Prevention and Response 

Marine Corps’ leadership has initiated aggressive actions to elevate and highlight 

the importance of the Sexual Assault Prevention and Response (SAPR) Program and 

institutionalize a zero-tolerance policy. SAPR is focused on several key initiatives: 

• Prevention: Commanders are accountable for creating a climate in which 

sexual assault will not be tolerated and building trust within their units 

that enables victims of sexual assault to report the crime. Bystander intervention training has been identified as an evidence-based best practice for 

engaging marines in their role in sexual assault prevention. New videoVerDate Aug 31 2005 09:55 Jan 25, 2012 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00347 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6621 Y:\BORAWSKI\DOCS\68089.TXT JUNE PsN: JUNEB
342 

based bystander intervention training is in development with a completion 

date of April 2011. 

• Risk Reduction: Alcohol has a tremendous impact on the prevalence of 

sexual assault. Research on best practices for addressing risk reduction, 

consent, and raising awareness within the Marine Corps is forthcoming in 

2011. 

• Offender Accountability: The Trial Counsel Assistance Program and a 

Joint Mobile Training Team were implemented in 2010 to provide training 

for 40 Marine Corps investigators and prosecutors on best practices in handling sex crimes. Following-up on the success of the Case Review Project 

in 2009, the Judge Advocate Division Military Law Branch is reviewing 

closed cases of sexual assault to develop lessons learned. This information 

will be disseminated in the form of training techniques for investigators 

and prosecutors. 

• Victim Advocacy: During 2010, SAPR Program Managers were hired at 

18 installations to heighten sexual assault prevention efforts by serving as 

master trainers and reporting coordinators. A 24/7 Helpline was established 

across all installations to provide victims with emotional support, information on reporting options, and critical resources. 

Suicide Prevention 

During calendar year 2010, we saw a nearly 30 percent decrease in the number 

of suicides within our Total Force (52 in calendar year 2009; 37 in calendar year 

2010). Yet even one suicide is still one too many. It is premature for us to be able 

to identify what specific initiative(s) have resulted in this decrease. For the past several years, we have been, and will continue to be, engaged on multiple fronts: 

• Established a DSTRESS Line pilot in TRICARE Region West for all our 

marines, sailors, and families which provides 24/7, anonymous counseling 

designed to assist with problems at an early stage. The phones are manned 

by veteran marines, our former corpsmen, and by licensed counselors specifically trained in our culture. 

• Leadership engagement and discussion of issues at senior leader forums 

and Executive Force Preservation Boards. 

• Our ‘‘Never Leave a Marine Behind’’ suicide prevention training series is 

being expanded. In November 2010, we provided a junior marine module 

as well as an update to the existing award-winning NCO module. In development for release in March 2011 are SNCO and officer modules that will 

help leaders to manage command climate in a way that builds resilience 

and encourages help-seeking in their marines. 

• Working with the American Association of Suicidology to develop training 

programs for unit-level prevention officers. 

We believe our training and other prevention efforts will help our marines and 

their family members maintain readiness and win their personal battles. 

Combat and Operational Stress Control (COSC)—Resiliency Training 

Stress issues affect all marines and families regardless of deployment. Assisting 

marines who show signs of stress and preventing combat and operational stress is 

one of our highest leadership priorities. To improve their resilience, we are working 

aggressively and creatively to build a training continuum that better prepares them 

for the inevitable stress of combat operations and to equip them with the necessary 

skills required in coping with the challenges of life as a marine. 

Instruction founded and focused on our core values helps provide some of this resilience and enables effective operations, especially in irregular warfare and complex 

environments. A program combining the ‘‘best practices’’ of mental, spiritual and 

physical fitness will instill in our marines the resiliency to better endure the 

stressors of combat. 

Our COSC program’s goal is to help Commanders and Marine leaders maintain 

their warfighting capabilities and, with assistance from medical personnel, reduce 

the impact of negative stress reactions. By providing tools and resources to assist 

marines with coping with the challenges of combat and the rigor of life as a marine, 

our COSC program implements activities focusing on force preservation and readiness and the long-term health and well-being of our marines and their families. 

COSC, with other behavioral health initiatives, aggressively combats these problems 

by strengthening marines, mitigating stress, identifying those who are at risk, and 

providing treatment when necessary, with the overall goal of reintegrating marines 

back into the force. 

Our Operational Stress Control and Readiness Program (OSCAR) embeds mental 

health professionals in operational units and provides training that helps the 

343 

OSCAR team identify and mitigate negative stress reactions. The OSCAR team is 

comprised of three groups: Providers (mental health professionals), Extenders (other 

medical and religious personnel), and Mentors (selected unit marines) who are 

trained to quickly intervene when marines show signs of stress reactions. Currently 

over 1,900 marines are trained as mentors. 

In fiscal year 2011, COSC will sustain and improve OSCAR training by conducting a RAND evaluation, working with units who utilized OSCAR training while 

in combat environments, and providing refresher training to OSCAR trainers. Extenders are receiving formal OSCAR training at Field Medical Schools, which began 

in January 2011 and which also supports institutionalizing OSCAR enhancing resiliency training. 

Our COSC program continues to show positive results as indicated by outside 

evaluations and assessments. Despite increased exposure to heavy combat, marines 

surveyed in Afghanistan in July 2010 indicated increased protective factors including unit resilience, small-unit cohesion, perceived readiness, and improved climate 

towards asking for help. This assessment also revealed increased training effectiveness in managing combat/deployment stress and significant reduction in stigma associated with seeking behavioral health treatment. 

Casualty Assistance 

The Marine Corps’ Casualty Assistance Program is committed to ensuring that 

families of our fallen marines are always treated with the utmost compassion, dignity, and honor. Our Casualty Assistance Program actively seeks opportunities to 

improve survivor assistance and has a demonstrated record of taking quick, effective 

action as needed. 

The Headquarters Casualty Section is a 24-hour-per-day operation manned by 

marines trained in casualty reporting, notification, and casualty assistance procedures. Next-of-kin (NOK) are notified in-person by a marine in uniform—a Casualty 

Assistance Calls Officer (CACO)—and a chaplain whenever possible. Notifications 

are typically completed within 4 hours of receipt of the casualty report. Marine 

CACOs are there for the NOK—to assist with burial arrangements, applications for 

benefits and entitlements, contact with benevolent and philanthropic organizations, 

and obtaining reports of investigation. 

Within days of the incident, families are connected to representatives from the 

Tragedy Assistance Program for Survivors (TAPS), a nationally recognized provider 

of comfort and care to those who have suffered the loss of a military loved one and 

are experts at ‘‘taking care of the heart’’. TAPS services are no-cost and available 

24/7. 

Approximately 60 days following the death, we reach out to the NOK to help resolve any residual issues and let them know we are available to them for as long 

as they need us. 

WOUNDED WARRIOR REGIMENT

In his 2010 Planning Guidance, our Commandant reiterated his commitment to 

‘‘enhance the capabilities of the Wounded Warrior Regiment to provide added care 

and support to our wounded, injured, and ill (WII).’’ Moreover, he affirmed the need 

to sustain the Regiment for the long-term given the wounds of the war and that 

the Regiment also provides care for our marines who are not combat wounded, but 

are injured in training or other accidents, suffer from diseases, and other tragedies. 

Congress and the Nation may rest assure that the Marine Corps, through the Regiment, will continue to meet the Commandant’s intent and the needs of this Nation’s 

wounded, ill, and injured (WII) marines. 

The Regiment serves the Marine Corps Total Force—active duty, Reserve, retired 

and veteran marines. It is positioned in locations around the country and abroad 

in order to establish a personal relationship with WII marines and their families. 

Its strategic reach allows for resources and services to be delivered to WII marines 

and their families regardless of their recovery location. The Regiment maintains administrative and operational control of two Wounded Warrior Battalions located at 

Camp Pendleton, CA, and Camp Lejeune, NC. Each battalion has detachments located at military treatment facilities and Department of Veterans Affairs 

Polytrauma Rehabilitation Centers. The span of the Regiment extends across the 

globe from Landstuhl, Germany, to Okinawa, Japan, and throughout the continental 

United States. 

The complexity of WII marines’ care requires a heightened level of coordination 

between various medical and non-medical care providers. There is no ‘‘one-size-fitsall’’ approach to care and the Regiment delivers a cross-section of services and resources to WII marines and families. We continue to refine our support capabilities 

and grow our care model to ensure we promote healing the ‘‘whole’’ marine. Through 

344 

synchronization of our programs and resources and external programs, we strive to 

help each WII marine focus on their abilities to heal medically while strengthening 

their mind, body, spirit, and family through mandatory participation in programs 

covering a wide range of activities, such as academic endeavors, internships, physical fitness, and community service. Highlights of our program include: 

• Marine Section Leaders. The Section Leader combines the discipline and 

standards of the Marine Corps with an understanding of the obstacles WII 

marines face, while serving as their advocate to ensure coordinated medical 

and non-medical recovery efforts. Section Leaders are key to the recovery 

process as they oversee the integration of the Marine’s medical recovery 

process with productive and meaningful non-medical activities that build 

strong minds, bodies, and spirits. 

• Recovery Care Coordinators. The Regiment has a fully operational Recovery Coordination Program. Recovery Care Coordinators (RCCs) are assigned 

to certain active duty WII marines to help them and their families develop 

Comprehensive Transition Plans to define and meet their individual goals 

for recovery, rehabilitation, and reintegration. RCCs and section leaders 

work together to help WII marines transition. RCCs serve as the ultimate 

point of contact for WII marines to help them identify needs, define goals, 

and meet their goals. 

• Medical Section. The Regiment’s Medical Section includes a Regimental 

Surgeon, Nurse Case Manager, and Clinical Services staff who work with 

public and private medical providers to ensure the best care for WII marines, particularly in the areas of Post-Traumatic Stress (PTS) and Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI). They also work hand-in-hand with the Bureau of 

Navy Medicine to environmentally scan for new and emerging treatment 

protocols and advise the commanding officer regarding medical issues and 

emerging technologies and treatments impacting WII marines. 

• Warrior Athlete Reconditioning (WAR) Program. The Regiment’s WAR 

Program strengthens the marine’s body through physical activity and nutrition to develop lifelong healthy habits. Under this program, marines engage 

in both physical and cognitive activities outside the traditional therapy setting. Activities are individualized to the WII marines’ needs, and encompass 

over 18 areas—from aquatic training to yoga. 

• Family Support. Support for WII marines and families is unique and staff 

often perform non-traditional family support roles at all of its locations. 

Family support staff often work in hospital-type environments and rely on 

nontraditional resources, such as charitable organizations, Veterans Service 

Organizations, and Federal and State agencies. 

• Reserve Support. Our Reserve Medical Entitlements Determination Section maintains oversight of all cases involving reservists who require medical care beyond their contract period for service-connected ailments. The 

Regiment also has Reserve-specific RCCs who provide one-on-one support 

and resource identification for reservists who often residing in remote and 

isolated locations. 

• Transition Support. To enhance community reintegration, the Regiment’s 

Transition Support Cell, manned by marines and representatives from the 

Departments of Labor and Veterans Affairs, proactively reaches out to identify employers and job-training programs that help WII marines obtain positions in which they are most likely to succeed and enjoy promising and 

fulfilling careers. 

• District Injured Support Cells. Our District Injured Support Cells are mobilized Reserve marines located throughout the country to conduct face-toface visits and telephone outreach to WII marines and their families. They 

maintain oversight of the welfare and quality of life of all WII marines convalescing at home and all OEF/OIF WII marine veterans. 

• Sergeant Merlin German Wounded Warrior Call Center. Our Sergeant 

Merlin German Wounded Warrior Call Center extends support to marines 

and families through advocacy, resource identification and referral, information distribution, and care coordination. The Call Center has clinical 

services staff that provide immediate assistance and referral for marines 

with psychological health issues and/or PTS/TBI. Outreach is an important 

aspect of our non-medical care delivery and management. The Call Center 

also conducts outreach calls to offer assistance on a wide variety of issues, 

such as service disability ratings, awards, employment, financial assistance, 

education, and benevolent organizations. A recent feature to the Call Center is the addition of social media experts who actively manage the Regiment’s Facebook page. 

345 

The Marine Corps is committed to the long-term care of its wounded warriors and 

their families and will continue to provide for their care. As warrior care evolves 

and innovates, we will continue to adjust to ensure we are providing the best support possible. Your WII marines are highly motivated, focused on their abilities, and 

remain in the fight. The Marine Corps is grateful for the exceptional support that 

you have provided to our marines and the families who support them. 

CIVILIAN MARINES

Civilian marines provide an invaluable service to the Corps as an integral component of our Total Force. With a population of 35,000, the civilian workforce is as 

lean and efficient as our Active-Duty Forces. The ratio of civilians to marines is 1:6, 

compared to about 1:2 in the other Services and DOD-wide. Civilian marines work 

in true partnership with our marines and play an important role in current combat 

operations, research and development, and acquisition. They are critical assets 

which provide support to the Total Force, especially our marines returning from deployment and their families, and to Base and Station operations. Civilians are the 

‘‘force multiplier,’’ enabling our marines to accomplish missions across all aspects of 

expeditionary operations and warfare. Dozens of civilians are currently forward deployed supporting combat operations. The civilian labor budget represents less than 

5 percent of the Marine Corps fiscal year 2012 budgetary submission, demonstrating 

that our ‘‘best value’’ for the defense dollar applies to our civilians as well as our 

marines. 

CONCLUSION

As we continue to deploy and fight in Afghanistan and other parts of the world, 

the Marine Corps will be required to meet many commitments, both at home and 

abroad. To continue to be successful, we must always remember that our individual 

marines are our most precious asset, and we must continue to attract and retain 

the best and brightest into our ranks. Marines are proud of what they do. They are 

proud of the ‘‘Eagle, Globe, and Anchor’’ and what it represents to our country. With 

your support, a vibrant Marine Corps will continue to meet our Nation’s call. 

Thank you for the opportunity to present this testimony. 

Senator WEBB. Thank you, Secretary Garcia. 

Admiral Ferguson, welcome. 

STATEMENT OF VADM MARK E. FERGUSON III, USN, CHIEF OF 

NAVAL PERSONNEL, U.S. NAVY 

Admiral FERGUSON. Thank you. Chairman Webb, Senator 

Graham, and distinguished members of the subcommittee, thank 

you for the opportunity to review our fiscal year 2012 budget request. 

We believe our request appropriately balances risk in supporting 

the readiness requirements of the fleet, growth in new mission 

areas, and the essential programs that provide for the care of our 


511per4.eps
346 

sailors and their families. The extraordinary people of our Navy are 

serving around the globe, with nearly 50 percent of our ships underway or deployed. 

Our forward-deployed naval forces give us the flexibility to respond rapidly around the globe. We have witnessed this unique capability over the past few months, where naval forces on scheduled 

deployments were quickly on hand in the waters off Japan, after 

the devastating earthquake and tsunami, to deliver humanitarian 

assistance to the Japanese people. Simultaneously, halfway around 

the globe, our ships, submarines, and aircraft were on station in 

the Mediterranean to set the conditions for a multinational no-fly 

zone over Libya. In the central command region, naval forces remained on call to support our ground troops and Special Operations Forces. 

To sustain this force, we continue to adapt our family support 

programs to meets the needs of our sailors and their families. We 

monitor the health of the force through surveys and retention data, 

which indicate sailors are satisfied with their leadership, benefits, 

and compensation. 

Your support has made this possible. 

In developing our fiscal year 2012 budget request, we review current operations, our procurement profile, and readiness requirements. This review indicated the need to add approximately 6,800 

billets to the operating forces. To source these billets without additions to our overall end strength, we reduced or consolidated approximately 8,400 billets in the fleet, squadron staffs, and shore activities. 

Additionally, the Navy has placed end strength, previously funded by supplemental appropriation, into our baseline program for 

fiscal year 2012 and beyond. We assess that our Active and Reserve end-strength request will meet our 2012 projected requirements. 

We continue to attract, recruit, and retain the Nation’s best talent. Your Navy’s received over 20 national awards, over the past 

year, recognizing accomplishments in workplace flexibility, management, training, recruiting, and workforce development. 

On behalf of the men and women of the U.S. Navy and their families, I extend my sincere appreciation to the committee and Congress for your support. I look forward to your questions. 

Thank you. 

Senator WEBB. Thank you, Admiral Ferguson. 

General Milstead, welcome. 

STATEMENT OF LT. GEN. ROBERT E. MILSTEAD, JR., USMC, 

DEPUTY COMMANDANT FOR MANPOWER AND RESERVE AFFAIRS, U.S. MARINE CORPS 

General MILSTEAD. Chairman Webb and Ranking Member 

Graham, it’s my privilege to appear before you today. 

The Marine Corps is our Nation’s expeditionary force in readiness, and we’re ready to respond to today’s crisis with today’s force, 

today. The individual marine is our Corps’ most sacred asset. The 

quality of our force has never been better. Part of my job is to 

make sure it stays that way. 

347 

Regardless of any future force-structure changes, the challenge of 

shaping our force with the right grades, combat experience, and 

skills to fulfill operational requirements will remain. We appreciate 

your continued support for the tools and the funding to succeed. 

A top priority of our Commandant is to keep faith with our marines, sailors, and their families; and, through program improvements, and with your continued support, we are doing just that. 

Marines are proud of their eagle, globe, and anchor and what it 

represents to our country. With your support, a vibrant Marine 

Corps will continue to meet our Nation’s call. 

I look forward to answering your questions. 

Senator WEBB. Thank you, General. 

Secretary Ginsberg, welcome. 

STATEMENT OF HON. DANIEL B. GINSBERG, ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE FOR MANPOWER AND RESERVE 

AFFAIRS 

Mr. GINSBERG. Thank you, Chairman Webb and Ranking Member Graham. I appreciate the opportunity to come and testify before you today. Your committee plays a vital role in overseeing the 

DOD, and we deeply appreciate your support, in the Air Force. 

I begin with Secretary of the Air Force Donley’s recent words 

that our most valuable asset is our people. I recently returned from 

a trip to Afghanistan with Secretary Lamont and can report that 

your airmen are making an incredible contribution to the joint and 

coalition warfight. Whether in the realm of air medical evacuation, 

forward airbase resupply, close air support, or intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance, the Nation’s airmen are applying every 

ounce of their skills, talents, and energy to support their partners. 

We have a total force that is indeed fully engaged in today’s 

fight. We have deployed more than 42,000 airmen, and engaged 

significant stateside forces in support of global operations. There 

are approximately 10,000 deployed Guard and Reserve airmen supporting every combatant commander. 

Under Secretary Donley’s leadership, we are building on our 

longstanding commitment to taking care of our airmen and their 

families by establishing the Air Force Sense of Community, which 

is an outgrowth of last year’s highly successful Year of the Air 

Force Family Initiative. This plan will strengthen our ties to one 

another, increase our operational abilities, and ensure our Air 

Force community is best positioned to meet future commitments 

and requirements. 

In the all-important realm of wounded warrior and survivor care, 

we have significantly improved the Air Force Survivor Assistance, 

Recovery Care, and Air Force Wounded Warrior Programs. Our 

family liaison officers, recovery care coordinators, medical caseworkers, Air Force wounded-warrior consultants, and community 

readiness consultants provide immediate and direct care for our 

airmen and their families through recovery, rehabilitation, and reintegration into the Air Force or into the civilian community. 

Also, at the direction of Secretary Donley, we developed a plan 

to integrate the three Air Force component personnel management 

systems into one system. The strategic intent of this effort, which 

we call ‘‘3-in-1 integration,’’ is to establish a single, uniform system 

348 

for Air Force personnel management, optimizing existing systems 

already in place. This effort will greatly improve efficiency, personnel management, and promote uniformity in policies and processes, to the extent practicable. 

I look forward to answering your questions, and thank you for 

your continued support of the Air Force. 

[The joint prepared statement of Mr. Ginsberg and General 

Jones follows:] 

JOINT PREPARED STATEMENT BY HON. DANIEL B. GINSBERG AND LT. GEN. DARRELL

D. JONES, USAF 

INTRODUCTION

Chairman Webb, Senator Graham, and distinguished members of the subcommittee, we thank you for the opportunity to appear before you on behalf of 

America’s airmen. In an era of evolving requirements, diverse mission sets, and constrained budgets, our Air Force faces an ever increasing set of challenges as we seek 

balance between winning today’s fight and countering the threats of tomorrow. This 

objective will not be achieved easily and will increase in complexity as we realize 

the cumulative impact of being at war continuously for the past decade. As the Air 

Force’s Assistant Secretary for Manpower and Reserve Affairs and Deputy Chief of 

Staff for Manpower, Personnel and Services, it is our mandate to help deliver fullyqualified and ready airmen for the Joint Warfighter while meeting the essential 

needs of these airmen and their families. As part of this charge, we remain dedicated to ensuring we organize and develop our Total Force so we are prepared to 

meet the challenges of the 21st century. 

MILITARY AND CIVILIAN PERSONNEL BUDGET

Towards this end, our personnel budget submission reflects this focus as we have 

requested $30.5 billion in MilPers and $7.8 billion for CivPers for the regular component in fiscal year 2012. This decrease of $600 million in CivPers from fiscal year 

2011 levels is primarily due to a return to fiscal year 2010 manning levels. For the 

Air National Guard, we have requested $2.2 billion for CivPers to pay our Title V 

and Title 32 (dual status military technicians) civilians and $3.1 billion for MilPers. 

This is a $10 million increase over fiscal year 2011 primarily due to price growth 

in pay, BAH, incentives, and Retired Pay Accruals, alleviated to a degree by targeted program reductions. For the Air Force Reserve we have requested $1.7 billion 

for MilPers and $1.2 billion for CivPers. 

As part of our overall focus on efficiencies, the Air Force will not increase our civilian workforce to planned levels and will follow the Secretary of Defense’s intent 

to maintain civilian full-time equivalents near the fiscal year 2010 levels. This will 

require some workforce rebalancing and we are conducting a strategic review to determine areas where we most need our valuable civilian personnel in the future. We 

are conducting this review concurrent with the development of our fiscal year 2013 

budget. In order to maintain alignment of our workforce against our most critical 

missions and take care of our current workforce as we determine our long-term 

needs, we have recently instituted hiring controls to ensure the size of our workforce 

is consistent with our available civilian pay dollars. We will monitor the size of our 

workforce closely over the next months and adjust controls accordingly, but we’ll 

continually focus on maintaining the right skillsets for our missions and taking care 

of our civil servants. 

AIRMEN IN THE JOINT AND COALITION FIGHT

More than 97,000 Total Force airmen are currently forward stationed or deployed 

worldwide supporting combatant commanders. Another 133,000 provide daily strategic mobility, space and missile capabilities, command and control, and intelligence, 

surveillance, and reconnaissance to joint warfighters. In all, 43 percent of the Total 

Force directly supports combatant commander requirements every day. 

END STRENGTH

The fiscal year 2011 programmed Total Force end strength is 702,367 which is 

comprised of 332,200 active duty, 192,267 civilians, 71,200 Reserve, and 106,700 Air 

National Guard personnel. In the fiscal year 2012 budget, we have requested a Total 

Force end strength that will actually decrease to 693,099. Active duty end strength 

349 

will increase by 600 airmen to 332,800, and our civilian end strength will decrease 

by just over 10,000 to 182,199 civilians. We will also increase the Reserve end 

strength by 200 to 71,400 while the Air National Guard remains unchanged at 

106,700. Additionally, the fiscal year 2012 budget captures efficiency efforts through 

reducing overhead and support functions which will allow us to shift manpower resources to our warfighter and readiness programs. 

FORCE MANAGEMENT

Fiscal constraints and 16-year record high retention rates compel the Air Force 

to develop voluntary and involuntary programs to manage our end strength. At the 

end of fiscal year 2010, the Air Force exceeded its end strength of 331,700 by approximately 2,300 officers while meeting enlisted end strength levels. We expect to 

exceed our fiscal year 2011 end strength by approximately 900 officers and could 

reach well above this level by fiscal year 2012 if we do not continue efforts to manage attrition. We have reduced and delayed officer and enlisted accessions to help 

manage our total end strength. Since its implementation, nearly 13,000 reservists 

have become trained and available. For fiscal year 2011, we will conduct a Force 

Shaping Board for junior officers, a Reduction in Force (RIF) board for mid-grade 

officers, and Selective Early Retirement Boards (SERB) for lieutenant colonels and 

colonels. Mid-grade officers eligible for the RIF board will have the opportunity to 

apply for voluntary separation pay in lieu of meeting the board. Likewise, lieutenant 

colonels and colonels will have the opportunity to voluntarily retire in lieu of meeting the SERB. Our force management strategy is not a rapid resolution, but a carefully tailored, multi-year effort designed to manage the force along a 30-year Continuum of Service in a manner that makes required efficiencies while still keeping 

faith with our career force. 

ACCESSIONS

For fiscal year 2011, planned enlisted accession reductions are 2,135 but may be 

adjusted before the end of the year based on losses and retention rates. Planned officer reductions have been adjusted to approximately 300, down from 439. Reductions 

are realized in all officer competitive categories, with our rated force at 97 percent 

sustainment; non-rated line at 93 percent sustainment; and non-line at 93 percent 

sustainment. In fiscal year 2012, we anticipate few reductions in officer accessions. 

However, enlisted accession reductions are currently set for 2,037 but may be readjusted before the end of the year. In the past year, the Air Force Reserve experienced the most accessions in 16 years and the highest amount of non-prior service 

recruits in over 20 years. 

RECRUITING, RETENTION, BONUSES, AND INCENTIVE PAYS

We are completely committed to retaining high quality airmen in order to successfully carry out today’s missions as well as our new and emerging missions. America 

has the very best Air Force in the world, and it takes recruiting, developing, and 

retaining the highest quality airmen to maintain that status. To do so, our fiscal 

year 2012 budget request includes $30.5 billion in military personnel funding, including a 1.6 percent pay increase. Although our recruiting quality and retention 

levels are at the highest in 16 years, we are allocating $630 million for bonuses to 

recruit the right skill sets and retain experienced Airmen for today’s fight and tomorrow’s emerging missions. Our fiscal year 2012 recruiting activities budget request includes $65.5 million for recruiting activities and $70.6 million for advertising efforts, including a strategic 

marketing campaign which focuses on diversity and science, technology, engineering, and math. 

Similarly, the Air National Guard (ANG) is focusing its recruiting efforts on precision recruiting to fill existing vacancies. The Air Force Reserve has programmed 

$31.3 million for bonus incentives in fiscal year 2012 and continues to show positive 

gains in all retention categories. The Air Force Reserve uses its bonus program to 

meet the demand for critical skills deemed vital to its mission. Its bonus program 

has been pivotal to recruiting and retaining the right people to meet combatant 

commander requirements. Members with these skills are normally in high demand 

within the private sector. With continued funding, the Reserve will be able to offer 

the appropriate combination of bonuses for enlistment, reenlistment, affiliation and 

health professionals. To improve our chances of success, we have increased the number of recruiters working in the field to attract quality candidates. 

Even with high retention for the active duty officer force as a whole, there are 

still manning shortfalls and retention deficits in high-demand and new and emerging specialties that require bonuses as a part of a gap-closing strategy. These speVerDate Aug 31 2005 09:55 Jan 25, 2012 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00355 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6621 Y:\BORAWSKI\DOCS\68089.TXT JUNE PsN: JUNEB
350 

cialties, which contribute significantly to the joint fight, include contracting, control 

and recovery, public affairs, civil engineering, intelligence, logistics readiness, and 

many of our medical professionals, including mental health and other critical wartime skills. 

The overall Air Force budget for initial enlistment bonuses for fiscal year 2012 

is $14.5 million, providing 4 and 6 year bonuses ranging from $1,000 to $17,000. 

This helps us target hard-to-fill, chronically critical, and battlefield airmen occupational specialties, including airborne cryptologic language analyst; combat control; 

tactical air control party; survival, evasion, resistance, and escape; pararescue; special operations weather; explosive ordnance disposal; and security forces. 

The remainder of the Air Force’s recruiting bonuses attracts experienced health 

professionals in critical wartime specialties, such as physicians, dentists, nursing, 

pharmacy, public health, clinical psychology, and social work in order to more effectively meet validated health care needs. Increased operations tempo and outside 

competition are also impacting our ability to retain Health Professions Officers. To 

mitigate this situation, the Air Force Recruiting Service recruits Fully Qualified 

(FQ) Health Profession (HP) officers and Health Professional Scholarship Program 

(HPSP) candidates. 

While active duty officer retention as a whole remained strong through fiscal year 

2010, we still need higher retention in targeted year groups for specific specialties 

including contracting; control and recovery; public affairs; civil engineering; intelligence; logistics readiness; and certain medical specialties. In order to address officer retention concerns, contracting, control and recovery were approved by 

OUSD(P&R) in fiscal year 2009 as critical skills and are currently receiving a critical skills retention bonus (CSRB). The projected CSRB costs for fiscal year 2012 

are approximately $9 million ($2.8 million budgeted for control and recovery and 

$6.2 million for contracting). The Air Force also uses Cumulative Continuation 

Rates (CCR) to track retention by Air Force Specialty Code and by reenlistment 

zones. The CCR shows the expected rate an airman is likely to remain in the Service from year-to-year or zone-to-zone. Skills Retention Bonus (SRB) are also an effective tool for measuring targeted retention by AFSC and by zone. 

DEPLOYMENTS

As of 25 April 2011, we have more than 40,000 personnel deployed, approximately 

5,000 of whom are fulfilling Joint Expeditionary and Individual Augmentee taskings 

working with our sister services. In order to meet the growing demands of combatant commanders, Air Force 6 month tours increased from 12 percent of all deployments in calendar year 2004 to 65 percent of all deployments today. In October 

2010, the Chief of Staff of the Air Force established the Air Force’s baseline deployment tour length to be 6 months, which will be normalized for all airmen by October 

2012. Approximately 2,700 of our deployment requirements, or 7 percent of all deployments, require members to be away for 365 days. We are committed to ensuring 

we fulfill deployment commitments while taking the greatest care of our airmen and 

their families. 

As we continue to provide air, space, and cyberspace support to combatant commanders, we are leveraging the capabilities resident within the Active, Guard, Reserve, and civilian forces, to include deployments and mobilization. Reserve airmen 

support our Nation’s needs, providing operational capabilities around the globe. 

Today, Air Force reservists are serving in every area of responsibility, and there 

are approximately 4,300 Air Force reservists activated to support operational missions. Likewise there are 5,554 Air National Guard members deployed. In calendar 

year 2010, 3,739 National Guard airmen performed domestic missions under Title 

32 including U.S. air defense, border security, counterdrug operations, and search 

and rescue. 

Through our Overseas Contingency Operations (OCO), we have budgeted $1.5 billion in fiscal year 2012 and we invest in it as an equal partner with our sister services and coalition team members to effectively pursue national security objectives 

around the globe. We have a validation process for all OCO requirements and just 

recently implemented a prioritization system to ensure our Reserve component mandays meet the greatest need while remaining within our appropriated funds. 

As the Department of Defense builds its civilian expeditionary workforce, Air 

Force civilians continue to be a significant part of the capability we offer to the combatant commander. For example, deployed civilians are currently augmenting our 

Office of Security Investigations, intelligence, logistics, comptroller, as well as various headquarters support positions worldwide. In addition, civilian employees 

throughout the Air Force provide vital support on a daily basis such as aircraft reVerDate Aug 31 2005 09:55 Jan 25, 2012 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00356 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6621 Y:\BORAWSKI\DOCS\68089.TXT JUNE PsN: JUNEB
351 

pair, purchase of equipment and supplies for troops, continuity at home station for 

deployed military, and support for Air Force families. 

DIVERSITY

In a nation where about 75 percent of our youth are ineligible or unable to serve 

in an all-volunteer military due to educational or health issues, it is a military necessity to maintain a diverse Air Force to overcome today’s increasingly complex 

challenges. Our Active, Guard, and Reserve units throughout the country this year 

will participate in symposiums, career fairs, and expositions such as the Joint Women’s Symposium and Air Force in the Community. 

In the fall of 2010, we published strategic guidance to include a diversity policy 

directive and Diversity Roadmap, which provides priorities, goals, and specific actions for implementing diversity initiatives. Formalizing the Diversity Roadmap into 

an Air Force Instruction will provide the Total Force its final piece of strategic guidance. The vetted recommendations of the congressional-mandated Military Leadership Diversity Commission will be woven into the instruction. We anticipate completion of the instruction by the end of September 2011. 

We furthered the institutionalization of diversity by holding a Diversity Senior 

Working Group in October 2010. Showcasing senior leader commitment, we had participation from the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, Secretary and Chief of Staff of the 

Air Force, in addition to 60 senior leaders from the major commands and the Pentagon. They were challenged to promote diversity within their spheres of influence. 

The Air National Guard has championed this effort and created a diversity position, 

reporting directly to the Director, Air National Guard. 

As a result of our commitment to advocate equity, diversity, and inclusion at the 

U.S. Air Force Academy (USAFA), a Chief Diversity Officer (CDO) position was created and filled in December 2010. The CDO directs all diversity initiatives, policies, 

and programs at USAFA to advance inclusion as a core institutional value and increase diversity in all dimensions across its faculty, staff, and cadets. 

Air Force diversity is interwoven into our rich culture, heritage, and traditions 

and we will continue to emphasize the necessity to attract and recruit the bestqualified citizens to serve on our team, America’s Air Force. 

NUCLEAR HUMAN CAPITAL STRATEGY

Airmen must be specifically trained, educated, and experienced through professional development initiatives designed to create the capabilities and culture this 

no-fail mission demands, and our Nation deserves. We implemented several new initiatives to enhance the development of our nuclear airmen and improve the management of their assignments. Central to our efforts is the shift to assigning the most 

‘‘qualified’’ airman versus the most ‘‘eligible’’ airman for our key nuclear billets. 

Our new approach to managing enlisted talent gives us the capability to evaluate 

the entire pool of nuclear Senior Noncommissioned Officers (SNCOs) and select the 

right airmen for critical jobs, while also ensuring our nuclear SNCOs are vectored 

in the proper career sequence and that we are preparing them for future leadership 

roles in the Nuclear Enterprise. Our 2W2 (Nuclear Weapons Maintenance) and 21M 

(Munitions, Missile Maintenance) career fields have developed prioritization lists to 

ensure we assign the most qualified airmen to positions by order of importance 

within the Nuclear Enterprise. 

We also moved the screening of qualifications to serve in nuclear billets to earlier 

in our pipeline for our most stressed career fields. This led to greater efficiency in 

initial selection and training for nuclear-related positions, and more timely backfills 

for open positions. 

AIRMAN AND FAMILY RESILIENCE

We are totally committed to strengthening the resilience of our airmen and their 

families. Our leadership is committed toward building resilient airmen who have 

the ability to withstand, recover, and grow in the face of stressors and changing demands, regardless of time, challenge, or location. To heighten the focus on this area, 

the Air Force established a Resilience Division within Headquarters Air Force. This 

division will build a corporate program with two distinct yet integrated focus areas: 

Airman Resilience and Family Resilience. In addition, we established the Deployment Transition Center at Ramstein Air Base, Germany in July 2010. Since the 

Center’s inception, more than 1,420 selected airmen have participated in this 2-day 

reintegration and decompression program while enroute to their homes from deployment. 

We are also working with the RAND Corporation to develop a longitudinal study 

on families that will begin in summer 2011. This study will follow more than 5,000 

352 

active duty families while tracking their resilience across a full deployment cycle, 

before, during, and after deployment. The information received from this study will 

be invaluable on how we treat and provide care for airmen and their families in the 

future. 

In concert with The First Lady’s ‘‘Let’s Move’’ family fitness initiative, we 

launched Air Force ‘‘FitFamily,’’ which meets two of four goals of the ‘‘Let’s Move’’ 

initiative. FitFamily raises the awareness of the importance of physical fitness and 

healthy meals for the entire family. FitFamily encourages everyone to ‘‘Get Up, Get 

Out and Get Fit—Together’’ by registering online as teams, and achieving various 

participation levels through family fun activities, sports and fitness events, and 

healthy food selections. 

SUICIDE PREVENTION

Since 1997, Air Force has worked resolutely to decrease the number of suicides 

among airmen, civilian employees, and families. The Air Force suicide prevention 

program uses a multi-faceted approach to address the needs of a variety of individuals from different backgrounds and in different career fields. Air Force programs 

involve the entire Air Force community, including leaders, airmen, families, chaplains, and health professionals in preventing suicide. Recent suicide prevention initiatives include the addition of mental health providers in primary care clinics 

where airmen can obtain care without concern about the perceived stigma associated with mental health care. 

The annual Department of Defense/Department of Veterans Affairs Suicide Prevention Conference is another means by which our organizations and communities 

share research efforts, identify effective tools, discuss risk factors, and describe innovative programs. As our shared knowledge of the causes and risk factors associated 

with suicide increase, we are better prepared to create and tailor programs that afford our servicemembers, families, and employees the coping skills and help-seeking 

skills that minimize their susceptibility to suicide. 

EXCEPTIONAL FAMILY MEMBER PROGRAM

Over the last 2 years we assessed available community and family support services for our special needs families, uncovering inconsistencies in service delivery. 

With Secretary Donley’s approval, we implemented a new policy building an Exceptional Family Member Program (EFMP) which integrates enrollment and health 

care assistance, assignment coordination, and family support components into one 

seamless program. In fiscal year 2010, the Secretary of Defense provided $4.7 million in start-up 

funding, enabling the immediate hiring of 35 Air Force EFMP Coordinators to serve 

families at locations serving the majority of our 17,000 airmen with special needs 

family members. The Air Force is committed to funding these positions from fiscal 

year 2012 forward. All of our active duty remaining locations have a designated 

staff member at the Airman and Family Readiness Center to provide community/ 

family support assistance to families with special needs. 

Additionally, beginning in fiscal year 2012, the Air Force will add 36 active duty 

social work billets which will manage enrollment and assistance with health care 

responsibilities in order to improve coordination of care for high-risk families. 

SENSE OF BELONGING

The Air Force developed an actionable plan to institutionalize our commitments 

to Fostering and Maintaining a Strong Air Force Community; Strengthening a 

Sense of Belonging to the Air Force; and Improving Airman and Family Resiliency. 

These three objectives will be achieved and maintained through four key strategic 

focus areas: Housing and Communities, Airman and Family Support, Education and 

Development, and Health and Wellness. Policy and process priorities have been 

translated into actions and tasks that will be accomplished over the next few years, 

perpetuating the Air Force’s commitment to strengthening our ties to one another, 

improving our operational abilities, and ensuring our Air Force Community is best 

positioned to meet future commitments and requirements. 

We are delivering on this commitment by expanding child care through different 

programs such as the Extended Duty program, Home Community Care, and the 

new Supplemental Child Care initiative to provide flexibility in meeting child care 

needs. Through our Extended Duty Program, we are able to provide 14,000 free 

hours of child care each month, assisting members who work nonstandard duty hour 

shifts, weekends and evenings. Additionally, Air Force Reserve and Guard members 

are able to obtain free child care during drill weekends through our Home Community Care Program. Consequently, our Youth Program serves nearly 68,000 youths 

353 

in our before and after summer programs, part-day preschools, and youth development camps. 

Within our Airman and Family Readiness Centers, Spouse Employment Assistance is one of several areas where we have concentrated our efforts. We continue 

to work closely with our Service partners on the advancement of the Military 

Spouse Employment Partnership to increase portable career opportunities for all of 

our spouses. This year we completed six major Morale, Welfare, and Recreation construction projects valued at $29 million and three major lodging construction 

projects valued at more than $207 million. 

These projects and upgrades not only greatly improve our airmen and their families’ quality of life but also increase the readiness of our warriors to fulfill ongoing 

deployment commitments across the world. 

SEXUAL ASSAULT PREVENTION AND RESPONSE

Sexual assault is a crime that violates our core values. It undermines the environment of professionalism, respect, and discipline that we need to succeed. It impacts 

the victim, the unit, the mission, friends, and family. In order to better understand 

the extent of and circumstances surrounding the crime, we commissioned Gallup to 

conduct a confidential survey to measure the incidence (past 12 months) and prevalence (lifetime in the Air Force) of sexual assault in the Air Force.We provided a 

copy of this report to this committee in March 2011. 

At the direction of the Secretary of the Air Force, we did a top-to-bottom assessment of our Sexual Assault Prevention and Response (SAPR) program, looking at 

everything from leadership steps to prevention, response, and accountability. Our 

assessment included recommendations from Gallup subject matter experts, the Defense Task Force on Sexual Assault in the Military Services, and direction from 

Congress. We are currently moving forward with improvements to the program. The Air Force projected $35.1 million to execute the Air Force Sexual Assault Prevention and Response program for fiscal year 2011. The budget funds 199 fulltime 

positions and program funding for operational expenses for all first-responder agencies and field level activities. The manpower positions include 175 military and civilians serving as Sexual Assault Response Coordinators and assistants, and 24 dedicated investigative agents specializing in sexual assault investigations. 

We are committed to a strong prevention program, victim safety and care, and 

holding assailants accountable for their actions. 

YELLOW RIBBON REINTEGRATION PROGRAM

In addition to other Air Force programs designed to support our Air Force families, the Yellow Ribbon Program is a venue in which wing leadership, community, 

and State partners can address challenges facing airmen and their families during 

the deployment cycle. Through their Yellow Ribbon events, the Air Force effectively 

works partnerships with community organizations to ensure attendees receive information and counseling on a wide variety of issues through programs designed to 

help them during pre-deployment, deployment, and demobilization. These include 

programs on marriage counseling; services for children; substance abuse awareness 

and treatment; mental health awareness and treatment; financial counseling; anger 

management counseling; domestic violence awareness and prevention; employment 

assistance; and preparing and updating family plans. All these programs have tangible benefit for our airmen and their families as well as significant intangibles for 

the Reserve components. As Yellow Ribbon evolves our primary objective is to make 

a strong program even more robust and effective for those it serves. 

WARRIOR AND SURVIVOR CARE

Our Military Health and Non-Medical Care system achievements have significantly changed the face of war. We can now deploy and set up hospitals in 12 hours 

of arrival almost anywhere in the world. We move wounded warriors from the battlefield to an operating room within minutes leading to a sustained less than 10 percent died-of-wounds rate. This includes moving our sickest patients in less than 24 

hours of injury to be near their loved ones within 3 days to hasten their recovery. 

Since October 2001, we safely evacuated more than 86,000 patients. Our Centers 

for the Sustainment of Trauma and Readiness provide our medics with state-of-theart training required for treating combat casualties. 

As to non-medical care, the Air Force is fully committed to caring for our brave 

wounded ill and injured airmen and their families. In fiscal year 2010, we programmed $13.3 million to provide non-medical case management, support, and assistance through the Air Force Survivor Assistance Program, the Recovery Care Program, and the Air Force Wounded Warrior Program. 

354 

Our Wounded Warrior population has increased by 329 members to 1,043 as of 

March 31, 2011. The current breakdown by component includes: Regular, 762; Reserve, 131; and Air National Guard, 150. Of this total population, 635 or 61 percent 

suffer from psychological (PTSD) illness and the remaining 408 are recovering from 

injuries, including Traumatic Brain Injury. In this regard, we place heavy emphasis 

on the performance of our Recovery Care Coordinators and their ability to reach our 

airmen in all components regardless of location. In keeping pace with our growing 

population, the Air Force has hired 32 Recovery Care Coordinators to support 30 

locations across the Air Force and we have increased our Air Force Wounded Warrior Care Managers from 12 to 21 positions. 

INTEGRATED DISABILITY EVALUATION SYSTEM

The Integrated Disability Evaluation System (IDES) provides support to our 

servicemembers who have potentially disabling conditions. To date, approximately 

40 Air Force installations have implemented disability processing under IDES. 

Under IDES, there is a 5.3 percent rate of appeal of informal physical evaluation 

board decisions, compared to a 15.4 percent rate of appeal under the legacy process. 

For these individuals, IDES has the potential for retaining them in an active status 

for considerably longer periods of time compared to the legacy disability evaluation 

system. As a result, the Air Force is especially pleased to be working with the Office 

of Wounded Warrior Care and Transition Policy in developing the IDES Remodel 

to incorporate streamlined processes within the medical evaluation phase of IDES. 

PHYSICAL DISABILITY BOARD OF REVIEW

As a result of the 2008 NDAA Wounded Warrior legislation, the Department of 

Defense was directed to establish the DOD Physical Disability Board of Review 

(PDBR). OSD designated Air Force as the Lead Component to operate and manage 

this congressionally directed Wounded Warrior program. The Air Force operates the 

board on behalf of the Secretary of Defense and provides critical reviews for all uniformed services, including Army, Navy, Air Force, Marine Corps, Coast Guard, and 

their Guard and Reserve components. Since its inception, the board has received 

2,296 applications and adjudicated nearly 800 cases with an overall recharacterization rate of 58 percent to a disability retirement. 

The Department of Justice remanded a Post Traumatic Stress Disorder Class Action Lawsuit Litigation (Sabo, et al, v. United States) to the board for remediation. 

Nearly 1,200 individuals who were board eligible chose to join the suit. Since July 

2010, the board has made recommendations to the Service Secretaries on more than 

200 Sabo cases. Ninety-four percent of these cases have resulted in recharacterization recommendations to retirement. 

Since the Physical Disability Board of Review is a DOD board, OSD programmed 

the funding to the Air Force for the board’s standup and operations through fiscal 

year 2012. However, due to the extended operational requirement of the board and 

existing DOD policy, the Air Force will now pursue proportional reimbursement 

from each Service to fund current and future year operating costs. 

TOTAL FORCE ENTERPRISE

We are diligently working to develop a requirements-based analytical model which 

we hope will enable us to more effectively balance the mix of regular and Reserve 

component forces across the Total Force Enterprise (TFE) and put them to their 

most effective use. The end state we seek is equilibrium between demand, requirements, inventory, manpower, costs, and employment guidance in the new strategic 

reality of today’s dynamic operational environment. As we continue to utilize the Reserve component as an operational force, our goal is to design a process that will 

assure we are approaching force structure from a total force frame of reference and 

achieving the optimal balance of capabilities in a manner that is repeatable and 

transparent. 

CONTINUUM OF SERVICE

Continuum of Service is a personnel management construct supporting the most 

efficient use of human capital to accommodate varying levels of individual services 

commensurate with a member’s ability to serve either part-time or full-time to effectively meet Air Force requirements. This will allow the Air Force enterprise to more 

efficiently meet its human capital needs. In a collaborative effort, the Air Force Secretariat, Air Staff, Air Force Reserve, and Air National Guard staffs are developing 

and implementing Continuum of Service personnel policies, guidance, programs, and 

initiatives in support of Air Force Strategic guidance and Air Force priorities such 

355 

as modernizing organizations and developing and caring for airmen and their families. 

INTEGRATION OF AIR FORCE COMPONENT PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS

In late 2010, the Secretary of the Air Force directed a team of cross-functional 

leaders from across the Air Staff to develop a work plan to integrate the three Air 

Force Component Personnel Management Systems into a single system. This effort 

is charged to review, analyze and integrate not only data systems, but also organizations, laws, regulations and policies, processes, technology, and performance management. Our strategic intent is to establish a single, uniform system for Air Force 

personnel management optimizing existing systems already in place. This effort is 

known as the Integration of Air Force Component Personnel Management Systems, 

commonly referred to as 3–1 Integration, with a targeted initial implementation 

date of calendar year 2012, with follow-on actions through the Future Years Defense 

Plan. 

The integration of personnel management systems across the Air Force is intended to improve efficiency in Air Force personnel management; promote uniformity in policies, processes, and regulations to the extent practicable across the 

Active Duty, Air National Guard, and Air Force Reserve; reduce barriers across the 

components; enhance career opportunities for a Continuum of Service; and provide 

better service to our airmen. 

DON’T ASK, DON’T TELL

We are responsible for many Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell repeal actions, including the 

education and training of our Total Force. Every airman must understand what is 

expected in the post-repeal environment, including the continuation of the Air 

Force’s high standards of professional and personal conduct. To achieve this goal, 

we are aggressively implementing a systematic training program and updating numerous Air Force Instructions to implement policy changes on separations, accessions, recruiting, and sexual orientation. The dignity and respect of our airmen will 

remain a top priority, as always. In the Air Force, all airmen receive the opportunity to reach their highest potential in an environment free from personal, social 

or institutional barriers. 

CONCLUSION

Today’s airmen possess an unsurpassed commitment and dedication to service and 

are a credit to the Joint Warfighter and the U.S. Air Force. They enable our competitive advantage against our adversaries and deliver dominance in air, space, and 

cyberspace. For these reasons, we will continue to recruit, train, and retain America’s finest to serve our great Nation, and for their solemn devotion we have an obligation to provide the care and service they and their families deserve. 

Senator WEBB. Thank you very much, Secretary Ginsberg. 

General Jones, welcome. 

STATEMENT OF LT. GEN. DARRELL D. JONES, USAF, DEPUTY 

CHIEF OF STAFF FOR MANPOWER, PERSONNEL AND SERVICES, U.S. AIR FORCE 

General JONES. Thank you, sir. Chairman Webb, Ranking Member Graham, thank you for the opportunity to appear before you 

today and represent the men and women of your U.S. Air Force. 

These tremendously talented men and women—officers, enlisted, 

and Air Force civilians of the total force—are the backbone of our 

Service in an era of evolving requirements, constrained budgets, 

our Air Force faces increasing set of challenges. As the Deputy 

Chief of Staff for Manpower, Personnel, and Services, I’ll do everything I can to help deliver fully qualified and ready airmen to the 

joint warfighter, while meeting the essential needs of these airmen 

and their families. 

We are dedicated to properly managing our end strength. Unfortunately, with retention at a 16-year high, we are compelled to use 

voluntary and involuntary programs. We expect to exceed our end 

356 

strength in fiscal year 2011, and could experience additional 

growth in fiscal year 2012, if we do not actively manage our force 

levels. 

Our force management strategy is not a quick fix, but a tailored, 

multi-year effort. Beyond existing force management legislative authorities, we are working with the Office of Secretary of Defense to 

seek additional legislative authorities to provide us the tools to better manage our end strength. 

America deserves the very best Air Force in the world, and that 

is what you have. We must recruit, develop, and retain the highest 

quality airmen from the broadest landscape to maintain that status. Even though quality and retention are high, we are obligating 

a portion of our budget for bonuses to recruit the right skill sets 

and retain experienced airmen in our critical warfighting skills. 

Without these funds, we will handicap our commanders and their 

ability to carry out the full range of missions America demands of 

its Air Force. 

We are committed to strengthening the resilience of our airmen 

and their families. Our goal is to build resilient airmen who have 

the ability to withstand, recover, and grow in the face of stressors 

and changing demands. 

We remain fully committed to caring for our wounded airmen. 

We continue to provide support and assistance to the Air Force 

Survivor Assistance Program, the Recovery Care Program, and the 

Air Force Wounded Warrior Program, and will do so for as long as 

needed. 

In closing, today’s airmen have an unsurpassed dedication. They 

enable our competitive advantage against our adversaries and deliver dominance in air, space, and cyberspace. We will continue to 

recruit, train, and retain America’s finest, and we will provide the 

care and service that they and their families need. 

To that end, we would like to thank you for championing the 

post-9/11 GI Bill and the opportunities it has provided to many of 

our airmen and their families, including my youngest, who’s in his 

first year at Texas A&M University in computer science. 

On behalf of the Chief of Staff of the Air Force, we appreciate 

your unfailing support of our airmen, and we look forward to answering your questions today. 

Senator WEBB. Thank you very much, General. 

As I mentioned at the beginning of the hearing, your full statements will be entered into the record immediately after your oral 

statements. They have been, and they will be again, thoroughly examined by staff. There may be a number of follow-on questions, 

staff-to-staff, after this hearing. All of the information that you provided is valuable to us as we looking forward to marking up the 

defense bill this year. 

I have a number of questions. I think what I’m going to do, because of the nature of the subcommittee, is, I will ask one and then 

ask Senator Graham to go ahead and ask one. Welcome, Senator 

Blumenthal. We can just rotate, rather than any one of us taking 

up a block of time the way that it’s normally done on full committee. 

I’d like to start with this. Last week, I raised the issue, with 

Under Secretary Stanley, and also with the Defense Comptroller, 

357 

about the nature of the contracting force, the civilian contractors. 

Many years ago, I was Assistant Secretary of Defense for Reserve 

Affairs. At that time, we were flushing out the structure of what 

we then called the ‘‘total force,’’ which was the Active, Guard, and 

Reserve, and—shall we say, the formal civilian component of DOD. 

Since the post-September 11 buildups, we have had an enormous 

growth in civilian contractors, many of whom perform what, in the 

past, were military functions. We’re having a hard time getting an 

actual number from DOD as to how many civilian contractors really are on board at any one given time. So, I would like to ask each 

of you, however you want to do this, by service component, how you 

take into account civilian contractors when you build your manpower models. 

Secretary Lamont. 

Mr. LAMONT. It’s all part of our total force mix. Each Army military organization is required to maintain an inventory of all their 

functions to assess whether those functions are inherently governmental, closely associated, or not at all. From that, we determine, 

then, which positions can be converted to internal full-time employees. As we look at our total force policy, though, we look at all mix 

of all components, be it the Active Duty, be it the Guard and Reserve, be they civilians in our contractor mix—trying to create the 

most balanced and integrated total force that we have. 

On the Army side, you will find in excess of 200,000 contractors 

at any given time. Like you, we have some issues determining precisely how many contractors we have at any given time. Given our 

drawdown that’s looming—— 

Senator WEBB. Let me ask you one question—— 

Mr. LAMONT. Yes, sir. 

Senator WEBB.—on that, because this is one of the issues that 

came up last week. When you say ‘‘200,000,’’ does that include contractors that are brought on board through block operations and 

maintenance funding that goes out to the various combatant commanders? 

Mr. LAMONT. Yes, it does. 

Senator WEBB. It does? Okay. 

Secretary Garcia? 

Mr. GARCIA. A year and a half into my tenure, I shared the frustration with the challenge of putting a headcount on the contractor 

force. As we’ve wrestled with it, what we learn is that oftentimes 

a contract is let, and it’s up to that contractor, as an entity, to determine how many folks they’ll employ in that effort, ranging from 

folks operating in theater, obviously full-time, to part-time work, 

mowing the grass on bases. 

It came to a head during the end game of this year’s budget process, when the remaining variable, at the end of the process, was 

that contractor figure. What we found was that it was a less-thanstrategic effort to meet our numbers; instead, was applied, salamislice style, for lack of a better term, across the BSOs. 

We started a 2-month initiative, a total force effort to drill down 

to ensure that each of the BSOs has a strategic voice in ensuring 

what their contractor force should be, and that it does not become 

an afterthought. In the meantime, we continue to drill down and 

put a headcount on the number of contractors out there, acknowlVerDate Aug 31 2005 09:55 Jan 25, 2012 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00363 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 Y:\BORAWSKI\DOCS\68089.TXT JUNE PsN: JUNEB
358 

edging that it’s a challenge, in that how a given entity deploys 

their personnel is up to them. 

Senator WEBB. So, do you know how many contractors are in the 

Department of the Navy? 

Mr. GARCIA. Candidly, we do not, Mr. Chairman. 

Senator WEBB. It’s kind of difficult to place—— 

Senator GRAHAM. Within 50,000, can you tell us? 

Senator WEBB. It’s kind of difficult to place cost-effectiveness on 

the use of a contractor if you don’t know how many you’re using. 

Mr. GARCIA. We concur. What we do know is what we’re paying 

in—for contractors and for those services. What we’re trying to do 

with this 2-month initiative is, across the BSOs, make an assessment of whether we’re using them wisely across each one. 

Senator WEBB. So, you’re working toward finding a number. 

Mr. GARCIA. That’s right. 

Senator WEBB. Okay. 

Secretary Ginsberg? 

Mr. GINSBERG. Senator, we of course recognize that, in addition 

to all Active, Guard, Reserve, and civilian manpower, we have a 

great amount of work that’s being undertaken by contractors. One 

of the major muscle movements that we’ve been engaged in over 

the past couple years is a great deal of insourcing, where we took 

a look at some of the work that was being done by our contractors, 

and we saw that it actually would save money and did get the work 

done as effectively by bringing it back in house. We’ve been undertaking that process. 

In terms of tracking the amounts, we have a general idea. It’s 

around 215,000 over the next few years. But, in terms of the specific granularity, that’s a challenge that we’re going to work on 

with our fellow Services, as well as the Office of the Secretary of 

Defense (OSD), in trying to get that granularity that we need. 

But, we definitely recognize, of course, that there’s great deal of 

work that has contributed to the Service, and that—fluctuations in 

that realm have an impact, and that we need to address. 

Senator WEBB. For the record, we’d like to see your best estimates on those numbers, as we move toward the Defense bill this 

year, which means fairly soon. 

[The information referred to follows:] 

Mr. LAMONT. Army has 237,000 contractor full-time equivalents. 

Mr. GARCIA. The Department of the Navy (DON) (Navy and Marine Corps) contracts for services and/or deliverables. The majority of these contracts are based on 

outcome and/or performance. As such, current contractual practices do not require 

the reporting of contractor headcount or workforce full-time equivalent (FTE) workyears. As required in 10 U.S.C. 2330a, the DON developed a methodology for estimating FTEs (due to performance based contracting) that reported 249,821 FTEs of 

contracted workload in fiscal year 2009. As directed in the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2011, the DON is currently working with the Department 

of Defense (DOD) to adopt the Army methodology for estimating contractor FTE 

work years. 

Mr. GINSBERG. The Air Force contracts with private companies for the performance of commercial activities—we do not ‘‘maintain’’ any contractors. The size of this 

workforce is dependent on the definition used, but we have quantified three basic 

full-time equialvent definitions as found below: 

359 

Definition 

Fiscal Year 

2009 2010 2011 2012 

All Service Contract ...................................................... 230,000 215,000 219,000 

Title 10, Section 235 .................................................... 132,000 127,000 129,000 

Title 10, Section 2330a ................................................ 190,000 Under 

Development 

Definition Notes: 

1. Title 10 Section 235, Procurement of contract services: specification of amounts requested in budget excludes services related to research and development and services related to military construction via statue. 

2. Title 10, section 2330a, Procurement of services: tracking of purchases excluded portions of R&D Contracts (1, 2, and 3), leasing of 

equipment/facilities, and construction (OSD Direction in consultation with Congress) 

These amounts were quantified using a derived average cost calculation methodology to document the number of contractor full-time equialvents similiar to that the 

DOD used in the fiscal year 2009 Service Contract Inventory per USD(AT&L), Compliance Instruction for Inventories of Contracts for Services, dated 10 May 2010. Unfortunately, this is our only alternative since we do not have a data collection system in place that captures this contractor full-time equivalent information. 

Senator WEBB. Senator Graham. 

Senator GRAHAM. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. That was an excellent question. 

I know it may be difficult to count, but as we try to figure out 

what force we can afford and pay for, and where’s the best investment of taxpayer dollars, I think is very important that we understand, generally speaking, how many contractors we have. 

That gets us back to numbers of people available for the fight. 

Secretary Lamont and General Bostick, I understand there are 

20,000 Army personnel awaiting disability evaluation boards, or in 

that system. We’re supposed to draw the Army down by 22,000 

over the next couple of years. What are we doing to get the people 

through the system? That’s 42,000 people, over the next couple 

years, that will be lost to the fight. How does that impact the 

Army? Nondeployable really means you can’t go to the fight. 

Doesn’t mean you can’t contribute, but it does take away. 

General BOSTICK. Yes, Senator. The nondeployable situation is 

just one factor in our overall challenges in manning the force. Congress helped us with the 22,000 temporary end strength increase, 

and that allowed us to account for not only the nondeployables, but 

the wounded warriors, and the fact that we had to stop using stoploss. So, all of that 22,0000 is being utilized today. 

Additionally, we were supposed to stand up three additional brigade combat teams, and we did not do that. We did not apply 

structure to it. So, that gave us another 10,000 or so to work with. 

Having said that, it’s bigger than the nondeployable issue, which 

we’re working. It’s also the fact that we’re going to come down the 

22,000, then come down 27,000. We’re going to do that in an environment where we’re still fighting a war. But, the physical disability evaluation system (DES), in the process, despite all of our 

efforts and despite all of the leadership that has gone into it—it is 

not functioning at a pace that is keeping up with the number of 

soldiers that go in there. So, it grows every month, as opposed to— 

the input is much higher than the output. 

So, we are working very closely with OSD to figure out how we 

can streamline it. We’ve worked closely with the VA on the integrated DES. So, instead of doing two physicals, we now do one 

physical. But, it takes more time on the Army time. 

360 

But, the bottom line is, I think we have an antiquated medical, 

physical DES that needs to be revamped for the war that we’re in, 

and to really meet the needs of Active, Guard, and Reserve soldiers 

and other military needs. 

Mr. LAMONT. If I might just add the DES is complex, disjointed, 

hard to understand, and takes way too long. That’s the good news. 

On top of that, it is, as you say, highly inefficient and truly does 

impact our readiness. We have to get a grip on this, and we are 

making every effort to do that, as we move hopefully to get to a 

single—— 

Senator GRAHAM. I understand it’s frustrating. It’s a balance 

here. You just can’t throw people out. Most people want to stay. 

Being told you’re disabled and unable to serve is a dramatic event. 

Some people obviously can’t, and they need to be separated with 

dignity and quickly, and given the best treatment possible. You 

need a process that will convince people, who are challenging their 

decision, that they’re not able to stay in—fair renderings of evaluations. Just let us know what we can do to help. This is a major 

problem for the country. 

Mr. LAMONT. It’s not all medical-related. We will find legal, being 

a fellow JAG—our legal issues, particularly on the due-process 

side, have expanded over the past 10 years. There are various 

other slices that contribute to the problem. But, medical is our 

largest. 

Thank you. 

Senator WEBB. Let me, if I may, add something on this—but the 

disability evaluation process—is much more complex than any civilian model that people may try to use. I say this as someone who 

worked for 4 years as committee counsel on the House Veterans Affairs Committee, years ago, and represented many veterans—pro 

bono, by the way—on their disability claims. It’s not simply people 

who are trying to stay in, and want to stay in; there are a lot of 

people who want to get on with their lives and, at the same time, 

have suffered some sort of permanent disability, with respect to 

having served their country. 

Disability law evolved out of the old private bills in Congress, 

where people who would have in other wars, would have had no 

recourse except for to get a Member of Congress to come in and 

say, ‘‘My constituent lost a leg and we’d like the government to sort 

of help him out.’’ So, part of it is whether an individual is able to 

stay on Active Duty. Another part of it is simply compensating people—citizen soldiers, who have served—for any injuries and disabilities that they incurred when they stepped forward to serve their 

country. 

I’m a little worried here. This is the reason that I’m raising this. 

I’m a little worried with this joint single-disability evaluation, because, in history, there are always two separate evaluations. There 

was the evaluation as to whether or not someone was fit to remain 

on Active Duty, and then, the second one, with the Veterans Administration (VA), was a lifetime evaluation. You could leave the 

military with a 10-percent incurred disability during your military 

service, but that disability could get worse as you get older; and 

when you’re 55, 60, 65 years old, the VA, appropriately, could rate 

you as, say, 60-percent disabled. 

361 

What we’re seeing right now, first of all, is a logjam, which is 

what Senator Graham is talking about. A lot of people who want 

to get out, who are ready to move on, who’ve done their time, can’t 

get out. They’re stuck on Active Duty until this process unwinds. 

Then, the second one is, there are people who are going to leave 

the military with a fairly small incurred disability that, over their 

lifetime, is going to grow. It’s appropriate for us to take that into 

account, as well. 

Do you want to add anything, Senator? 

Senator GRAHAM. I agree. 

Senator WEBB. Yes. All right. 

Senator Blumenthal. 

Senator BLUMENTHAL. Thank you, Senator Webb. 

Thank every one of you, for your service to the Nation, and to 

the people who serve with you, and particularly your work on recruiting and training the best-qualified people who are entering the 

military, and people given such talent and skills, as we’ve just seen 

over the last couple of weeks. The briefings that we’ve received 

have emphasized that the triumph was an all-service triumph, 

truly. Although the Navy Seals are the ones in the spotlight, the 

training and the qualifications that you are instilling, I think, are 

seen not only at the tip of the spear, but throughout the armed 

services. This leads me to the question, focusing on the end, when 

these folks leave the military; among them, the most talented and 

dedicated in their age group, receiving tremendous training, and 

those skills may not be directly applicable to civilian needs, but 

they then become among the highest unemployed in the whole 

country. Depending on which numbers you pick, or which ages and 

so forth, their rates are multiples of the civilian populace, which 

seems to me not only unjust and unfair, but unproductive. 

I have a general question, which I’d like to pose to you. I know 

time may not permit, and you may not have been fully prepared 

for this question. So, I would welcome anything you have, to follow 

in writing later. But, I think this is profoundly important for the 

whole Nation. 

Why is it that the unemployment rates are so high among that 

20- to 30-year age group? What can we do about it? I’ve looked at 

the testimony, and there’s not a lot in here, but I would welcome 

any comments that you have. 

Secretary Garcia? 

Mr. GARCIA. Thank you, Senator. Thanks for raising the issue, 

and I speak for the Navy and the Marine Corps when I say that, 

candidly, our Transition Assistance Program (TAP) has not been 

sufficient. A 3- to 4-day evolution, required on the Marine side; but, 

the reality is, it’s not been sophisticated enough, it’s not been tailored for the individual. At a time when your Marine Corps is 60 

percent under 25 years old, 40 percent lance corporal or junior, 

when that junior marine gets out—it’s highly likely that he or she 

enlisted right out of high school, has never put a resume together, 

and he’s in the same room, going through the same seminar as O– 

5, O–6, who has a different set of needs as he or she makes their 

transition. 

What my colleagues and I are in the process of rolling out, a focused effort, a joint effort with the VA, with the Department of 

362 

Labor. It’s a TAP 2.0, if you will, a new TAP that’ll roll out, Veterans Day, this November—that instead of being a 3- to 4-day generic slice of what one could expect, it’ll be focused and tailored for 

the individual, not just a 1-week evolution, but one that a member 

can reach back to in the weeks and months to come, that will address what we know to be a major chokepoint in hiring, that is, 

translating the skills that a member learned in the Navy or the 

Marine Corps into terms that are applicable for industry, that will 

have avenues for spouse engagement, as well. In many cases, we 

know that these days, they’re the principal breadwinner. It will be 

an ongoing engagement. It’ll also, at the same time, address veterans’ benefits, access to the Reserves, and be an all-around, 360 

revisitation or reformation of the TAP experience. 

Senator BLUMENTHAL. I was actually going to ask whether a sort 

of re-TAP, or second-round TAP, once somebody gets home, or 

where that person is going to call home, might make some sense. 

But, it sounds like you’re pursuing that approach. 

Mr. GARCIA. I think it’s going to be productive, Senator. 

Senator BLUMENTHAL. Thank you very much. 

Senator WEBB. Senator Ayotte. 

Senator AYOTTE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

I want to thank all the witnesses who are here, for your testimony and for your leadership, for your service to our country, and 

to all of those that serve underneath you. 

Lieutenant General Bostick and the other panel members, I’m 

pleased to see, in your written statements, your repeated recognition of the critical contributions that our guardsmen and women 

have been playing, in terms of our national security. As we all 

know now, they are an operational force. We’ve needed their assistance to conduct the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, and it’s been 

critical. 

I want to follow up on actually a question that Senator 

Blumenthal asked you about. In the Guard and Reserve, the issue 

of unemployment—when you get back from a deployment, go back 

into your community, you’re in a setting where you are not necessarily on a base, where you might get put right back in a civilian 

setting, where others might not understand or appreciate the experience you’ve gone through, and then also with the unique challenges of dealing with employment in a context where you’re a civilian worker, and then you’re called away and come back. 

We have a program in New Hampshire called the Deployment 

Cycle Support Program, that’s been a great public-private partnership that I’ve talked to many of your colleagues before our Armed 

Services Committee about. In the fiscal year 2011 Defense appropriation, there was $16 million allotted for outreach and reintegration services under the Yellow Ribbon Reintegration Program. I 

spoke with Secretary McCarthy last week about this program. 

Last week, Secretary McCarthy assured me that critical funds to 

continue, in our State, this Deployment Cycle Support Program, 

which has been very successful, in terms of measurable metrics, on 

reducing unemployment, on making sure that our guardsmen and 

women get the appropriate support on the mental health end and 

other services they need when they return, to cover the whole deployment cycle, are there. There were many of us that joined on a 

363 

letter. There were eight States that have these types of programs. 

Secretary McCarthy assured me that these funds that were allocated in fiscal year 2011 were making their way through the system to the National Guard Bureau and then to the eight States, 

including New Hampshire. 

A week has passed, and many of the States—I can speak for my 

own, New Hampshire—are approaching the deadlines for putting 

this funding in place. If we delay any longer, we’re going to risk 

a gap in service that will directly hurt our troops and our families. 

So, I would like to ask either Assistant Secretary Lamont or 

Lieutenant General Bostick, or whoever is the most appropriate individual to answer this question, Can you tell me the status of 

where these funds are and when these funds will be provided to 

the National Guard Bureau and distributed the eight States who 

have these model programs? 

We need a national way to address this. I’m proud that my State 

has a model that I think is a good one for everyone to examine, it’s 

an efficient use of funds. It also brings the private sector in, which 

I think is very important. So I would urge you all to look at that 

on a national basis. 

But, right now, I’m concerned about New Hampshire, and wondered where we were at in getting those funds to continue that program. 

Mr. LAMONT. I’ll take the first stab at it. 

Senator AYOTTE. Thank you. 

Mr. LAMONT. Which—it’s a very serious question, and we appreciate the question. But, quite candidly, I cannot tell you the status 

of those funds right now. We will try to get you an appropriate answer as soon as we can. 

[The information referred to follows:] 

On May 13, 2011, the State of New Hampshire received $2 million from the $16 

million outreach funding that was appropriated by Congress in the fiscal year 2011 

budget. 

Mr. LAMONT. As a 26-year guardsman, I can tell you I share your 

concern, here. As we do any kind of transition with Reserve component forces, it’s always considerably different because of their location, the geographic differences from an installation which has 

quite a bit more service and support available to the returning veterans on the active side—we’re very concerned about our transition 

efforts for our Reserve component. 

We have a Yellow Ribbon Integration Program. We do try very 

hard to have employer-support relationships. We do have a regional service, medical centers. 

The employment situation really is a great concern. This goes, 

also, to Senator Blumenthal’s question. That cohort is not an easy 

one to help right now. We’re making every effort, as I say, to bring 

in these employer relationships, set them up into our Yellow Ribbon Programs, to have them on the ground, there, to meet with 

them. 

Also, I think the Reserves has a new program—it’s called a ‘‘Helmets to Hardhats Program’’—in which we have any number of 

skills—for instance, if you’re a military police soldier, do you need 

to go back and requalify in your State to be a law enforcement officer? Do you need to take that over-the-road test for a commercial 

364 

driver’s license if you are fully qualified in the transportation end? 

We are trying to find any number of those partnership linkages 

where it will assist them in going forward, back in their home 

States. 

Senator AYOTTE. I very much appreciate what you’re saying. We 

would love to have you up to our State to take a look at it and— 

because we’ve bridged those partnerships, and we’re keeping 

metrics on issues like deployment retention, homelessness, unemployment, mental health. We’ve had instances where we’ve actually 

saved someone from committing suicide. So, I think that things always start, hopefully, as a pilot. You get measurable metrics and 

go forward. So, please come to visit New Hampshire. 

I would also say, I’m hoping, in the short term—I would very 

much like an answer on where we are on the status of the funds. 

So, if you could follow up, or if—unless someone else on the panel 

has the answer—with the status of that, it’s something that’s an 

immediate need. We know it’s there, and Secretary McCarthy is 

committed to getting those funds where they’re needed. So, I would 

appreciate that. 

Mr. LAMONT. Thank you. 

General BOSTICK. Senator, we’ll follow up. We don’t have the answer to that today. 

[The information referred to follows:] 

On May 13, 2011, the State of New Hampshire received $2 million from the $16 

million outreach funding that was appropriated by Congress in the fiscal year 2011 

budget. 

General BOSTICK. But, I did want to say that in our own Army 

Career and Alumni Program, our Vice Chief, General Chiarelli, 

asked us to relook at that program. That report’s coming in this 

May. So, we’ve worked that with West Point and with the Guard, 

Reserve, the VA, and Secretary Ray Jefferson, over at Labor. That’s 

going to be helpful to us. 

What I would also say is that the 20- to 30-year-old age group 

is that same group that is having tough time with unemployment 

across the country. Our military reflects society, and where we differ is, they’re part of the 1 percent that have worn the uniform. 

While the government and the military can help work a lot of these 

issues, after 4 years in recruiting, what I learned is that a lot of 

America wants to help, but they don’t know how. Part of what I 

would offer is that our soldiers coming out may not be certified in 

the areas that they need. A truckdriver may not have the certifications, but can drive a truck anywhere. A medic may not have the 

exact certifications that they need, but can work anywhere. 

An educator on our platforms, or an instructor at West Point, 

coming out, may not have the certifications to go into an elementary school or high school. But, what can the country do to accept 

those military without those certifications, get them into jobs, and 

then allow them to work on the certifications as they go along? 

We’re doing the same in reverse, because we are desperately 

short of alcohol and substance abuse counselors. The one thing that 

those counselors really need to be independent counselors is they 

need 2 years of study and tutelage under a supervisor. No one on 

the outside really has the time to deal with folks that need 2 years 

of study. So, we are bringing them on. We’re making them commit 

365 

to moving with us when we tell them that they have to move to 

a part of the country that is not a big city, and that they have to 

stay with us for a certain amount of time. But, we’d ask the country, What can you do to take our soldiers on? 

Senator BLUMENTHAL. Mr. Chairman, if I could just add a quick 

footnote to that—— 

Senator WEBB. Sure. 

Senator BLUMENTHAL.—really excellent question. When you compile those numbers for New Hampshire, could you please get them 

for the other States, as well? I recommend visiting New Hampshire 

or New England, including Connecticut. This time of year, it’s a 

beautiful time to be there. 

Senator WEBB. Thank you, Senator Ayotte. 

I don’t think there are many issues in the military personnel 

that are more emotional or controversial than the issue of diversity. 

Secretary Garcia, during your confirmation hearing 2 years ago, 

there was a debate going on at the Naval Academy about standards. I asked you about it during the confirmation hearing. There 

were allegations that there was basically a two-track admissions 

system—one for athletes and minorities and the other for other 

folks. You indicated you were going to get your arms around that. 

Let me just say, I am aware, at least from the 1970s, that there 

have been DOD policies with respect to diversity. When I was Secretary of the Navy—every promotion board, there was a precept 

that went into the promotion board saying, ‘‘You will examine 

issues relating to diversity.’’ At the same time, we just had a diversity commission come out recommending more—different kinds of 

policies. I know, in the Air Force statement, there was some observation in there that there’s actually an officer in charge of diversity 

at the Air Force Academy, or something to that effect. 

I’m just wondering what’s going on. Secretary Garcia, why don’t 

you start with the question that we had during your confirmation 

hearing? 

Mr. GARCIA. Sure. Thanks for the opportunity, Mr. Chairman. 

There’s been a lot of coverage, a lot of ink spilled, on what’s been 

depicted as a most diverse Academy class in its history, and the 

most diverse ROTC class in its history. I think the real significance 

is that, what is the largest is the most number of applications from 

minority Americans across the country, in Academy history, over 

the last 4 to 5 years. The same with ROTC. If the argument goes 

that if you cast a wider net, you’ll get a better candidate, that, in 

the mission that the Nation now requires of our Navy and Marine 

Corps, that we can’t afford to overlook talent anywhere, I think it 

follows that recruiting and looking for candidates in regions where 

we haven’t had applicants before, drawing from congressional districts where we haven’t had applicants before—the number of congressional districts who send less than three qualified applicants, 

within the recruiting year, has been cut in half over the last 4 

years. We’ve gone to places we just haven’t gone before. If that’s 

the premise, I think you can draw a linkage between casting that 

wider net and the superior candidate we’re getting now. 

Tightly correlated with a spike in minority applications is a 

greater presence of minority midshipmen on the meritorious acaVerDate Aug 31 2005 09:55 Jan 25, 2012 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00371 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6602 Y:\BORAWSKI\DOCS\68089.TXT JUNE PsN: JUNEB
366 

demic honor roles and a discorrelation, less of an appearance on attrition roles—greater graduation among Hispanic midshipmen. In 

less than a decade, it’s gone from 68 to 81 percent. 

I continue to wrestle with this, specifically in the Naval Academy 

Prep School application. But, my guiding light, my northern star, 

remains in—I guess the academy position is that if we continue to 

recruit in places we haven’t been before, cast a wider net, we’ll continue to get the best of the best. 

Senator WEBB. What are your findings with respect to the allegations about different standards? 

Mr. GARCIA. The Academy employs a whole-person structure. It 

is documented that there are midshipmen who are accepted, who 

do not have traditionally as high a board scores, Scholastic 

Aptitute Test (SAT) scores as others. But, because of the whole-person structure, that takes into account other things—less quantifiable, perhaps; life experiences—they are admitted. I continue to 

wrestle with that and the results at the other end; that is, the 

graduation end, performance end, retention end, performance in 

the fleet—to ensure that we’re getting the best we can get. 

Senator WEBB. Let me make one other suggestion. If you’re following that formula, there are a lot of differences among white cultures in this country. That’s something that’s not frequently talked 

about. I wrote a piece in the Wall Street Journal about this last 

July. When I was in law school, the University of Chicago did a 

study of white ethnic groups, and they broke them down into 17 

different ethnic strata, and the difference between the top and the 

bottom, in white America, was greater than the difference between 

white America and black America at that time, in the 1970s. 

So, if you’re looking for places where people perhaps haven’t been 

applying, you may want to examine areas like the Appalachian 

Mountains and areas like that. 

Mr. GARCIA. Point taken, Mr. Chairman, and know that when I 

alluded to ‘‘regions’’ we disproportionally haven’t heard from, that 

also includes Montana, the upper Midwest. I saw your Journal 

piece, and I take your point. 

Senator WEBB. All right. Secretary Ginsberg? 

Mr. GINSBERG. Senator, I appreciate the opportunity to talk 

about our diversity initiative in the Air Force. For us, we consider 

diversity a military necessity. It’s not diversity in the way that you 

would think about in, sort of, legally-defined equal opportunity programs—race, ethnicity, gender. It’s part of that. It’s really, like you 

were talking about, as Secretary Garcia was mentioning—making 

sure we’re not cutting ourselves off from any person who is capable 

of contributing to the Air Force, whether it could be somebody from 

inner-city or somebody from a region where we don’t have as many 

recruits coming in as the past. 

So, we see this as sort of a broad-reaching initiative to make sure 

we get the very best people, especially in a time when so many 

young people are not eligible to join the military. So, when we’ve 

looked at this, and when you can almost mathematically show this, 

that when you get people with different perspectives coming together and they look at a problem, and they look at it, time and 

time and time again, from those different angles, you get better 

outcomes. 

367 

Also, there are certain career areas where we have to retain people. If somebody who can contribute looks in and doesn’t see somebody like them, in whatever way, then they’re not going to want 

to join the Air Force. 

This is something that the Chairman, Admiral Mullen, has 

talked about, as well as the Secretary of Defense. There are some 

dangers when the country starts looking significantly different— 

and again—not just in race, ethnicity, and gender, but a whole 

broad set of characteristics. 

So, that’s really what we have a diversity policy directive for, and 

the Academy has gone out and engaged a really super diversity officer. That’s really what we’re driving for. It’s something distinct 

from equal opportunity, and it’s certainly something distinct from 

affirmative action, if you will. 

Senator WEBB. General Bostick. 

General BOSTICK. Mr. Chairman, I’d say diversity is extremely 

important in the U.S. Army, as it is with the other Services. We 

compete for the talent that is out there. It’s a broader definition, 

I would agree with the Air Force, of diversity. 

In the Army, we are experiencing some challenges as—minorities 

in our combat arms, if you’re just looking at the minority part of 

it. 

But, we did meet with General Lyles, Air Force (Retired), and 

Lieutenant General Becton, Army (Retired), after they did the Military Leadership Diversity Commission. We understand we have 

work to do. We’re looking at that commission’s report. We also published our own diversity roadmap that the Secretary and the Chief 

of Staff signed on, and it’s guiding the way ahead for Army. 

What we have also found in our enlisted force, that is now helping in our officer force—and it just gets back to what Secretary 

Garcia said, that it’s really a whole-person concept. This notion of 

quality being a test score or some other metric has not proven successful in many universities across the country and, in some cases, 

at our Academy and in our enlisted force. Our Army Research Institute has developed a number of unique tools for us to look at our 

enlisted soldiers, and now our officers, to try to predict their behavior and whether they will stay with the Army for the long haul, 

and whether they’ll get promoted and serve as a leader. It’s a personality assessment, an adaptive personality assessment tool that 

we have started; I think the Navy and the other Services are using. 

What we’ve found out is that there are some that don’t test as high 

as those on the top rung, but perform extraordinarily well, even 

better, and then they stay with the military. That’s important for 

ROTC. It’s important for the academies, and we’re looking at that 

as well. 

Senator WEBB. Thank you. This is not a question that is openly 

discussed often enough, in my view. I want to be really clear here. 

I grew up in the U.S. military, the first institution in this country 

to be racially integrated, in 1948. I believe very strongly that there 

is strength in different cultures working together. 

At the same time, the warning that I would have is, please be 

very careful when you lump so-called white America into one monolith in order to create your statistics. There are so many different 

368 

cultures in white America that you run the risk of undoing the 

very thing you want to construct, if you’re not careful. 

Senator Blumenthal 

Senator BLUMENTHAL. Thank you. Thank you, Senator Webb. 

I want to go a little further in the line of questioning I was pursuing regarding the TAP, and focus on another area which may not 

directly link to unemployment. But, I’ve asked a number of panels 

about traumatic brain injury (TBI), post-traumatic stress disorder 

(PTSD), which obviously is tied to unemployment, and wondered if 

any of you would share your thoughts or observation about how the 

outreach to young men and women, who may not even recognize 

that they should be seeking some kind of treatment, can be done, 

either through the TAP program or through something like it. 

Mr. GARCIA. Let me start out with that, if I could, Senator. 

Senator Ayotte referred to the use of the Guard and Reserve. 

While we don’t have a Guard or Reserve that played heavily in a 

decade’s worth of combat, on the Navy side, alone, we’ve deployed 

some 60,000 individual augmentees (IA) for year-long deployments. 

What we found, early on in the war, was that the reluctance—a 

fear of a stigma to identify—for an individual to stand up and to 

recognize—verbalize that they were wrestling with demons and 

may need some help. 

What we’ve done since is initiate what we call a Post-Deployment 

Health Assessment (PDHA) that no longer requires raising a hand. 

Everyone gets it, removing that stigma. 

An IA, coming back, takes a PDHA within 30 days, and then 

takes another one within 90 days, a followup. We think, in that 

sense, we’ve removed the challenge of raising your hand in a group 

of your buddies, taking the stigma out. We think it’s reaped a benefit. 

Senator BLUMENTHAL. I thank you for that answer. Commandant 

Amos and Sergeant Major Kent have spoken very persuasively and 

eloquently on this issue. I’m thinking not only of Active Duty members, but—and not only those as they transition out, but a year or 

so later. 

I spoke, just coincidentally, this morning to a young marine who 

has been out for probably more than a year and called me because 

he’d had an unfortunate brush with the law. Nothing serious, but 

just sort of explosive behavior when stopped for speeding. He got 

himself into more difficulty. Then, with his Service experience in 

Iraq some things clicked in my mind. This young man really should 

be seeing someone before he gets himself deeper into trouble. 

If there was some way to reach out to people who have been 

through these experiences and may not have been diagnosed, because so many of the cases are undiagnosed. That is just a suggestion or an observation. 

General MILSTEAD. Senator, let me jump in here since you’re 

using a marine as an example. We’re very much involved in the 

PDHA, but your point is a good one. For those marines that have 

already separated from the Service and have gone on—and we’ve 

spoken about this—we’ve put our behavioral health—under the behavioral health umbrella, we put our combat operational stress, 

our family advocacy, our suicide prevention, our sexual assault prevention, substance abuse. They’re all connected in many, many 

369 

ways. But for a young marine—and this kind of goes back to the 

TAP, and I won’t spend a great deal of time on what we’re trying 

to do with the TAP—but, we have a de-stress line, we have the 

means that a young marine can call someone, we have our Marine 

for Life Program, that is distributed in the towns across America. 

That’s one of the things in our transition assistance, is making sure 

that we turn this transition assistance from an event—from a 3- 

or 4-day event—into, as we’ve discussed, a process, something that 

will take care of a marine. We like to say, ‘‘You’re a marine for 

life,’’ and to take care of marines for life, so that they can come 

back to us and they can reach back, if they begin to dance with the 

demons, something that they didn’t have, that it has been postponed, and that they can come back and we can take care of them. 

I think that’s important. We need to do a better job—and we’re 

working at that—of making sure that those marines, before they go 

ashore and before they depart the Service, understand all those 

sorts of ways that they can come back. There are thousands of people out there, thousands of organizations, that want to help and we 

just have to connect them. They’re all points of light, and we’re 

working very hard on that. 

Senator BLUMENTHAL. I think that’s an excellent answer, and I 

thank you, General Milstead. I didn’t mean to single out the marine. It just happened to be the one who called me this morning, 

and so it occurred to me. But, I thank you for that answer. 

General JONES. Senator, I think, from the Air Force perspective, 

identification, obviously, of PTSD and TBI are very important. As 

we start bringing our airmen back from the fight, especially those 

outside the wire, we’ve started utilizing the Deployment Transition 

Center at U.S. Air Forces in Europe where it allows our airmen to 

decompress, to talk about their experiences with professionals, of 

what they saw, what they experienced, and start identifying some 

of those traumatic events early on. 

Then a recent change we’ve also done, that I’m sure many of the 

Services also utilize, is, anyone being discharged, who has deployed 

within the last 2 years, who had any incident of PTSD or TBI, who 

is being discharged for anything less than an honorable discharge, 

is required to be evaluated by highly, highly skilled mental health 

professionals and psychiatrists. By doing that, we’ve realized that 

a lot of the misconduct that—maybe in the past, have gotten someone discharged for personality disorder or adjustment disorder, is 

really related back to the TBI. 61 percent of all of our airmen who 

we follow in the Wounded Warrior Program experience some portion, or some manifestation, of TBI or PTSD syndrome. Some, 

that’s all that they experience, and that’s why they’re in the 

Wounded Warrior Program. Others obviously have other issues, 

along with that. 

So, I think the identification, through the Deployment Transition 

Center, as they roll back. I know, the marines recently evaluated 

our program at Ramstein, and have wanted to use that for a lot 

of their marines that were outside the wire, dealing with conflict 

every day. It’s a great program. I’d encourage you to come over and 

see it if you ever have an opportunity to pass through Ramstein. 

Senator BLUMENTHAL. Thank you. I hope to do that. Thank you. 

Senator WEBB. Thank you, Senator. 

370 

What percentages of your discharges are honorable these days, 

as opposed to general or other than honorable? 

General JONES. Senator, I’d have to get the for the record. 

It’s obviously the great, overwhelming majority of them. 

Senator WEBB. You don’t have any idea? 

General JONES. I can get that for you. 

[The information referred to follows:] 

Air Force officer separations from fiscal year 2001 to fiscal year 2011 (year-todate): 


511per5.eps
371 

Air Force enlisted separations from fiscal year 2001 to fiscal year 2011 (year-todate): 

General MILSTEAD. For the Marine Corps, sir, we’d like to take 

that for the record and come back to you so that you get a precise 

answer on it. 

[The information referred to follows:] 


511per6.eps
372 

General MILSTEAD. Of course, the vast majority—— 

Senator WEBB. I’d be curious to see it. 

General MILSTEAD. Yes sir. We’ll come back to you with it. 

Senator WEBB. I can tell you, it was 97 percent, during the Vietnam era. That’s a readily available piece of information I’d like to 

look at, honorable versus general versus unsuitable versus courtmartial, bad conduct, or dishonorable discharge just for the record. 

I’d like to throw a question out, here. I mentioned it last week. 

We’ve had testimony estimating that around 25 percent of the 17- 

to 24-year-olds in this country are eligible for enlistment, the disqualifying reasons being, generally, educational/physical requirements. I just find that mind-boggling. I know this is an enlistmentrich environment, for many reasons, right now. But, it’s an issue 

that I think may come up, depending on circumstances in the future, and certainly for the health of the country, if we’re talking 

about cross-sections of people coming in. Again, I go back to the 

Vietnam era because it was an era where there was conscription 

and there were a lot of people who didn’t want to go in. But, still, 

one-third of the draft-eligible males during the Vietnam era, actually served, either on Active Duty or in the Guard and Reserve. 

Now we’re saying 75 percent in this pool wouldn’t even be able to, 

if these numbers are correct. 

So I’m wondering, first of all, if this really is an accurate figure. 

Second, if there’s some sort of evaluation of the disqualifying features that could be undertaken, or should be undertaken. 

General Bostick. 

General BOSTICK. Mr. Chairman, I’d be happy to start off. 

The figure that I often use is less than 3 out of 10 are fully qualified to serve in the military. They’re ‘‘not qualified’’ for several reasons, but it’s education and aptitude. They don’t have a high school 

diploma or they don’t score high enough on the Armed Services Vocational Aptitude Battery (ASVAB); medical reasons, which include 


511per7.eps
373 

all sorts of things, from asthma, eyesight, hearing, bad knees; and 

lately, some of types of psychological drugs that they may have had 

to take for attention deficit disorder and that sort of thing; and 

then, finally, conduct, or misconduct—misdemeanors and felonies 

of that sort. 

So what can we do? In the area of weight, for example—I think 

weight and education are two areas that the country needs to go 

after. I think we—all the educators—and my wife is a principal at 

an elementary school here in Arlington—but, education is something the country needs to help us with. We’re doing our part in 

the military. Education is very important if you’re going to come 

into the military service. I think the GI Bill, tuition assistance, the 

emphasis of the military to say, ‘‘We don’t just want you in uniform. We don’t want you to just deploy. We want you to earn your 

education, from high school all the way up to the Ph.D., if it works 

for you.’’ 

The other area is medical. Over the years, we’ve just gotten more 

and more overweight. One of the things that we have tried to do 

in the Army—again, working with our Army Research Institute— 

is to find those young men and women who have grown up eating 

hamburgers and other things all their life, and not doing the fitness kind of things that they need to do, but they have the motivation and strength to come in the Army. So we’ve created the Assessment of [Recruit] Motivation and Strength program. That 

would take a youngster who might be a little bit overweight—body 

mass index—but, we are assured based on this test that we give, 

that they can get through basic training. It has been a wonderful 

success. They come in. They graduate at the same levels as others 

that don’t have a weight issue. Then they lose the weight while 

they’re in the Army. But, I think the country has to take that on, 

and we’re trying to do our best in the military. 

Senator WEBB. Thank you. Anyone else have a thought on that? 

Admiral FERGUSON. Senator, I would just offer that there was a 

DOD study on this issue several years ago which we can provide 

to the subcommittee which breaks down the various factors and 

reasons. But I echo General Bostick’s comments that what we’re 

seeing is increased disqualification rates—health and education 

seem to be the primary factors. 

[The information referred to follows:] 

The accompanying report, Estimating the Qualified Military Available, was developed in November 2007, by the Lewin Group, Inc., at the request of the Director 

of Accession Policy, Office of the Under Secretary of Defense (Personnel & Readiness). 

Estimating the Qualified Military Available Final Report reflects a count of youth 

who are mentally, medically, and otherwise eligible for service without requiring a 

waiver, and who are free of family commitments that would make them unavailable 

for duty. The Lewin Group developed an estimator that projected the number of 17- 

to 24-year-old youth who are qualified and available for service. This 17- to 24-yearold group comprises about 90 percent of non-prior service accessions annually. To 

estimate the number qualified, disqualification filters were developed for those who 

would be disqualified based on the Department of Defense standards. Data for developing medical/physical, conduct, and dependent filters came primarily from three 

sources: 

• National Longitudinal Survey of Youth 1997 (NLSY97), 

• National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES), 1999– 

2002 

• Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration 

374 

Youth may be disqualified for more than one reason; however, a hierarchy of disqualifications was used so that only one disqualification applied to any one person. 

• 9 percent are disqualified due to a low aptitude score on the Armed 

Forces Qualification Test. 

• 35 percent are disqualified for medical conditions or physical fitness 

issues owing mainly to asthma, obesity, and other childhood maladies. 

• 19 percent are disqualified for substance abuse (drugs and alcohol). 

• 6 percent are disqualified based on the number of dependents under age 

18 they have. 

• 5 percent are disqualified for questionable conduct or law violations. 

Combined, the data show that only about 26 percent of today’s youth are qualified 

to serve without obtaining a waiver. Data also show that, 11 percent, although 

qualified, are enrolled in college, and therefore not available to serve. Subtracting 

for those in college, only 15 percent of the 17 to 24 youth population are both qualified and available for military service without requiring a waiver for one or more 

sources of disqualification. 

375 

[The Report ‘‘Estimating the Qualified Military Available’’ follows:] 


511per8.eps
376 


511per9.eps
377 


511per10.eps
378 


511per11.eps
379 


511per12.eps
380 


511per13.eps
381 


511per14.eps
382 


511per15.eps
383 


511per16.eps
384 


511per17.eps
385 


511per18.eps
386 


511per19.eps
387 


511per20.eps
388 


511per21.eps
389 


511per22.eps
390 


511per23.eps
391 


511per24.eps
392 


511per25.eps
393 


511per26.eps
394 


511per27.eps
395 


511per28.eps
396 


511per29.eps
397 


511per30.eps
398 


511per31.eps
399 

[The Report ‘‘Ready, Willing, and Unable To Serve’’ follows:] 


511per48.eps
400 


511per49.eps
401 


511per50.eps
402 


511per51.eps
403 


511per52.eps
404 


511per53.eps
405 


511per54.eps
406 


511per55.eps
407 


511per56.eps
408 


511per57.eps
409 


511per58.eps
410 


511per59.eps
411 


511per60.eps
412 


511per61.eps
413 


511per62.eps
414 


511per63.eps
415 

[The Report ‘‘Too Fat Too Fight’’ follows:] 


511per32.eps
416 


511per33.eps
417 


511per34.eps
418 


511per35.eps
419 


511per36.eps
420 


511per37.eps
421 


511per38.eps
422 


511per39.eps
423 


511per40.eps
424 


511per41.eps
425 


511per42.eps
426 


511per43.eps
427 


511per44.eps
428 


511per45.eps
429 


511per46.eps
430 

General MILSTEAD. I’ll just jump in here, Senator. After commanding the Marine Corps Recruiting Command for about 21⁄2

years, the quality of young men and women that are coming in to 

the military today, is the finest that I’ve seen in my 35 years of 

service. I’ll just use the Marine Corps’ figures from last year. 99.7 


511per47.eps
431 

percent of the young men and women that joined were at tier I; 73 

percent, mental category three-alpha [3A]. You kind of hit it on the 

head. Right now, it’s a buyer’s market. 

But to echo what was said, it is a national issue. It’s a national 

problem. It’s not a military problem, per se, but it’s a national 

problem. It’s something that—like education, like suicides—that we 

need to take on, on a national level. I’ll just offer that. 

Mr. GARCIA. If I could just put a punctuation point on General 

Milstead’s point. We’re seeing the same data that you are, Senator, 

in terms of one in four of the 17- to 24-year-old traditional recruiting demographic is either morally, medically, or legally ineligible 

for service. But, as the General said, by any objective metric, 

ASVAB, technical background, traditional academic diploma holders, we’re off the charts; we haven’t been here before. The same 

goes in the officer ranks. It’s never been more competitive, at least 

academically, for ROTC scholarships and academy admission. 

I would just leave with the point that every one of those kids 

who goes and stands on the yellow footprints or goes to Great 

Lakes does so knowing nothing but combat for their entire adult 

lives. So, out of that 25 percent that’s left, we’re getting an incredible cadre to raise their right hand. 

General JONES. Senator, our quality in the Air Force is extremely 

high. But, I echo what my colleagues say; it is a national issue with 

having all Americans fit for military service. I think the biggest 

thing is the physical attributes that we have, not because we’ve 

gotten tougher, but because the country’s gotten softer. In the Air 

Force, we need to make sure 90 percent of all of our recruits are 

in the top three mental categories. We have 60 percent as the goal 

for DOD. So, we’re all experiencing, really, a high-quality standard. 

But, what that allows us to do is reduce our training costs. We 

used to program 10.5 percent attrition for basic military training. 

We’re now down to 5 percent, because our recruits that come in are 

such high quality. 

But, the number of recruits, as you pointed out, the number of 

people eligible to be recruited in the military is a significant concern for the future. 

Senator WEBB. Certainly not as I said when I started this question, not a question of the quality of the military today. That is 

something that could well come up in the future. I’m not thinking 

that it will, in the way we are sizing our military and the way that 

we have been taking care of, in an appropriate way, our military 

members and their families, including post-military assistance, 

such as the GI Bill. But, it certainly is a stunning statistic, when 

you look out at the rest of the country. Perhaps going to what Secretary Garcia, you were saying, being more ‘‘embracive’’ in society. 

I remember years ago, in the Marine Corps, they used to have 

a platoon down in Parris Island for the overweights. They’d just 

work them to death until they hit the weight marks, and then they 

would go on and begin their regular basic training. As far as I 

could tell, they weren’t any different than any other marine when 

they came out of all that. Right now, I guess you don’t have the 

need to be doing those things, in terms of the quality of the force. 

But it’s just a stunning statistic. 

432 

You talked about in your testimony—many of you did and I don’t 

have all your testimony in front of me—but, the reduction in enlistment and reenlistment bonuses that are now being paid, what happens to that money when it’s not paid? Is it reprogrammed into 

other personnel accounts? 

Secretary Lamont. 

Mr. LAMONT. As an ability to reshape the force in other ways. 

What we don’t need in our incentive for recruiting, for instance, we 

will look for the critical skill needs—so that we can add to our 

bonus situation there, for instance—as well as in our retention 

area, where we want to maintain those high-quality new captains 

coming out of there. So, we will provide any number of incentives, 

be it in terms of graduate school, be it in terms of bonus, be it in 

terms of assignment. 

But, yes, we reallocate those funds primarily, as I say, to shape 

the force for our critical skill needs. 

Mr. GINSBERG. Mr. Chairman, of course, in the Air Force, we 

want to make sure the budget requests that come up here are as 

accurate as possible, and that we project, in the future, how much 

we are going to need in recruiting and retention bonuses. So, of 

course, once the money’s been appropriated, as the year goes on, 

we monitor it closely. 

I would say that recruiting and retention bonuses are absolutely 

vital right now, especially for filling some of our stressed career 

areas that we are having—particularly in the realm of retention— 

having some challenges. 

But we, of course, monitor it closely. We tailor it, because given, 

obviously, how scarce resources are right now, and that we do need 

to be good stewards of taxpayers’ dollars, we want to target those 

as much as possible. 

Senator WEBB. Thank you again for being here today, all of you, 

and for your continued dedication to the well-being of the people 

of the U.S. military and the others who are making our military 

posture successful in the total force. I appreciate the candor in 

which we’ve been able to conduct our discussions today. We will 

have some follow-on questions on some of these other areas. 

This hearing is now adjourned. Thank you. 

[Questions for the record with answers supplied follow:] 

QUESTION SUBMITTED BY SENATOR RICHARD BLUMENTHAL

PRESCRIPTION DRUGS

1. Senator BLUMENTHAL. Secretary Lamont, I believe that the ability to utilize a 

local pharmacy to fill prescriptions contributes to the quality of life for military families, by providing them crucial face-to-face consultations and advice on filling prescriptions and medication safety. This relationship has many benefits, including reducing the likelihood of substance abuse or using prescription drugs outside of their 

intended guidelines. Military families recognize this value. In 2009, more than half 

of TRICARE prescriptions were filled at pharmacies, and only 8 percent were filled 

by mail order. As you know, the Department of Defense (DOD) has proposed an increase to the co-pay for prescriptions filled at a beneficiary’s local pharmacy in order 

to incentivize the use of mail-order prescriptions. Requiring beneficiaries to pay 

more to be able to speak to a pharmacist about how to properly take their medication or to fill urgently needed prescriptions is, I believe, inappropriate and would 

actually hamper the ability of beneficiaries to take charge of their own health. What 

are the Army’s views on the importance of pharmacists in preventing substance 

abuse and do you have any concerns that by incentivizing military families towards 

433 

a mail-order system the contribution of pharmacists in the fight against substance 

abuse may be diminished? 

Secretary LAMONT. The Army views pharmacists as vitally important in the fight 

against substance abuse. At each point of service, pharmacists have medication profiles and can personally discuss any medication related issues with all beneficiaries. 

Mail-order prescriptions are intended for medications taken on a regular basis for 

chronic conditions and not intended for medications prescribed for acute illness or 

injury. Incentivizing military families towards a mail-order system for routine medications will not diminish the contribution pharmacists make to fight substance 

abuse. 

QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY SENATOR JOHN MCCAIN

TOUR NORMALIZATION IN KOREA

2. Senator MCCAIN. Secretary Lamont and General Bostick, on September 23, 

2010, the Secretary of Defense directed U.S. Forces Korea and the Services to proceed with full tour normalization for Korea, as affordable, but not according to any 

specific timeline. This new policy will require the DOD to build facilities and infrastructure to support up to 14,000 families who will be stationed in Korea for up to 

3 years. DOD’s cost assessment office was directed to provide a plan by March 31, 

2011, detailing schedules and costs for this policy decision. A major part of the plan 

involved committing funds allocated for overseas housing allowances (OHA) as the 

government’s contribution to a public/private venture called the ‘‘Humphreys Housing Opportunity Program (HHOP)’’ for the construction and leasing of multiple highrise towers containing thousands of housing units at Camp Humphries, Korea. Are 

you aware of any cost estimates for this proposal? If so, can you provide them? 

Secretary LAMONT and General BOSTICK. As directed in the September 2010 

memorandum, the Director of the Cost Assessment and Program Evaluation office 

provided a report to the Secretary of Defense that contained very broad options to 

normalize tours in Korea. To date no implementation decision or costing formulas 

have been released from OSD. The U.S. Forces Korea is in the process of relocating 

from Seoul to U.S. Air Guard (USAG) Humphreys under the Yongsan Relocation 

Plan (YRP). Under YRP, the United States provides housing at USAG Humphreys 

through the HHOP to support the relocation of families. The HHOP units deliver 

1,400 family homes and support both YRP and the 3,198 Command Sponsored Families at USAG Humphreys during Phase I. 

3. Senator MCCAIN. Secretary Lamont and General Bostick, at one time we heard 

the monthly OHA needed to finance this program would exceed $4,000 a month paid 

as rent, not including utilities. What is the projected monthly OHA rate to support 

the Army’s housing plan at Camp Humphreys and has this been approved by the 

Secretary of Defense? 

Secretary LAMONT and General BOSTICK. On 18 October 2010, the Secretary of 

Defense directed the Army to execute the HHOP. Currently the fiscal year 2011 

base HHOP rate is set at $4,200 plus utilities, and is used as the basis for programming and cost analysis. Implementation of HHOP is currently under review by the 

Office of the Secretary of Defense. 

4. Senator MCCAIN. Secretary Lamont and General Bostick, are any of these costs 

included in the President’s budget request for fiscal year 2012 or in the current 5- 

year plan for DOD or the Army? If so, how much and in what account? 

Secretary LAMONT and General BOSTICK. The funding has not been annotated in 

the President’s budget for fiscal year 2012 or the out years. As no decision was made 

to support the action, it was not included in the budget. 

ENLISTED RECRUITING AND ALTERNATE HIGH SCHOOL EDUCATION

5. Senator MCCAIN. General Bostick, Admiral Ferguson, General Milstead, and 

General Jones, a high school diploma from a brick-and-mortar high school has been 

the preferred qualification for recruits for many years. Graduates of such high 

schools are designated Tier 1 recruits. In recent years, many alternate forms of education have become popular, including distance learning and online public and private schools that are, nonetheless, fully accredited by States. These graduates are 

designated Tier 2 candidates, and, with the recruiting success you are having in this 

economy, Tier 2s are having a much harder time being recruited. Recognizing that 

DOD policies control in this area, what are your views about whether the Tier 1/ 

434 

Tier 2 system works as advertised to reduce attrition while producing the best candidates your Service can get? 

General BOSTICK. The Army agrees the Tier 1/Tier 2 systems are valid predictors 

of trainability, knowledge, and job skill based on over 20 years of evidence-based 

analysis. To date, there has been limited research completed on enlistees who hold 

nontraditional alternate high school credentials such as online and distance learning 

certificates. As we study these credential holders to assess their trainability, attrition, and performance in comparison to GED holders, home school graduates, National Guard Youth Challenge graduates, the Army has considerable hope that research instruments such as the Tailored Adaptive Personality Assessment System 

(TAPAS) will offer a tool that can predict higher performance from alternate credential holders. Although still in its infancy, the Army has begun collecting data on the 

distance learners and online graduates to assess their training and first-term attrition rates. 

Admiral FERGUSON. The DOD Three-Tier System has proven effective in selecting 

applicants with the greatest likelihood of completing their initial service obligation. 

Navy focus is on quality Tier I applicants with a corresponding correlation to lower 

attrition rates during initial enlistment. 

Of note, current Navy policy does allow for home school graduates to be considered as Tier I applicants, provided that they attain an Armed Forces Qualification 

Test (AFQT) score of 50 or higher on the Armed Services Vocational Aptitude Battery (ASVAB) and complete an Assessment of Individual Motivation (AIM). The AIM 

and ASVAB are utilized to assess the individual’s aptitude for Navy service, and assists the applicant in job selection. 

General MILSTEAD. The Marine Corps has found, through numerous studies over 

the years, the DOD Tier classification system is a very accurate predictor of the 

likely success an applicant will have in their first enlistment. The Marine Corps has 

focused on the high school market as our primary recruiting source for quality applicants since that is the educational credentialed cohort that has the lowest attrition. 

We recognize there are deserving applicants that are classified Tier 2, and in order 

for the Marine Corps to accommodate these applicants, we allow up to five percent 

of our annual accessions to enlist with these education credentials. 

General JONES. At this time, the Air Force embraces the DOD tier system as a 

valid screening methodology for our recruits. The Air Force has always been a recipient of very high quality recruits, even during lean times. However, we believe 

that additional non-cognitive measures could be added to improve the screening 

process along with proactive evaluation of alternative credential holders. If there are 

validated options to identify other types of graduates that will be successful airmen, 

then we fully support a modification or change to the current system. 

6. Senator MCCAIN. General Bostick, Admiral Ferguson, General Milstead, and 

General Jones, is the traditional high school experience, in your view, what’s important? Or is it the achievement of the high school diploma? 

General BOSTICK. We believe it is a combination of both experience and achievement. A diploma from a traditional high school program offers proof that an applicant attended and completed a 12 year graded program of classroom instruction. Applicants who have completed these programs successfully have a long history of 

demonstrating that the combination of experience and achievement they have 

gained are significant indicators of the type of personal commitment which proves 

to be an asset in adjusting to Army life. A high percentage of individuals who do 

not complete a traditional high school experience are more apt to demonstrate lower 

trainability, and performance and higher attrition and other problems in comparison 

to traditional high school diploma graduates. 

Admiral FERGUSON. Both. While a high school diploma and equivalent credentials 

are measures of academic achievement, completion of a brick-and-mortar high 

school curriculum, in itself, is also a strong predictor for program completion success. The traits exemplified through completion of a traditional high school education are similar to those needed to complete Navy recruit and skill level training. 

The motives behind a student’s preference for alternative forms of education vary 

widely. While most of these reasons are in the best interest of an individual student’s graduation prospects or personal education desires, analysis has shown nontraditional high school graduates to be less successful than the ‘‘traditional’’ brick 

and mortar students in completing basic military training. Experience has shown 

that, in general, students who participate in non-traditional forms of education have 

less exposure to varied social experiences and interaction that promote the growth 

and adaptability that strongly indicate success at Recruit Training Center (RTC). 

However, recognizing that completion of high school is not the sole indicator of sucVerDate Aug 31 2005 09:55 Jan 25, 2012 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00440 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6621 Y:\BORAWSKI\DOCS\68089.TXT JUNE PsN: JUNEB
435 

cess at RTC, alternate education students who display academic excellence are eligible for Tier reassignment as previously stated. 

General MILSTEAD. We believe the traditional high school experience, not just a 

diploma, is a better indicator of how an individual will adapt to military life. A candidate who receives a diploma through the traditional high school experience has 

demonstrated the ability to succeed in a structured environment and to work at 

length in pursuit of a goal, traits that will serve them well in future military service. The Marine Corps remains focused on the traditional high school market for recruiting and appreciates the assistance of Congress in ensuring our recruiters have 

access to high schools and student directory information. 

General JONES. Currently, the high school diploma is our critical benchmark for 

Air Force recruiting. We know that our most successful first-term airmen are high 

school graduates. The traditional high school experience develops a well-rounded 

graduate from both a social and educational standpoint. The attrition data and analysis is conclusive-high school graduates have significantly lower attrition rates in 

training and are more likely to serve their entire first enlistment term. This saves 

valuable recruiting and training resources, and provides airmen with the skills and 

aptitude needed to perform well in Air Force jobs. 

7. Senator MCCAIN. General Bostick, Admiral Ferguson, General Milstead, and 

General Jones, would you support a pilot program to evaluate whether graduates 

of nontraditional, online public schools perform as well as graduates of traditional 

high schools? 

General BOSTICK. Yes, the Army would be highly supportive of such pilot. We 

think it is imperative that we begin studying applicants with these kind of educational credentials to assess their trainability, attrition, and performance in comparison to other non-traditional, alternate high school credentials, such as GEDs, 

home school graduates, and National Guard Youth Challenge graduates as well as 

in comparison with traditional high school diploma graduates. 

Admiral FERGUSON. Navy would support a pilot program to evaluate whether 

graduates of nontraditional, online public schools perform as well as graduates of 

traditional high schools. We support evaluating pilot programs based on changing 

trends in education and their impact on the recruitable population. 

General MILSTEAD. DOD provides oversight in the evaluation and classification of 

whether graduates of non-traditional or online public schools perform as traditional 

high school graduates. A standing military accession education committee, including 

representatives from all of the services, reviews and modifies the policies that evaluate whether graduates of nontraditional or online public schools perform as traditional high school graduates. We recommend the military accession education committee evaluate and recommend whether such a pilot program should be initiated. 

General JONES. Yes, the Air Force is supportive of pilot programs or studies that 

could valildate new options for increasing the potential talent pool of future airmen. 

8. Senator MCCAIN. General Bostick, Admiral Ferguson, General Milstead, and 

General Jones, should we retain the current system, or move to a new ‘‘whole man’’ 

evaluation of some kind that does away with the Tier system? 

General BOSTICK. The Army maintains that the current Tier systems are valid 

predictors of trainability, knowledge, and job skill and should be retained until a 

better system can be developed, studied, and has proven to be more credible than 

the current system. To date, there has been very limited research conducted on enlistees who hold nontraditional alternate high school credentials such as online and 

distance learning certificates to assess their training base and first term attrition 

rates. The Army is willing to revisit this issue after a study of empirical data has 

been conducted to determine the feasibility of transitioning to a different system. 

Admiral FERGUSON. Until current research projects can validate a proven method 

to measure an individual’s potential for success in the military, we recommend retaining the current Three-Tier system, since it has proven extremely successful in 

selecting individuals with the highest likelihood for success in the military service. 

The Navy and Army have been working on developing and fielding Non-Cognitive 

Testing Instruments to assist the Services in improving the selection process. While 

the ASVAB is a very good predictor for a person’s aptitude, it does not provide an 

assessment of an individual’s probability for success in military. 

Army has been administering its TAPAS test to potential Army recruits for more 

than 2 years, and preliminary results have indicated that soldiers who performed 

well on the TAPAS test, but scored less than 50 on the AFQT have attrition rates 

comparable to soldiers who scored greater than 50 on the AFQT. Based on Army’s 

preliminary research findings, Navy has begun to use the Military Entrance ProcVerDate Aug 31 2005 09:55 Jan 25, 2012 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00441 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6621 Y:\BORAWSKI\DOCS\68089.TXT JUNE PsN: JUNEB
436 

essing Centers to administer the TAPAS test to all potential future sailors, to determine if Army’s TAPAS test is a viable predictor for success in the Navy. 

General MILSTEAD. We do not recommend abandoning the Tier system. DOD established the current Tier system so that all of the services classify applicant education credentials in the same manner. This system has proven to be a very accurate predictor of military applicant attrition for well over 3 decades. 

General JONES. The current tier system has proven to be a valid predictor of attrition. Our position supports that of the department to retain the current tier system. 

If results from new studies and analyses indicate that changes are supported, then 

the Air Force would be amenable to considering alternatives. 

DISABILITY EVALUATION SYSTEM

9. Senator MCCAIN. Secretary Lamont and General Bostick, after almost 10 years 

of war, the Army is trying to move about 20,000 nondeployable soldiers through the 

Disability Evaluation System (DES). When considered against the requirement to 

cut 22,000 Active Duty soldiers from the Temporary End Strength Increase over the 

next 2 years, this looms as a significant readiness issue. What are you doing and 

what recommendations do you have to address the Army’s problem with this large 

and growing backlog of soldiers in the DES? 

Secretary LAMONT and General BOSTICK. The Army remains convinced statutory 

reform is the only sustainable way to achieve a system worthy of the sacrifices of 

our volunteer force in this era of persistent conflict. Although the DES is better 

than it was 4 years ago, the process remains complex, disjointed, hard to understand, and processing has become embarrassingly slow and unpredictable. While 

DOD and the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) have integrated their separate 

disability systems, the laws, legal opinions, and policies specific to each department 

result in differing outcomes for the same type of determination; this duality creates 

confusion, a lack of trust, and a belief the Army is not being loyal to or fair with 

its soldiers. 

The current DES is 60 years old and was designed for a draft-based military in 

an industrial/agricultural America; its focus on disability and compensation is inadequate for the needs of today’s professional military. The unintended effects of disability compensation reduce incentives to participate in rehabilitation or to return 

to work. Some of our soldier’s believe if they get better, they will receive less disability compensation; they may want to work, but they also need to maintain their 

income for themselves and their families. We need to reform the system—our soldiers deserve a more comprehensive system that promotes resilience, self-reliance, 

re-education, and employment, while ensuring enduring benefits for the soldier and 

their families. 

The Army’s current backlog is related to an inherently inefficient process. For perspective, a rapid improvement effort conducted at Fort Carson last year identified 

155 distinct processing handoffs, organized into 10 sub-processes crossing 8 functional activities in 2 departments. At present, the Joint DOD/VA Integrated process 

takes nearly 400 days to complete, but our soldiers active participation in the process is less than 30 days. More to the point, even if we were meeting the DOD’s 295- 

day goal, 10 months is simply too long for our soldiers to wait while their future 

hangs in the balance. 

Although we fully support current efforts to redesign the Integrated Disability 

Evaluation System (IDES) to realize a 150-day process, we believe any effort to redesign the process within the constraints of legislation will likely have low payoff 

as it did in 2007, and more importantly, these efforts divert leadership away from 

real reform. As our Surgeon General argued in 2007, attempting to speed up a bad 

system will do little more than turn a bad process into ‘‘a fast bad process.’’ However, we are not suggesting we do not; we understand effective reform will take 

time, and in the mean time we have to do what we can with the process we have. 

Therefore, the Army will continue to commit resources and leadership energy to improve our DES. Since 2007 the Army has increased resources dedicated to DES activities, conducted over 30 improvement projects, and increased command/leadership 

focus on the process. Ongoing improvement efforts include: 

• Holding quarterly Video Teleconferences (VTC) with senior Army and VA 

leadership to identify and resolve systemic issues hindering efficient processing and share Best Practices/lessons learned. 

• Simplifying Medical Evaluation Board requirements to reduce variability, 

improve quality, facilitate training of new examiners, and decrease 

redundancies. 

• Providing additional resourcing to increase Medical and Physical Evaluation Board capacity to meet current and anticipated demands. 

437 

• Testing new medical evaluation and referral procedures at RC Soldier 

Medical Support Center (RC SMSC) in Pinellas Park, FL with the initial 

supporting Medical Treatment Facility (MTF) at Fort Gordon. 

• Published a directive outlining the roles, responsibilities, and expectations for preparing an installation to transition from the Army’s legacy 

Physical DES to the Joint DOD/VA Integrated DES. 

• Continue to enforce existing standards for processing and adjudicating 

non-deployable soldiers. 

• Continue to review and revise policies, processes and systems that have 

caused the non-deployable rate to increase. 

Finally, we believe the rehabilitation and DESs required to sustain an All-Volunteer Force deserve a broader national and interagency discussion. This discussion 

must focus on the Nation’s responsibilities to the less than 1 percent of the American population who volunteer to ensure our Nation’s security, and through no fault 

of their own except for doing their duty become Wounded, Injured, or Ill and can 

no longer serve. 

INDEPENDENT REVIEW PANEL TO STUDY THE JUDGE ADVOCATE REQUIREMENTS OF THE

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

10. Senator MCCAIN. Secretary Garcia, the Report of the Independent Review 

Panel to Study the Judge Advocate Requirements of the Department of the Navy 

(the Panel) was completed on February 22, 2011. The Panel recommended that the 

Navy’s Judge Advocate General (JAG) Corps be manned at a level of 950 judge advocates. The Navy JAG testified to the Panel that his assessment was that there 

should be 926 JAG on Active Duty to meet current demands in missions including 

Office of Military Commissions and individual augmentees assignments. What is the 

Department of the Navy’s plan with respect to responding to the report and recommendations of the Panel? 

Secretary GARCIA. The Navy plans to fund 31 JAG Corps officer billets currently 

detailed to the Office of Military Commissions until the end of fiscal year 2015, and 

continue increasing the number of JAG Corps billets to 821 over the Future Years 

Defense Program (FYDP). This is consistent with the number of active-duty JAG 

Corps officer billets the JAG, VADM James Houck, testified before the 506 Panel 

are needed to meet baseline mission requirements (Individual Augmentee and the 

Office of Military Commissions assignments are not included in the baseline requirement). We have also begun to train enlisted members of the Legalman rating 

to obtain certification through the American Bar Association as paralegals, which 

will gradually ease much of the administrative burdens currently levied on JAG 

Corps officers. 

11. Senator MCCAIN. Secretary Garcia, what is your assessment of the appropriate level of Active Duty JAG in the Navy and Marine Corps and what actions 

do you plan to take in this regard? 

Secretary GARCIA. We have experienced increased demand for JAG Corps officers 

in areas such as operational law and support for sailors and their families. However, 

I believe the panel’s estimate of the number of JAG Corps officers necessary to meet 

future requirements is high. For Navy Active Duty JAG Corps officers, I concur with 

VADM Houck’s testimony before the 506 Panel that the number of Active Duty JAG 

Corps officers necessary to meet baseline mission requirements is 821 (Individual 

Augmentee and the Office of Military Commissions assignments are not included in 

the baseline requirement). To meet these requirements, the Navy intends to increase the number of JAG Corps billets to 821 across the FYDP. This increase, coupled with our ongoing initiative to train enlisted members of the Legalman rating 

to obtain certification through the American Bar Association as paralegals, will ease 

much of the administrative burdens currently levied on JAG Corps officers. 

SEXUAL ASSAULT PREVENTION AND RESPONSE EFFORTS

12. Senator MCCAIN. General Bostick, Admiral Ferguson, General Milstead, and 

General Jones, preventing and responding properly to incidents of sexual assault remains a high priority for each of your Services, and progress has been made. Is the 

military a safer place for women to serve than before September 11? 

General BOSTICK. The comprehensive Sexual Assault Prevention and Response 

(SAPR) Programs implemented across DOD and within all the Services have undoubtedly helped make the military safer for all servicemembers, female and male. 

438 

Although Army statistics show a significant increase in the number of reports of 

sexual assault since 2001, those statistics are misleading as sexual assault was and 

is the most under-reported crime in the Nation. Since the Army SAPR Program 

began in 2004, there has been a steady increase in the percentage of Army victims 

who break their silence and come forward to report a sexual assault. More victims 

are reporting because they feel safer and more confident with the response they will 

receive from their chain of command, criminal investigators, medical personnel and 

prosecutors. 

Additionally, the Army has increased its focus on prevention by implementing a 

comprehensive sexual assault prevention strategy. The cornerstone of the Army’s 

strategy is the ‘‘I. A.M. Strong’’ Sexual Harassment/Assault Prevention Campaign 

where the letters I–A-M stand for Intervene-Act-Motivate. The ‘‘I. A.M. Strong’’ messaging features soldiers as influential role models and outlines the Army’s intent for 

all team members to personally take action and set a respectful standard of conduct, 

thereby providing a safe environment for all community members. 

Admiral FERGUSON. Although measuring success in prevention is difficult, it appears that Navy’s SAPR program may be contributing to a decrease in the incidence 

of sexual assault against servicemembers, as measured by the Defense Manpower 

Data Center (DMDC) 2010 Workplace and Gender Relations Survey of Active Duty 

Members. In 2006, 7.1 percent of active duty women, and 2.3 percent of active duty 

men, indicated they experienced unwanted sexual contact in the 12 months before 

the survey. In 2010, 4.4 percent of active duty women, and 1.1 percent of active duty 

men, indicated they experienced unwanted sexual contact in the prior 12 months. 

General MILSTEAD. The Marine Corps SAPR program is focused on the safety, dignity, and the well-being of all marines. Our leadership has elevated and highlighted 

the importance of the SAPR Program by institutionalizing a zero tolerance policy, 

holding commanders accountable for establishing an environment of trust and respect, and developing ‘‘Bystander Intervention’’ training, an evidence-based best 

practice for engaging marines on their role in sexual assault prevention. 

Although not conclusive, there was a slight decrease in the reported number of 

sexual assaults from fiscal year09 to fiscal year 2010. In addition, command actions 

taken on sexual assaults (e.g. courts-martial, non-judicial punishments, and other 

administrative actions) increased from 41 in fiscal year 2009 to 52 in fiscal year 

2010, which may correlate to greater offender accountability. 

Since September 11, the Corps has taken a comprehensive look at the behavioral 

health needs of marines. The Commandant directed the integration of all Behavioral 

Health programs, including SAPR, in order to provide services that are responsive 

to the needs of victims and offer evidence-based practices to marines and their families. The SAPR program will continue its efforts to improve overall education and 

training on the need to prevent sexual assaults. 

General JONES. Yes, we are confident that since the implementation of the SAPR 

program in June 2005, significant strides have been made to provide a safer environment for military women and men regarding preventing and responding to incidents of sexual assault. We also recognize that there is more to be done and will 

continue our efforts to enhance our program and aggressively work towards eliminating a crime that has no place in our Air Force. 

13. Senator MCCAIN. General Bostick, Admiral Ferguson, General Milstead, and 

General Jones, do you think that additional legislation is needed to enhance the sexual assault prevention programs in DOD and your Service? 

General BOSTICK. Additional legislation for sexual assault prevention programs is 

not needed at this time. The National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for Fiscal 

Year 2005 provided the necessary legislative impetus to create SAPR programs in 

DOD and the Military Services. Since then, DOD and the Services have worked very 

closely with each other and Congress to implement, assess and improve SAPR in 

the military. 

For example, three GAO reviews, the congressionally mandated Defense Task 

Force on Sexual Assault in the Military Services (DTF–SAMS), as well as continuous internal assessments by DOD and the Services have identified ways to improve 

how we can prevent and respond to incidents of sexual assault. 

This collaborative relationship among DOD, the Services and Congress facilitates 

identifying and implementing changes and enhancements, without the need for additional legislation. 

Admiral FERGUSON. Existing laws have helped to achieve an enhanced and more 

efficient SAPR program. Navy continues to comprehensively evaluate our SAPR program and implement appropriate steps to eliminate sexual assault from the Navy. 

As our program evolves, we continuously monitor our efforts, and assess the impact 

of our initiatives, which will allow us to determine if additional legislation is reVerDate Aug 31 2005 09:55 Jan 25, 2012 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00444 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6621 Y:\BORAWSKI\DOCS\68089.TXT JUNE PsN: JUNEB
439 

quired. Should new legislation be deemed necessary, we will recommend its inclusion in a future Defense Authorization request. 

General MILSTEAD. The Marine Corps is currently working with DOD to implement the SAPR requirements set forth in the NDAA for Fiscal Year 2010. We do 

not believe additional legislation is needed at this time. 

General JONES. Prior legislation initiated with the Ronald Reagan NDAA of 2005 

and subsequent public laws have provided us with a robust framework to establish 

a SAPR program, while allowing integration with overall military readiness. We appreciate the attention Congress has brought to bear on this issue and the ongoing 

efforts to provide for strong prevention and response programs within the Department. For example, we support the recent Senate Armed Services Committee inclusion in the mark up of legislation to amend section 920 of title 10, U.S.C. (article 

120 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice) to clarify the separate sexual assault 

offenses. This legislation was requested by the Joint Services Committee on Military 

Justice and the Secretary of Defense to address deficiencies in existing law that 

have been identified by military courts and which were addressed in the report of 

the Defense Task Force on Sexual Assault in the Military (December 2009). 

PROGRESS OF IMPLEMENTATION OF DON’T ASK, DON’T TELL REPEAL

14. Senator MCCAIN. General Bostick, Admiral Ferguson, General Milstead, and 

General Jones, training for Repeal Day is currently underway in each of your Services that will pave the way for gay and lesbian individuals to serve openly in the 

Armed Forces. What is your assessment of the effectiveness of the training for your 

Service thus far? 

General BOSTICK. The Army’s Chain Teach method has been very effective in educating the force on the policy changes that will result from implementation of the 

repeal of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell. It puts direct responsibility on commanders/leaders 

for their units’ complete education, allowing them to personally engage their soldiers, civilians, and interested family members on this important policy change and 

to explain its impact and our expectations of them. Feedback to date continues to 

confirm confidence that Army commanders and senior noncommissioned officers are 

fully capable of providing strong leadership, a clear message and proactive education that are keys to successful implementation of DADT repeal. 

Admiral FERGUSON. Navy assesses the training conducted to date to be effective 

and training remains on track for completion by July 1, 2011. The effectiveness of 

training is accomplished through objective and subjective measures. We are accounting for the number of individuals and units that complete training through a webbased Navy Family Accountability and Assessment System to preclude gaps in any 

major commands or regions. 

To measure retention of training content, we administered knowledge-based tests 

to Command Leadership teams after completion of Tier 2 training with results 

showing over 90 percent comprehension. Training leadership teams provide feedback on questions and concerns that arise during training sessions. 

Sailors also have the opportunity to submit individual questions or feedback about 

their training experiences through our Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell repeal web site. Questions posed during training sessions or submitted online are reviewed and responses 

are added to the ‘‘Frequently Asked Questions’’ section of the web site. Sailor feedback indicates the training is comprehensive, well-delivered, and effective. Additionally, we have observed no negative impacts to readiness, effectiveness, cohesion, recruiting, or retention. 

Navy is confident that the training assessment measures we have in place, coupled with the overall positive feedback from the force, indicate that the training is 

effective. 

General MILSTEAD. Feedback from the force indicates our training has been effective. Marines indicate an understanding of the policy change and what is expected 

of them upon repeal. The face-to-face training allows marines to engage their leadership and ask those questions that are most important to the individual marine. The 

time allotted to prepare and train for the repeal provides the opportunity for marines to really consider potential impacts and ensure they are aware of the change 

in policy. 

General JONES. The Air Force is delivering the Office of the Secretary of Defense 

standardized tiered DADT repeal training. As of 1 Jun 11, the AF has trained 66 

percent of the total force. 

In order to assess the effectiveness of training, we’re soliciting subjective feedback 

from our Major Commands (MAJCOMs) on a bimonthly basis. These reports include 

440 

feedback in the following areas: policy, readiness, effectiveness, unit cohesion, retention, repeal related incidents, and barriers to repeal 

To date, the subjective reports from MAJCOMs are positive. MAJCOMs are indicating that the training is clear, on-target, and effective. The standardized slides 

and script are ensuring a consistent, accurate message is provided throughout the 

force. There has been no significant issues regarding policy, effectiveness, unit cohesion, retention, repeal related incident, and barriers to repeal. 

15. Senator MCCAIN. General Bostick, Admiral Ferguson, General Milstead, and 

General Jones, the ground combat forces—soldiers and marines, as well as the Special Forces for all Services—registered the greatest concern about the effects on 

readiness and unit cohesion of repealing the Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell policy. What problems do you anticipate on ships and in the field when the repeal takes effect? 

General BOSTICK. I do not anticipate significant or systematic problems from the 

repeal of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell. Feedback from the field across all units is that this 

is not a significant issue to the soldiers. We will deal with this issue with the same 

professionalism that has marked our conduct of current operations and has been a 

hallmark of this institution for 236 years. Soldiers are expected to treat all others 

with dignity and respect, consistent with the core values that already exist within 

the Army. Harassment, bullying or victimizing of any kind will not be tolerated. 

The Army is a force of over 1.1 million soldiers, and there will likely be inappropriate conduct by a few. Commanders and supervisors at all levels have the authority and responsibility to maintain good order, discipline and morale within their 

units; they should use existing tools (to include counseling, non-judicial punishment 

and court-martial) to deal with misconduct. Leaders will be educated on how to handle certain situations, and support will be provided as needed to ensure decisions 

are lawful, impartial, and promote unit cohesion. 

The Army Guiding Principles for Implementation of the Repeal of DADT include: 

standards of conduct apply to every soldier; treat each other with dignity and respect; emphasize our role as professional soldiers; and good order and discipline will 

be maintained at all times. The clear message is that respecting each other’s rights 

is critical to maintaining good order and discipline. Standards of conduct apply 

equally to all soldiers and inappropriate conduct should be corrected appropriately. 

Admiral FERGUSON. We have seen no adverse effects associated with repeal training to date, and no significant problems are anticipated on ships or in the field when 

repeal takes effect. The Comprehensive Review Working Group (CRWG) study anticipated some limited and isolated disruption to unit cohesion and retention and 

concluded that the risks of repeal within warfighting units in a field environment 

or at sea, would remain within acceptable levels when coupled with a sustained 

commitment to core values of leadership, professionalism, and respect for all. While 

the CRWG identified potential areas of friction, Navy has focused its DADT Repeal 

training on preparing leaders with an in depth understanding of policy changes and 

discussions on implementation. Using informed leadership to present training to 

sailors has ensured appropriate emphasis is being placed on professionalism and 

mutual respect. 

General MILSTEAD. We do not anticipate post-repeal problems that engaged leadership will not be able to successfully address. I expect that your marines will faithfully abide by the laws of this Nation and conduct themselves in accordance with 

their core values of honor, courage, and commitment. Any issues that may arise 

post-repeal will be immediately addressed upon identification. 

General JONES. Air Force is satisfied that education and training policies and regulations adequately address concerns of our deployed forces. 

Although 10 U.S.C. 654 has not yet been repealed, we have not received any reports from the field indicating negative operational impacts since legislation was 

passed allowing for repeal. 

Reports of concerns regarding privacy in berthing and bathroom areas have been 

limited and thus are not considered a major concern. As we approach completion 

of training, we expect fewer questions regarding privacy concerns; however, we will 

continue to closely monitor feedback. We also believe existing standards of conduct 

already are in place, and commanders have sufficient authority and flexibility to address issues arising in the future. 

441 

QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY SENATOR LINDSEY GRAHAM

MENTAL HEALTH ASSESSMENTS FOR DEPLOYED SERVICEMEMBERS

16. Senator GRAHAM. General Bostick, Admiral Ferguson, General Milstead, and 

General Jones, the NDAA for 2010 required person-to-person mental health assessments at regular intervals before and after deployment for any member of the 

Armed Forces who is deployed in connection with a contingency operation. How is 

your Service implementing this requirement for members of the Reserve and National Guard? 

General BOSTICK. The Army is implementing this requirement through its Comprehensive Behavioral Health System of Care. This campaign plan was launched in 

February 2010 to standardize, synchronize, and coordinate behavioral healthcare 

across the Army and through the Army Force Generation cycle. Included in this initiative is the identification of five touch points throughout the soldier’s deployment 

cycle that will provide enhanced behavioral health screening in compliance with section 708 of the 2010 NDAA. For Reserve and National Guard soldiers, three of the 

five screening points will occur while the soldier is activated and transitioning 

through existing deployment processing centers. The Army is closely working with 

the Reserve and National Guard components to implement the required Post Deployment Reassessment and annual screening requirements. Additionally, the Army 

is exceeding the NDAA requirements by providing in-theater assessments, immediate redeployment screening for returning soldiers, and annual enhanced screening 

for all soldiers regardless of deployment status. 

Admiral FERGUSON. The DOD force health protection strategy already requires 

servicemembers to participate in several deployment and nondeployment related 

health screenings to include: the Pre-Deployment Health Assessment (DD Form 

2795), the Post-Deployment Health Assessment (DD Form 2796), the Post-Deployment Health Re-Assessment (DD Form 2900), and the Periodic Health Assessment 

(PHA). To the extent that the time frames for the additional mental health assessments correspond to those of existing health assessments, performing the assessments concurrently is desirable. In support of the Navy and Marine Corps, Navy 

Medicine has developed an electronic application of the mental health assessment 

and reconfigured the DD Forms 2795 and 2900 to streamline the process and capture the mental health assessments during existing processes. The Navy and Marine Corps Reserve Components (RC) complete these existing requirements by using 

organic medical assets as well as contract services under the Reserve Health Readiness Program (RHRP). RC representatives are working with the RHRP representatives at ASD (HA) to expand services and augment existing resources to meet the 

additional mental health assessment requirement. Implementation is expected to 

begin in July 2011. 

General MILSTEAD. The DOD Force Health Protection Strategy already requires 

servicemembers to participate in several deployment and non-deployment related 

health screenings, to include: Pre-Deployment Health Assessment (DD Form 2795), 

Post-Deployment Health Assessment (DD Form 2796), Post-Deployment Health ReAssessment (DD Form 2900), and Periodic Health Assessment (PHA). To the extent 

that the time frames for the additional mental health assessments correspond to 

those of existing health assessments, performing the assessments concurrently is desirable. In support of the Navy and Marine Corps, Navy Medicine has developed an 

electronic application for the mental health assessment and reconfigured the DD 

Forms 2795 and 2900 to streamline the process and capture the mental health assessments during existing processes. The Navy and Marine Corps Reserve components complete these existing requirements by using organic medical assets as well 

as contract services under DOD’s Reserve Health Readiness Program (RHRP). Reserve components representatives are working with DOD to expand services and 

augment existing resources to meet the additional mental health assessment requirement. Implementation is expected to begin in July 2011. 

General JONES. As of 1 April 2011, all Air National Guard (ANG) Wings began 

conducting Deployment Resiliency Assessments (DRA) in compliance with the four 

regular intervals required by the NDAA for Fiscal Year 2010, section 708: 60-days 

pre-deployment; 90–180 days post-deployment; 7–12 months post-deployment; 16–24 

months post-deployment. 

A contracted service offered by Logistics Health Incorporated (LHI) has been used 

to conduct the person-to-person DRAs. The option for unit-level privileged providers 

to conduct the person-to-person encounters is open to all ANG units and four ANG 

Wings have conducted DRAs locally. The ANG DRAs are tracked as part of the ANG 

deployment schedule initiated by the Pre-Deployment Health Assessment process. 

442 

Post-Deployment DRAs are scheduled to coincide with the Post-Deployment 

Health Reassessment and the member’s annual Periodic Health Assessment (PHA). 

Due dates are tracked via the Air Force’s PHA and Individual Medical Readiness 

program. 

AFRC is using LHI to fulfill the requirements of the NDAA for Fiscal Year 2010 

mental health assessments. This organization was already being used to contact 

servicemembers who have completed a post-deployment health re-assessment questionnaire. Implementation of the mental health assessments began on April 1, 2011 

and is running smoothly, with minor changes being made to adjust for lessons 

learned during implementation. 

UNIFIED MEDICAL COMMAND

17. Senator GRAHAM. Secretary Lamont, Secretary Garcia, and Secretary 

Ginsberg, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) issued a report earlier this 

year stating that DOD could save $400 million by realigning medical assets into a 

single military command. I guess the House Armed Services Subcommittee on Personnel was listening, because they put it in their mark. Do you support a unified 

medical command, headed by a 4 star, with 3 subordinate commands each headed 

by a 3 star surgeon general, as a substitute for the current organization of the Military Health System (MHS)? If so, why? If not, why not? 

Secretary LAMONT. No, not until DOD has reviewed the desirability of establishing a unified medical command and ensures that this new command will maintain and improve the care to our soldiers and their families. 

Secretary GARCIA. Our sailors, marines, as well as all servicemembers and their 

families, are receiving the outstanding health care they need and deserve. I am privileged to have the opportunity to see firsthand the care being provided by our Navy 

medical personnel around the world—at sea, deployed with the Marines and at our 

medical treatment facilities. I have also had the opportunity to visit the Medical 

Education and Training Campus in San Antonio where our corpsmen are training 

together with their Army and Air Force counterparts in a joint learning environment. We have outstanding examples of our medical personnel working together to 

keep our servicemembers healthy and mission ready. 

The Secretary of Defense has been resolute in his commitment to implement efficiencies within the Department, including the MHS. DOD will be carefully studying 

potential organizational constructs that allow for the delivery of high quality medical care in an efficient and cost-effective manner. As such, we defer specific comment on any MHS organizational changes until the assessments have been conducted and evaluated by DOD and the Services. 

Secretary GINSBERG. We do not support a unified medical command. We do not 

agree there would be cost savings by the creation of a unified medical command. 

We believe a more effective and efficient joint medical solution can be attained 

without the expense of establishing a unified medical command. Changes to doctrine 

can be made within current authorities and do not require a new unified medical 

command. Service specific and joint medical doctrine must be improved to assure 

Service capabilities are fully interoperable and interdependent to bolster unity of effort. The Services should continue integrating common medical platforms to reduce 

redundancy and lower costs. 

A unified medical command may not achieve the intended synergy or unity of effort. All models of the unified medical command to date do not include medical 

forces intrinsic (line funded vs. Defense Health Program funded manpower authorizations) to Service line units. A unified medical command would not oversee medical forces serving in these line units. Air Force line funded medics represent 5 percent of Air Force medical personnel; Navy shipboard assets represent 25 percent of 

medical personnel; and Army line Tables of Organization and Equipment (TOE) 

funded medics represent 48 percent of Army active duty medics. Air Force ability 

to meet operational medical requirements would be disproportionately compromised 

in current models for unified medical command. 

Any new unified medical command will require new systems and structure to 

oversee component headquarters and assigned forces. This will drive even higher 

costs. If a unified medical command follows the example of the current JTF 

CAPMED (Joint Task Force, National Capitol Region Medical), it is highly unlikely 

there will be cost savings. There is no need for a fourth military Service and establishing such in the form of a unified medical command, without the discipline and 

historical rule sets that govern existing Services, will likely drive costs much higher. 

Even more critical, a unified medical command may not be as responsive to the 

needs of Service warfighters as is the current oversight by the Services. 

443 

BRAC 2005 created many opportunities for joint oversight of medics. Given time 

to mature, these initiatives along with the Service Surgeon Generals’ efforts to consolidate oversight of common support functions (information management, contracting, military health facility construction and financial management) in the new 

co-located medical headquarters will reduce redundancies. Adoption of a single Service accounting system to allocate Defense Health Program dollars and improve accountability would do more to reduce costs than a unified medical command. 

18. Senator GRAHAM. Secretary Lamont, Secretary Garcia, and Secretary 

Ginsberg, would establishment of a unified medical command help or hurt recruitment and retention of medical personnel? 

Secretary LAMONT. Without a thorough study and analysis by DOD, it is unknown 

if establishment of a unified medical command would help or hurt recruitment and 

retention of medical personnel or more importantly, why. 

Secretary GARCIA. We know how important the health care benefit is to our sailors, Marines and their families. Access to quality care is vital to force readiness as 

well as recruiting and retention. Our personnel deserve outstanding medical care 

and I believe we are providing it—around the world, each and every day. 

The Secretary of Defense has been resolute in his commitment to implement efficiencies within the Department, including the MHS. The DOD will be carefully 

studying potential organizational constructs that allow for the delivery of high quality medical care in an efficient and cost-effective manner. As such, we defer specific 

comment on any MHS organizational changes until the assessments have been conducted and evaluated by DOD and the Services. 

Secretary GINSBERG. The establishment of a unified medical command creates an 

uncertain environment for recruitment and retention of medical personnel. Currently, each Service offers unique opportunities and a Service specific culture which 

attracts and retains healthcare professionals to the Service of their choice. There are 

candidates who elect to serve in any military branch, however, most seek to be part 

of a specific Service culture. The establishment of a unified medical command could 

result in significant changes to Service culture, perceived quality of life (Sea, Land, 

or Air), Service specific initiatives, and professional development opportunities. 

Like the other Services, the Air Force Medical Service competes for fully qualified 

health care professionals from the private sector and other Federal agencies such 

as the Department of Veterans Affairs and the Public Health Service. We attract 

fully qualified specialists and retain them through competitive compensation using 

accession bonuses and other financial incentives. If accession bonuses and special 

pays were funded through a unified medical command, special attention would be 

necessary to ensure all Service operational support requirements were adequately 

covered. 

Without additional data, it remains unclear if the establishment of a unified medical command would help or hurt recruitment and retention of medical personnel. 

EDUCATION OF SCHOOL AGED MILITARY CHILDREN

19. Senator GRAHAM. Secretary Lamont, Secretary Garcia, and Secretary 

Ginsberg, last year, we received testimony from DOD that more than half of the 300 

local educational agencies serving military children were not meeting academic 

standards in reading/ language arts and/or math. Are you aware that a DOD grant 

program, which provided grants to improve learning opportunities for military kids 

at 284 local schools, was cut in the DOD efficiencies initiative? 

Secretary LAMONT. Yes, the Army is aware that DOD determined it would be 

more cost effective to replace grants to local education agencies with an alternative 

means of outreach. I would defer to the Office of the Secretary of Defense for details 

on their decision to discontinue the program and their planned way ahead. 

Secretary GARCIA. Yes, the DoN has received confirmation from the Department 

of Defense Education Activity (DODEA) that although the grant program is still in 

law, the funding to operate the entire DODEA Partnership Branch (which administers the grant program and other initiatives involving stateside local education 

agencies that support military-connected students) has been cut significantly starting in fiscal year 2012. 

Secretary GINSBERG. Yes, these grants effectively targeted assistance to school 

districts serving military children, particularly districts with the greatest needs. We 

had hoped to see OSD continue its funding of this initiative. Air Force will work 

closely with OSD to get the remaining grant funds used to the fullest extent possible. 

444 

We have funded School Liaison Officers (SLOs) at every base to serve as a key 

resource for parents as they navigate education information and they also serve as 

a central resource for area school districts to help provide orientation and assistance 

to new teachers and staff on the unique needs of military children affected by PCS 

moves and deployments. In addition, we have required military leader participation 

in local school boards to voice the issues pertinent to military children. In March 

11, we brought together our SLOs, along with our new Exceptional Family Member 

Program (EFMP) Coordinators and key education leaders and experts to build the 

partnerships to create optimal educational settings and opportunities for our children. Training our staffs and leaders in conjunction with the school districts and 

community educational resources will remain a priority for Air Force. 

We greatly appreciate the Congress providing $250 million this fiscal year for 

school construction which will significantly improve the condition and capacity of 

public schools on military installations. This core support improves the educational 

environments for large numbers of our military children. We are committed to sustaining a close relationship with the school districts, OSD and Sister Services, and 

the community organizations to continually improve the educational opportunities 

of military children, a critical quality of life issue. 

20. Senator GRAHAM. Secretary Lamont, Secretary Garcia, and Secretary 

Ginsberg, do you agree that providing access to a quality education for our kids is 

a readiness requirement for the All-Volunteer Force? 

Secretary LAMONT. Yes, the Army wholeheartedly agrees that providing access to 

a quality education for our children is a readiness requirement for the All-Volunteer 

Force. Since 1999, the Army has undertaken many initiatives to demonstrate to 

families its commitment to ensuring that schools, communities, and military installations respond confidently to the complexities of frequent transitions and parental 

separations and provide families the assurance that their children’s academic well 

being is a high priority. The Army actively collaborates with the Department of 

Education; DODEA; national, State, and local education agencies; public and private 

sector youth serving organizations; community groups; and Army and Defense Department agencies to build effective and enduring partnerships in support of our 

children’s education. 

Secretary GARCIA. I agree that quality education programs for children are valuable to the readiness of military families whether a servicemember is at home or 

deployed. 

Secretary GINSBERG. Absolutely. We recognize that the integration of children into 

local education systems is a major influence on morale and propensity to remain in 

the Air Force. Senior wing leadership involvement, as military School Liaison Officers (SLO), is required to ensure Air Force children are successfully integrated into 

local school systems. In saying that, we have established civilian SLO positions to 

provide even greater levels of support. Recently, the Air Force reemphasized the 

continued need for all senior leaders to stay involved in support of military child 

education issues. 

21. Senator GRAHAM. Secretary Lamont, Secretary Garcia, and Secretary 

Ginsberg, what initiatives do you have underway to address this? 

Secretary LAMONT. Army Child, Youth & School Services programs exist to support military readiness by reducing the conflict between a soldier’s mission requirements and his or her parental responsibilities. The Army School Support Services 

Strategic Plan addresses students’ learning environments, academic skills, and personal management skills to produce a military school support system that ensures 

positive outcomes for military students by: 

• Using community resources to reduce the impact of relocations and transitions of Army children 

• Providing predictable support services that assist children with relocation, life transitions, and achieving academic success 

• Helping parents, children, school, commanders and communities to access 

resources that facilitate school transitions 

• Identifying barriers and developing solutions to ensure academic success 

• Promoting parent and community involvement by providing tools to overcome obstacles 

• Educating schools and communities on the needs of Army children and 

the impact that a military lifestyle has on academic success and school adjustment 

Secretary GARCIA. The School Liaison program has been implemented within the 

Navy and Marine Corps to help support transitioning families in obtaining eduVerDate Aug 31 2005 09:55 Jan 25, 2012 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00450 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6621 Y:\BORAWSKI\DOCS\68089.TXT JUNE PsN: JUNEB
445 

cational information and assistance from local school districts. The mission of School 

Liaisons is to mobilize and use community resources to reduce the impact of the mobile military life style on military school-age children and families, and to implement predictable support services that assist school-age children with relocations, 

life transitions and achieving academic success. 

School Liaisons provide expertise, experience and resources to assist military children in their transitions to different schools; to improve the ability of teachers and 

administrators in meeting the needs of military children; and to educate parents on 

the Local Education Agency’s (LEA) academic requirements, and to provide assistance to LEAs on deployment support for military children. 

Additionally, we value DODEA’s grant program which provides LEAs with financial assistance to improve academic programs for military children. 

We also support the Defense-State Liaison Office collaborations with the Council 

of State Governments to develop Interstate Compacts on Educational Opportunity 

for Military Children. The purpose of the Compact is to remove barriers to educational success imposed on children of military families because of frequent moves 

and deployment of their parents. Some of the issues addressed include: timely enrollment; student placement process; qualification and eligibility for enrollment, 

educational programs, and participation in extracurricular academic, athletic, and 

social activities; on-time graduation; and promoting flexibility and cooperation between educational systems, parents and students. 

Secretary GINSBERG. Our major initiative is the authorization of 53 additional civilian School Liaison Officer positions, to have Air Force-wide coverage. The school 

liaisons work with parents and families who face the challenges of the mobile military lifestyle and associated transition and parental separation issues. Other initiatives include: Providing MAJCOM and installation guidance/emphasis on support 

for military child education issues and a comprehensive Desk Guide for School Liaison Officers (SLO). Also, we have funded Air Force membership in the Military 

Child Education Coalition and the Military Impacted Schools Association. Finally, 

we have standardized training for all SLOs as well as EFMP-Family Support Coordinators and have added Military Family Life Consultants for schools at selected 

installations. 

SPECIAL EDUCATION PILOT

22. Senator GRAHAM. General Bostick, Admiral Ferguson, General Milstead, and 

General Jones, testimony from the Marine Corps today points out something important with respect to military families who have kids with special needs that is important: ‘‘National economic impacts and subsequent State budget cuts . . . may impede school districts’ abilities to provide special education services.’’ Last year I proposed a pilot program to see if scholarships would help kids with special educational 

needs achieve their goals when local schools could not meet their Federal obligation 

to do so. Unfortunately, that provision was not agreed to in the final agreement for 

the NDAA. From your perspective, what are some of the best practices in support 

of families with kids with special needs and what more can Congress do to help? 

General BOSTICK. Army School Liaison Officers and EFMP managers continually 

collaborate with local education agencies to provide military children, including 

those with special needs, with the best possible education. The Interstate Compact 

on Educational Opportunity for Military Children is a best practice that removes 

barriers to educational success imposed on children of military families because of 

frequent moves and deployment of their parents by: 

• Facilitating timely enrollment for children of military families and ensuring they are not disadvantaged due to difficulty in the transfer of education 

records from the previous schools or variations in age requirements 

• Facilitating student placement through which children of military families are not disadvantaged by variations in attendance requirements, scheduling, sequencing, grading, course content, or assessment 

• Facilitating qualification and eligibility for enrollment, educational programs, and participation in extracurricular academic, athletic, and social 

activities 

• Facilitating on-time graduation for children of military families 

• Providing for the uniform collection and sharing of information among 

States, schools, and military families 

• Promoting flexibility and cooperation among educational systems, parents, and students to help students achieve educational success 

Thirty-six States have signed the Interstate Compact on Education Opportunity 

for Military Children. 

446 

Congress can support the education of all military children by providing full and 

timely funding for the President’s budget request. 

Admiral FERGUSON. Navy’s recent Exceptional Family Member (EFM) Quick Poll, 

conducted in March 2011, indicated that families found TRICARE, family support 

services, information and referral services, TRICARE Extended Care Health Option, 

early intervention services both in CONUS and OCONUS, and EFM Respite Care 

to be most helpful. 

The program with the highest participant satisfaction was EFM Respite Care. 

Respite Care provides specialized care to Navy families who have children with special needs, so they can leave the house, go to an appointment, or just rest, knowing 

that their child is being cared for by a qualified provider. This program provides 

families with a qualifying family member (birth to age 18), who live in designated 

areas up to 40 hours of respite care a month. Navy’s EFM Respite Care program 

is currently funded with Overseas Contingency Operations funding. 

School Liaisons also play an important role. Although the primary role of the 

School Liaison is to empower parents to be advocates for their children, they also 

help connect families of children with special needs to academic support and resources that will enhance their success in the classroom. Resources include the Parent Handbook on Special Education; Special Needs Parents Toolkit, Specialized 

Training of Military Parents (STOMP); and Medicaid to assist in payment for services not covered by TRICARE. School Liaisons also keep our installation commanders updated about policies that affect children with special needs. 

The NDAA for Fiscal Year 2011 directs the OSD Office of Community Support for 

Military Families with Special Needs to develop a report on DOD educational programs and childcare provided for military dependent children with special needs, 

and whether those programs comply with applicable disability law. The report will 

address obstacles in obtaining special education, evidence based research, and feasibility/costs of enhancing and expediting special education services. We expect this 

report to provide significant information for Congress’ consideration. 

General MILSTEAD. Families enrolled in the Marine Corps EFMP are provided 

multiple layers of support, to include: 

• Family Case Workers provide non-medical case management and serve as 

liaisons to medical, State, or educational providers. These case workers may 

attend school special education meetings with parents to ensure the adequate provision of educational services. The case workers also coordinate 

with school liaisons to address special education concerns that are systemic 

to the local education agency. This coordination is critical for families who 

are relocating and provides a family training to increase their understanding of disability-specific information and help them connect with other 

families who have similar requirements. 

• EFMP attorneys provide legal advice and representation to families seeking Federal and/or State benefits and services for an exceptional family 

member. 

• EFMP Assignment Coordinators individually screen each EFMP enrolled 

dependent to ensure that the medical and/or educational services can be 

provided at the sponsor’s next duty station. 

• Respite Care is available to all enrolled EFMP families and is funded by 

the Marine Corps. Respite care is intended to reduce stress on sponsor families by providing temporary rest periods for up to 40 hours per month. 

• EFMP also provides outreach, family training, forums, support groups 

and referrals. 

General JONES. The Air Force EFMP was developed to educate and increase special needs awareness of service personnel in a timely, clear and credible format for 

our more than 17,000 airman enrolled in the EFMP, with one or more special needs 

family members. 

In March 2011, a joint training of EFMP-Family Support Coordinators and School 

Liaison Officers (SLO) set the stage for a collaborative, working relationship between these key installation education advocates. Training topics ranged from navigating resources, TRICARE services, the assignment process, medical and legal information, deployment support, homeschooling and the interstate compact. During 

the training, several installations presented their best practices: Exceptional Fitness, Sensory Movie Program, In School Support Group for Children with Deployed 

Family Members, Military Child Education Guide and the EFMP Multi-Disciplinary 

Team. 

The NDAA for Fiscal Year 2011 requires the OSD Office of Community Support 

for Military Families with Special Needs to provide Congress an in depth report on 

447 

obstacles obtaining special education, evidence based research, and feasibility/costs 

of enhancing and expediting special education services. 

We expect the outcome of the report to provide significant information for Congress’ consideration for future legislative courses of action. We currently do not 

know the extent of problems, whether they require intervention or further training 

for military families about the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. A system 

that requires States and school districts to report complaints regarding special education issues by military families would provide valuable data on the extent of the 

problems. 

INCREASES IN SUPPORT FOR FAMILY PROGRAMS

23. Senator GRAHAM. General Bostick, Admiral Ferguson, General Milstead, and 

General Jones, all of the Services have indicated vastly increased support of family 

programs, which our families need. Are these enduring increases in the base budget 

for fiscal year 2012, or are these contingent on war-time funding? 

General BOSTICK. The enduring increases for Army Family Programs are in the 

base budget for fiscal year 2012. To divest itself from dependence on war-time funding, the Army identified enduring family program requirements while developing 

the fiscal year 2010 budget, and placed the increases in the fiscal year 2010 and 

future base budgets. 

Admiral FERGUSON. fiscal year 2012 funding for Navy Fleet and Family Support 

Programs is in the base budget and not contingent on war-time funding. War-time 

funding of family programs is limited to support of forward-deployed active duty 

members in Africa and Southwest Asia. 

General MILSTEAD. Yes, these enduring increases for family programs have been 

added to the baseline budget for fiscal year 2012. 

General JONES. Out-year funding requests include spend plans for Airman & 

Family Readiness (A&FR) Programs. To align services and resources that support 

and enhance mission and family readiness appropriately, all A&FR efforts are 

geared toward resource and service provision that enhance stability of members, 

making them war-ready and confident that the needs of their families are met. Wartime funding would provide program enhancements. 

YELLOW RIBBON REINTEGRATION PROGRAM

24. Senator GRAHAM. Secretary Lamont, Secretary Garcia, and Secretary 

Ginsberg, many of our witnesses this year have testified about the importance of 

the Yellow Ribbon Reintegration Program (YRRP) which is funded in the President’s 

budget request for fiscal year 2012 at nearly $250 million. In last week’s Personnel 

Subcommittee hearing, Assistant Secretary McCarthy voiced his strong support for 

continuation of this program, yet we have since learned that it may not be included 

in next year’s budget request. Do you agree that the YRRP is an important resource 

for servicemembers and their families returning from deployment? 

Secretary LAMONT. Yes, the reintegration our servicemembers and their families 

experience has second and third order repercussions in nearly all aspects of their 

military and civilian lives. Servicemembers and their families must understand how 

to access the support network that is available to them. Reintegration is as significant as any other part of the deployment cycle and must be resourced as such. The 

YRRP has been refined through lessons learned over a decade of hard deployments. 

It is imperative to identify the most effective and efficient models, institutionalize 

them in much the same way as we institutionalize the other areas of the deployment experience. 

Secretary GARCIA. Yes, YRRP is very important and has been successful in providing transitional support services for servicemembers and their families. Though 

the majority of focus falls on post-deployment services, YRRP supports the military 

family through all phases of deployment, including but not limited to pre-deployment, deployment, demobilization, and post-deployment and reconstitution phases. 

It’s designed to provide the operational reservist with as equitable levels of support 

as possible to what we provide to our Active Component personnel. 

Secretary GINSBERG. Yes. Today airmen are deployed abroad to numerous locations around the globe. Operations tempo in the deployed environment remains high 

and the rate of operations at home is higher than ever as airmen, both deployed 

in-place and in-between deployments dutifully perform their missions while balancing their home life. Support to airmen (whether they are Active Duty, Air National Guard or Air Force Reserve), civilians, and their families, is more critical now 

than at any point in the history of the U.S. Air Force. 

448 

The YRRP provides for the physical, emotional, and cognitive well-being of airmen 

and families. 

The importance of the YRRP cannot be overstated. The goal is to provide 

servicemembers and their families with a delivery structure ensuring a continuum 

of care, with specific emphasis on the Deployment Cycle Support (DCS) so they are 

better prepared and sustained throughout the entire deployment cycle. The National 

Guard YRRP provides sufficient information, services, referral and proactive outreach opportunities for servicemembers and their families. The National Guard recognizes that each servicemember and family is part of a support structure and a 

network of protection that helps them cope and even thrive in the face of life’s challenges. 

If YRRP is not funded or not fully funded for fiscal year 2012, ARC 

servicemembers and their families will be put at a disadvantage for receiving information and resources throughout the deployment cycle. Before this program was 

created, many ARC servicemembers and their families received partial information 

before and after deploying. This increased stress level places undue burden on them, 

which affected both their home and professional lives. There is no other funding 

stream or program like this available to ARC members. Cutting this would be a detriment to the Air National Guard and the Air Force Reserve. 

25. Senator GRAHAM. Secretary Lamont, Secretary Garcia, and Secretary Ginsberg 

what would replace it if budget cuts forced its cancellation in future years? 

Secretary LAMONT. The YRRP is one of several programs that provide an important service to our soldiers. Some of the other programs are Strong Bonds, Army 

Strong Community Centers, Employer Partnership of the Armed Forces, Transitional Health Care and RC Soldier Medical Support. 

Secretary GARCIA. It would be most unfortunate if YRRP were to be cancelled. 

However, were that to be the situation, the Department of the Navy would continue 

to provide its Returning Warrior Workshop program designed to reduce combat 

stress and other personal issues associated with a servicemember’s deployment. 

These workshops are made available to the servicemember, their spouse, or if unmarried, significant other or close family member. 

Secretary GINSBERG. There is no replacement for the YRRP. It is a DOD-wide effort, mandated in Public Law 110–181, section 582. Before the onset of the National 

Guard YRRP, substantial funding and resources were not available to assist Air National Guard (ANG) servicemembers and their families throughout the entire deployment cycle. ANG servicemembers received counseling sessions by the ANG Airmen and Family Readiness Program Managers (A&FRPMs) that may or may not 

have included their families. These A&FRPMs provided Family Program counseling 

and information on each ANG installation. Despite the one-deep position, A&FRPMs 

manage as many programs as their active duty counterparts; therefore, not allowing 

the opportunity to provide the same level of service provided by YRRP. 

The YRRP has made a difference in the lives of thousands of servicemembers and 

their families with informational events and activities to facilitate access to services 

supporting their health and well-being throughout the deployment cycle. If the 

YRRP is not supported with appropriate funding, servicemembers and their families 

would be at a disadvantage on receiving information and resources. Continuing support from Congress, the Military Departments, the National Guard and Reserve, 

Federal agencies, nongovernmental agencies, and State and local partners will ensure our National Guard and Reserve servicemembers and their families remain 

strong and ready! 

The Air Force Reserve has always taken great pride in the level and quality of 

support and services provided for airmen and families. YRRP provides a one stop 

shop for military members and their families through all phases of the deployment 

cycle with information, services, referral, and proactive outreach programs. 

Many of the programs mentioned exist and with future budget cuts will require 

leaders to identify and prioritize where the needs are greatest to ensure the wisest 

use of critical financial resources while focusing toward meeting the needs of the 

Air Force Community. 

The work of strengthening the Air Force family and building a stronger Air Force 

community will continue. It is a priority because it is the right thing to do for our 

airmen and the smart thing to do to ensure America’s Air Force accomplishes its 

mission and continues to be the world’s best air, space, and cyber force. 

449 

SUICIDE IN THE GUARD AND RESERVE

26. Senator GRAHAM. General Bostick, Admiral Ferguson, General Milstead, and 

General Jones, our committee has overseen a significant expansion of resources and 

programs by the Services in recent years to prevent suicide. I know that none of 

us is yet satisfied with our results. Recently we have seen reports of rising numbers 

of suicide in the Reserve components, and that is the focus of my questions today. 

We all agree that the Reserve components, including the National Guard, will continue to be operational assets of the armed forces, is that correct? 

General BOSTICK. Yes, over the past 15 years our military has become increasingly reliant on the Reserve components including the National Guard to perform 

title 10 missions. Although the operational tempo is expected to be less intense than 

it has been, the National Guard is uniquely suited to fulfill both military support 

to domestic civil authorities as well as integrating with Active and service Reserve 

components to perform full spectrum operations. 

Admiral FERGUSON. Yes, the Navy Reserve will continue to be a vital operational 

asset of Navy’s Total Force. 

General MILSTEAD. That is correct. The Marine Corps is developing our concept 

of how to employ the Reserves as an operational force after current contingency operations have concluded. 

General JONES. The Reserve Component (RC) will continue to be an operational 

asset. There is significant capability in the RC, and in some cases the preponderance of key capabilities are in the RC. The AF has also embraced the concept of 

‘‘Total Force’’ with very close integration of the Active (AC) and Reserve components. The AF uses various organizational constructs to augment and integrate the 

RC to ensure operations are seamless when called upon. With the Total Force construct and capacity within the RC, the RC will remain an operational asset for the 

foreseeable future. 

We know of no evidence that supports a link between the operational demands 

of the ARC and ARC suicides. The Army’s 2010 Health Promotion, Risk Reduction 

and Suicide Prevention report found no direct correlation between military suicides 

and deployments. Rather, the report identified a correlation of suicide with high-risk 

behaviors and increased life stressors. In the Air National Guard (ANG), data also 

shows no direct correlation with deployments, though with the complex issue of suicide, it is difficult to know how much each factor and life event impacts someone’s 

eventual decision to take their own life. The ANG sees a need to help airmen improve their protective factors, deployed or not. 

27. Senator GRAHAM. General Bostick, Admiral Ferguson, General Milstead, and 

General Jones, the majority of suicides reported in Reserve components are carried 

out by servicemembers who have never deployed, is that correct? 

General BOSTICK. Yes, in general the Reserve components deployment profile of 

suicide deaths is different from the active duty deployment profile, and the majority 

of Reserve component soldiers have not deployed. However, this difference is consistent with overall deployment profile of the Army Reserve and Army National 

Guard where less than 50 percent of the force has a deployment history. 

In 2010, 79 of the 145 (54 percent) confirmed and pending (final medical examiner 

determination) suicide deaths for those who were not serving on active duty at the 

time of their death had no deployment history. Thus far in 2011, 24 of 48 (50 percent) of the confirmed and pending suicide deaths for non-active duty soldiers had 

no deployment history. 

Eight of the 16 (50 percent) Reserve component soldiers who died of suicide while 

on active duty in 2010 had no deployment history, and in 2011 two of the four (50 

percent) soldiers had no deployment history. 

Admiral FERGUSON. The vast majority of Navy Reserve suicide victims have deployed. Of the seven Navy Reserve sailors who died by suicide in 2010 and year to 

date 2011, one had never deployed, two had deployed within 2 years of their deaths, 

the remaining four had deployed earlier in their career. 

General MILSTEAD. According to our records, suicides by Reserve Component Marines do not significantly vary between those with and those without a history of 

deployment. On 1 Jan 2009, DOD began requiring the reporting of suicides by members of the Select Reserve (SELRES) who were not on active duty or in a drilling 

status. From 1 Jan 2009 to 31 Mar 2011, there were 20 suicides by SELRES marines not on active duty or drilling. Ten of those had no history of deployment and 

10 had a history of deployment. From 1 Jan 2002 to 31 Mar 2011, there were 18 

suicides by SELRES Marines on active duty or drilling. Eight of those had no history of deployment and 10 had a history of deployment. 

450 

General JONES. The answer to this question depends on what is coded as a deployment. Analysis of the available data revealed that 67 percent of the reservists 

and 60 percent of ANG members who committed suicide had not served on orders 

in support of a contingency. 

28. Senator GRAHAM. General Bostick, Admiral Ferguson, General Milstead, and 

General Jones, we have been inconsistent in our tracking of suicide, mental health 

care, and follow-up medical care for members of the Reserve components who have 

deployed, especially those in the Individual Ready Reserve, is correct? 

General BOSTICK. Significant effort is being made to track the suicide deaths of 

soldiers who are assigned to the Individual Ready Reserve. However, the Army relies on the family to notify the Army of the death. Because those assigned to the 

Individual Ready Reserve have chosen to not become members of an Army Reserve 

unit, they do not have the same leadership oversight that is provided to member 

of the Army Reserves in troop units. 

Admiral FERGUSON. The Reserve component (RC) uses the same suicide tracking 

system (DOD suicide event report) system as the Active component (AC). They also 

have suicide prevention coordinators at each Navy Operational Support Center 

(NOSC) who conduct the same peer-to-peer prevention training provided to the AC. 

The Deployment Health Assessment (DHA) process is also in place in the RC, in 

addition to required annual Periodic Health Assessments (PHA) which are tracked 

in the same data base as the AC. The NDAA for Fiscal Year 2010 added a mental 

health assessment requirement that we are currently integrating into the DHA 

process to be assessed as part of pre-deployment (PDA), immediate post-deployment 

(PDHA) and later post-deployment—3 to 6 months following return (PDHRA). These 

are performed by primary care providers, either as group events or partially on-line, 

with follow-up at a Reserve Health Readiness Program (RHRP) center within 50 

miles of the reservist’s residence. The PDHA process does track individuals who 

have deployed and are no longer on active duty. Selected Reserve personnel are 

tracked for suicides in the same manner as the AC. There is no consistent tracking 

of deaths or specific suicide prevention outreach for members of the individual 

Ready Reserve (IRR), who have no unit affiliation. 

Additionally the Reserve Psychological Health Outreach Program (PHOP) teams— 

five to six full-time licensed mental health providers, are embedded within each geographic Navy Reserve Region to help commands, their families and to help RC personnel meet their care needs. This support includes manning a 24/7 watch bill. They 

provide screening, find local affordable resources, make referrals, and follow-up to 

ensure that the care was effective. They are also charged with contacting all returning personnel and attend unit events to provide training and assessment. They have 

helped many find appropriate care for medical and mental health needs by connecting them with available and accessible Federal and State programs as well as 

with local programs and services. 

Members who had mobilized and were subsequently transferred to the IRR are 

still required to complete the PDHRA requirements which include psychological/ 

mental health screenings. Navy has identified 316 IRR members who are due for 

this post-deployment evaluative tool. Navy’s contracted PDHRA administrator, Logistics Health, Inc., is currently conducting call center events designed to drive 

PDHRA completion for this group of sailors. As of 1 June, three members have been 

referred to the VA for additional care as a result of this initiative. 

For our wounded personnel, Navy works closely with the Department of Veterans 

Affairs to provide transitional support for case management of medical and nonmedical care recipients. Navy’s Safe Harbor program supports nonmedical case management for wounded, and seriously ill and injured sailors. 

General MILSTEAD. The Reserve component (RC) uses the same suicide tracking 

system as the Active component (AC). The Deployment Health Assessment (DHA) 

process is also in place in the RC, in addition to the required annual Periodic Health 

Assessments (PHA). Reserve personnel affiliated as SELRES are tracked for suicides in the same manner as the AC. There is no consistent tracking of deaths or 

specific suicide prevention outreach for Individual Ready Reserve (IRR), who have 

no unit affiliation. 

Members who had mobilized and were subsequently transferred to the Individual 

Ready Reserve are still required to complete the PDHRA requirements which include psychological/mental health screenings. 

For our wounded personnel, the Marine Corps works closely with the Department 

of Veterans Affairs to provide transitional support for case management of medical 

and non-medical care recipients. The Marine Corps’ Wounded Warrior Regiment 

supports non-medical case management of our seriously wounded, ill, and injured 

sailors. 

451 

General JONES. Tracking of participating ARC members is consistent and reliable. 

Tracking of mental health care and follow-up medical care for AFR members who 

have deployed is tracked two ways. Servicemembers, with an identified need, who 

have received medical services through the military healthcare system (to include 

official referrals to non-military providers), are tracked using the same process as 

Active Duty. Second, AFR members who return to civilian status, and receive 

healthcare outside of the military system and not through TRICARE, are required 

to report that care to their respective Reserve medical unit (RMU). Reports may be 

made while in any status and include completion of well-known screening instruments (e.g., PHA and DD forms 2795, 2796, and 2900). 

Active Guard members (i.e., Title 10 and Title 32) are also monitored by multiple 

means. The new Wing Directors of Psychological Health (DPH) work closely with 

the ANG medical units in providing referral and case management when pre- and 

post-deployment assessments reveal mental health concerns. A primary goal of this 

program is to help ANG members, regardless of the genesis of the mental health 

issue, navigate the mental health system and follow through with care. Continuity 

of post-deployment medical care is addressed by the Medical Continuation process, 

wherein members are kept on Active Duty orders with full pay and benefits in order 

to continue care for deployment related conditions. An enhancement planned for the 

Medical Continuation program is the institution of a case management structure to 

ensure members are assisted throughout the medical care process. 

When an ANG member becomes an Individual Ready reservist, they fall under 

the Air Force Reserve Center and are not tracked by the Guard. Currently AFR 

does not track suicides, mental health care or follow-up medical care of members 

in the IRR because we don’t typically mobilize AFR members out of the IRR. Since 

2001, we have not mobilized any of our AFR members from the IRR. 

29. Senator GRAHAM. General Bostick, Admiral Ferguson, General Milstead, and 

General Jones, continuity of health care can be a significant problem for members 

of the Guard and Reserve, is that correct? 

General BOSTICK. Yes, continuity of care is a complex issue for members of the 

Reserve components as they may be eligible for care from multiple sources. Reserve 

soldiers may be eligible for health care insurance from either TRICARE or nonTRICARE sources depending on where they are in the deployment life cycle. Additionally, their chosen civilian providers may or may not participate in TRICARE for 

which the soldier is eligible. Hence, continuity of both health care coverage and 

health care providers can be a significant problem for members of the Reserve Components throughout their deployment life cycle. 

Admiral FERGUSON. Given the mobile nature of our military force and the fact 

that many Reserve component (RC) sailors reside outside of a Military Treatment 

Facility (MTF) catchment areas, continuity of care can be challenging. RC 

servicemembers transition between civilian healthcare providers and military providers over the course of their military service. However, Navy, in partnership with 

the entire MHS and the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), is fully committed 

to ensuring the health and well-being of sailors as they make this transition. Continuity of care is maintained through a combination of the TRICARE benefit, Navyspecific outreach and entitlement programs, and the support and resources of the 

VA. 

From the time a RC sailor receives their early TRICARE eligibility entitlement, 

in advance of mobilization through actual demobilization, they receive the same 

level of care and access to services as any other member of the Active Force. Once 

demobilized, they maintain eligibility for TRICARE through the Transitional Assistance Management Program (TAMP) and may receive care at an MTF or through 

civilian providers. Following the 180-day TAMP eligibility period, these members 

may elect to purchase TRICARE Reserve Select, if they qualify through their Reserve affiliation. Those who do not qualify may elect to purchase the Continued 

Health Care Benefit Program. As these Reserve component servicemembers retire, 

they may elect to purchase TRICARE Retired Reserve coverage until age 60, when 

they become eligible for TRICARE retired benefits. 

The Reserve Component Medical Programs System is available to provide continued medical care and financial support for Reserve component members who incur 

or aggravate an injury, illness, or disease, in the course of their military duties. 

Members may be retained on active duty through the Medical Hold Program or they 

may receive a Line of Duty (LOD) Determination. The LOD allows them to receive 

care for that condition in a non-activated status. LOD care may be provided within 

an MTF catchment area or, in remote areas, through civilian providers, with authorization from the TRICARE Management Activity Military Medical Support Office 

(MMSO). Oversight of these Reserve Component members is maintained by their 

452 

unit or Navy Operational Support Center, Navy Personnel Command, as well as an 

MTF or the MMSO. The program provides incapacitation pay in those instances in 

which a member’s condition prevents them from working in their civilian occupation. 

The Deployment Health Assessment process is designed to reach out to Reserve 

Component members who have returned from deployment and demobilized. These 

members are assessed at established intervals from pre-deployment through up to 

24 months post deployment, to evaluate both their physical and mental health. 

The Navy Bureau of Medicine and Surgery’s PHOP teams, which are embedded 

within each Navy geographical Reserve Region, also assist commands, Reserve component members and their families. This can include helping with the LOD process 

when necessary, finding local resources, and obtaining other health care services 

when personnel do not have access to military medical benefits, or have limited, or 

no, health insurance. The PHOP teams can also provide screening, follow-up and referrals to Federal, State, local, and nongovernmental resources. 

Finally, the VA offers medical and psychological health services, including treatment for sexual assault, for RC servicemembers who have served in combat areas, 

whether they are still in the Reserves, separated or retired. Veteran Centers, with 

additional psychological and family support services, including marital counseling, 

are found in many local areas in which current and former Reserve component 

servicemembers reside. 

General MILSTEAD. Given the more mobile nature of our military force and the 

fact that many of our reservists reside outside the catchment area of a Military 

Treatment Facility (MTF), continuity of care can be challenging. Reserve component 

members transition between their civilian healthcare providers and military providers over the course of their military service. However, the Department of the 

Navy, in partnership with the entire MHS and the Department of Veterans Affairs 

(VA), is fully committed to ensuring the health and well being of our 

servicemembers as they make this transition. Continuity of care is maintained 

through a combination of the TRICARE benefit, Navy-specific outreach and entitlement programs, as well as VA support and resources. 

From the time a reservists receives their early TRICARE eligibility entitlement 

in advance of mobilization through actual demobilization, they receive the same 

level of care and access to services as members of the Active Force. Once demobilized, they maintain eligibility for TRICARE through the Transitional Assistance 

Management Program (TAMP) and may receive care at an MTF or through civilian 

providers. Following the 180 day TAMP eligibility period, these members may elect 

to purchase TRICARE Reserve Select, if they qualify through their Reserve affiliation. For those who do not qualify, they may elect to purchase the Continued 

Health Care Benefit Program. As these same members retire, they may elect to purchase TRICARE Retired Reserve coverage until age 60, when they then become eligible for TRICARE retired benefits. 

The Reserve Component Medical Programs System is available to provide continued medical care and financial support for reservists who incur or aggravate an injury, illness or disease in the course of their military duties. Members may be retained on active duty through the Medical Hold Program or they may receive a Line 

of Duty (LOD) Determination. The LOD then allows them to receive care for that 

condition in a non-activated status. LOD care may be provided within an MTF 

catchment area or in remote areas through civilian providers. 

General JONES. Continuity of care can be a challenge in the Guard and Reserve 

due to many factors, including changes in status and geographic dispersement. 

The ANG is in the process of placing a Director of Psychological Health (DPH) 

in each Wing to promote and support the psychological health and continuity of care 

of servicemembers. The Wing DPHs work closely with the ANG medical units in 

providing referral and case management when pre- and post-deployment assessments reveal mental health concerns. Wing DPHs can work closely with their State 

DPH counterparts when additional support is required. 

Additionally, if a member chooses to participate in Tricare Reserve Select or has 

private health insurance, there should not be a problem with continuity of care. 

30. Senator GRAHAM. General Bostick, Admiral Ferguson, General Milstead, and 

General Jones, stigma and confidentiality in mental health are uniquely significant 

for servicemembers who live and work in small towns all over our country, is that 

correct? 

General BOSTICK. Stigma is a concern for those seeking behavioral health care 

across the entire Army community. Over the last few years, the Army has focused 

significant attention, with a great deal of success, at reducing soldier unwillingness 

to seek behavioral health support attributed to stigma. Behavioral health care utiliVerDate Aug 31 2005 09:55 Jan 25, 2012 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00458 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6621 Y:\BORAWSKI\DOCS\68089.TXT JUNE PsN: JUNEB
453 

zation has increased across the Army. The Army established the Health Promotion, 

Risk Reduction and Suicide Prevention Task Force to further understand and mitigate the effects stigma has in extending care to the Army family. 

Admiral FERGUSON. We are continuing to address such concerns for Reserve Component personnel, whether they reside and work in small towns or in communities 

with larger populations, through our suicide prevention and psychological health 

programs, including Operational Stress Control (OSC), which is integrated into the 

Navy career training continuum. DOD and Navy have made policy changes to support this development over the past few years, and to encourage sailors to seek help. 

We are fully committed to reducing the stigma associated with mental health care 

and to raising awareness within the Reserve community that there is confidentiality 

for mental health care, especially when self-initiated. 

General MILSTEAD. We are not aware of any professional literature that addresses 

the significance of stigma and confidentiality rates in small towns versus more populated areas in America. However, we are continuing to address these concerns for 

Reserve Component personnel who may live and work in either small towns or in 

communities with larger populations through our suicide prevention and psychological health programs, including Operational Stress Control (OSC) which is integrated into the Marine career training continuum. 

DOD and the Marine Corps have made policy changes to support this development over the past few years and to encourage help-seeking by marines. We are 

fully committed to reducing the stigma associated with mental health care and to 

raising the awareness within the Reserve community that there is confidentiality 

for mental health care, especially when self-initiated. 

General JONES. There is some evidence to support this conclusion, likely due to 

the lack of anonymity in small towns. 

31. Senator GRAHAM. General Bostick, Admiral Ferguson, General Milstead, and 

General Jones, prevention programs that work in one State or community, may or 

may not be the right approach in another one—in other words, one-size-does-notfit-all, is that correct? 

General BOSTICK. There are numerous studies that suggest there are ‘‘universal’’ 

aspects of suicide prevention programs. Resources such as the Suicide Prevention 

Resource Center (http://www.sprc.org/about—sprc/index.asp) acknowledge there are 

some cultural differences in how programs and services are provided (e.g., appropriate language, etc.). The observed differences in the effectiveness of a program has 

less to do with the differences in communities and is more influenced by the behavioral health condition the program is attempting to address (e.g., a program targeted 

towards those with depression are less effective in helping someone who has a substance abuse problem). 

Admiral FERGUSON. Many complex and individual pathways lead both toward and 

away from suicidal ideation and attempts. No single message, training, intervention, 

or approach will intercept everyone on a deadly path. Intuitively it makes sense that 

different populations would respond in a non-uniform manner to various intervention attempts, given cultural differences between communities. Lessons from research and years of program efforts have shown that multiple approaches working 

within a strategic framework are required to reduce suicide risk. 

Each of the Services has developed unique programs designed to fit their communities/cultures, including their respective Reserve Components. These programs are 

based on the best evidence available, including accepted professional models and 

best practices. Each Service takes many measures to prevent suicide, including: 

mandated annual peer-to-peer training; regular safety briefings; large-scale social 

marketing campaigns to encourage members to seek help and promote suicide prevention; and offer programs that include suicide prevention at accession points, 

schoolhouses, and at critical career decision points and milestones. Also inherent to 

all of the Services’ programs is emphasis on the broader concepts of buddy care, 

leaving no one behind and bystander intervention. 

General MILSTEAD. Suicide prevention relies primarily on Marine Corps leadership, regardless of location. Beginning at the non-commissioned officer level and extending up through the ranks, leaders prevent suicide by fostering individual and 

unit resilience, encouraging self-care and peer-intervention, and managing command 

climate in a way that encourages Marines to engage helping services early, before 

problems worsen to the point of suicide. 

General JONES. One size certainly does not fit all especially when it comes to the 

Reserve Components. ANG and AFR units are very unique based on their population, geographic diversity, economic circumstances, and a number of other critical 

factors. Because of this reality, the recent National Guard Bureau Warrior Care Initiative focused on researching and recommending a toolbox of resilience-building 

454 

programs so that each State/Territory can choose the programs that best fit its 

unique needs. In this instance, all programs fit into the Comprehensive Soldier Fitness/Comprehensive Airman Fitness pillars of wellness. Thus, prevention programs 

do need to be tailored for their recipients, and can be based upon certain principles 

and guiding theories. Programs should provide some latitude for local factors (e.g. 

culture, resources, etc.) and demands of the wing missions, but should also be proven effective prior to widespread implementation. 

32. Senator GRAHAM. General Bostick, Admiral Ferguson, General Milstead, and 

General Jones, community involvement is essential for the Reserve components— 

even more so than the Active component, is that correct? 

General BOSTICK. Community involvement is equally important for all components. Many of the soldiers serving as recruiters and supporting Reserve component 

are stationed away from military installations and require the support of the local 

community. Many of the medical professionals return from deployments and return 

to work in community hospitals, where they are no longer around the soldiers with 

whom they deployed and on whom they learned to rely for support during that deployment. Reserve component soldiers also experience this sense of isolation when 

they return to their hometown and lack ‘‘peer to peer’’ support. It is impossible to 

say if community support is more important for one component versus another. 

Admiral FERGUSON. Yes, community involvement is essential for the Reserve 

Components. Reserve sailors typically have limited access to resources available on 

base and may only interact with members of their unit when drilling. On-line and 

telephone resources, such as the Navy help-line and Military OneSource, are available to all military servicemembers and their families. However, due to the distance 

between some RC sailors and face-to-face services, accessing available civilian community resources is important to their quality of life. Active component sailors are 

typically more rooted in the associated military community, while Reserve component sailors are more closely connected to their civilian communities, in part because they tend to relocate less frequently. 

Regarding suicide prevention, however, military involvement remains essential for 

Reserve sailors so they may benefit from all DOD resources designed to promote resiliency and prevent suicide, including effective peer-to-peer suicide prevention 

training. Our PHOP offers five counselors in each Navy Region responsible for 

reaching out to sailors returning from mobilization and for being readily available 

when leadership or shipmates sense a need for a sailor to speak with a professional. 

General MILSTEAD. Community involvement is equally important to suicide prevention in the Reserve and Active components. A marine’s community must recognize signs of distress, know where to turn for help, and be willing to assure that 

the marine gets the needed help. 

General JONES. Absolutely. Citizen airmen are more engrained in their communities. Traditional Guard members and reservist in particular spend much more 

time in their communities and at their civilian jobs than with their unit. The member and their families, although eligible for some military services, are often geographically separated from, or otherwise not exposed to, the unique aspects of an 

active duty lifestyle, which readily offers more assistance, accountability and oversight. Because of this, it is critical that leadership and policymakers begin to engage 

with the community in efforts to prevent suicide in airmen. This would help educate 

community providers and other community supporting agencies about the unique 

stressors faced by our Guard and Reserve members. Partnering with community initiatives in suicide prevention and educating agencies that assist citizen airmen 

about their unique stressors could prove to be helpful in reducing suicide rates. The 

ANG anticipates the newly-placed ANG Wing Directors of Psychological Health 

(WDPHs) will be instrumental in assisting with this effort. They are best able to 

impact the immediate community in which the wing is located. 

33. Senator GRAHAM. General Bostick, Admiral Ferguson, General Milstead, and 

General Jones, the YRRP is funded in fiscal year 2012, but may not be funded in 

fiscal year 2013. It’s part of the solution but not the entire solution, is that correct? 

General BOSTICK. The YRRP is one of several programs that provide an important 

service to our soldiers. Some of the other programs include: 

• Strong Bonds 

• The Strong Bonds mission is to increase soldier and family readiness 

through relationship education and skills training. 

• Strong Bonds helps single soldiers, couples, and families thrive in the 

turbulence of the military environment. 

• Army Strong Community Centers 

455 

• The Army Strong Community Center (ASCC) program was established by 

the Army Reserve to support military members and their families who live 

away from the larger military installations where support is readily available. 

• The ASCC aims to connect geographically dispersed families with support 

resources in their own community. 

• The ASCC is an information and referral office dedicated to assisting and 

supporting servicemembers, retirees, veterans, and family members. 

• The ASCC serves all branches of the military, Active and Reserve. 

• There are currently three ASCC locations in Rochester, NY; Brevard, NC; 

and Coraopolis, PA. 

• Employer Partnership of the Armed Forces 

• The Employer Partnership (EP) is a key program to help mitigate economic stress on Reserve component soldiers. 

• EP was created as a way to provide America’s employers with a direct 

link to some of America’s finest employees—servicemembers and their families. 

• EP’s partner with over 1,000 employers who include 96 of the 2010 

Forbes Fortune 500 Companies, and the list is growing. 

• There are 500,000 jobs available online on the EP website 

(employerparternship.org). 

• Nearly 4,000 soldiers, family members, wounded warriors, and veterans 

have been hired through the program. 

• EP launched a powerful new online job search portal on Veterans Day 

2010. 

• Transitional Health Care Program 

• The Transitional Health Care Program provides 180 days of transitional 

health care benefits, including psychological health care, to demobilized Reserve soldiers and their families. 

• TRICARE Reserve Select (TRS) is a premium-based health plan that 

qualified RC soldiers may purchase; the monthly premium for TRS individual coverage is $47.51, and the monthly premium for TRS family coverage is $180.17. 

• Military OneSource. Military OneSource is an information and referral 

clearinghouse that can guide AR members to the right resources. Through 

Military OneSource, the soldier and each family member has access to up 

to 12 in-person counseling sessions with a licensed counselor at no cost. 

• RC Soldier Medical Support Center 

• Its purpose is to ensure continuity of care/VA benefits by integrating and 

streamlining the medical review process across all States and territories. 

Admiral FERGUSON. Yes, that is correct. The YRRP is an invaluable program that 

benefits sailors in many ways. However, it is just one of a number of tools available 

to ensure returning reservists successfully and seamlessly reintegrate into their 

communities. Navy also administers a comprehensive and highly effective suicide 

prevention, intervention, and response program, to address the challenges and 

stressors with which Active and Reserve sailors contend, particularly upon returning from prolonged absences and assignments in combat zones. 

General MILSTEAD. Reserve suicide prevention relies in part, but not entirely on 

the YRRP. The Marine Corps has several other programs focused on Reserve suicide 

prevention, to include: 

• The Never Leave a Marine Behind suicide prevention and awareness education series trains Active and Reserve marines to recognize the warning 

signs for suicide, foster personal and unit resiliency, know where to go for 

behavioral health care, engage helping services early, and in the case of 

senior leaders, how to manage command climate to reduce the risk of suicide. 

• The Operational Stress Control and Readiness (OSCAR) program is being 

implemented at the Battalion/Squadron level to train marines and medical 

and religious ministry personnel to prevent, identify, and manage stress 

problems as early as possible. OSCAR team members know their unit members and can quickly recognize any unusual changes. Since the Marines are 

familiar with their team members, it is more likely that marines will talk 

about their stress. 

• The Marine Corps is currently piloting a 24–7 by-Marine-for-Marine 

counseling line, available to all Marines, whether Active, Reserve, or vetVerDate Aug 31 2005 09:55 Jan 25, 2012 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00461 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6621 Y:\BORAWSKI\DOCS\68089.TXT JUNE PsN: JUNEB
456 

eran, and their loved ones. The DSTRESS Line is being piloted in the Western U.S. 

• The Marine Corps Behavioral Health Information Network (BHIN) is a 

web-based clearinghouse for the latest information and tools for Reserve 

and Active marines on prevention and other resources concerning behavioral health. These free educational materials are excellent tools that will 

assist units and installation support services in their efforts to educate the 

military community about building resiliency, recognizing reactions and determining the need for help. 

• The PHOP provides psychological health professionals at six regional Marine Forces Reserve sites to screen and refer members for behavioral health 

services. Marines that are referred to the program can be screened for behavioral health issues, medically referred, and provided a road to recovery. 

Outreach specialists will follow each referred reservist through the resolution of that member’s case, whether it is return to active Reserve status, 

or resolution through the DES. 

General JONES. The YRRP provides information, services and referrals to 

servicemembers and their families. While suicide prevention briefings, information 

and counseling referrals are made at YRRP events, it is not the entire answer to 

suicide prevention in part because YRRP focuses only on supporting members who 

have deployed and because the events are based on voluntary attendance. The majority of reservists requiring behavioral health support has never deployed and thus 

would not be eligible or even exposed to these YRRP programs. 

The Air National Guard continues efforts to create and help implement strategies 

for suicide prevention with the development of outreach programs such as the ANG 

Wingman Project, whose goal is to eliminate warfighter and family member suicide 

through human outreach, media and training. Chaplains, Military Family Life Consultants, DPHs, and Military OneSource are just some of the resources available for 

anyone considering suicide. Suicide prevention success is driven by the collective action of individuals and communities across the Nation. 

QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY SENATOR SAXBY CHAMBLISS

SERVICEMEMBERS CIVIL RELIEF ACT

34. Senator CHAMBLISS. Secretary Lamont, Secretary Garcia, Secretary Ginsberg, 

General Bostick, Admiral Ferguson, General Milstead, and General Jones, the number of service men and women experiencing significant financial problems with their 

mortgage companies and banks is unfortunately well known. While the operational 

tempo of our Armed Forces will hopefully decrease following the withdrawal of our 

combat forces from Iraq, the OPTEMPO will likely still remain high and we will 

continue to rely on our Reserve components to meet operational requirements for 

the foreseeable future. With this in mind and if private lenders continue to violate 

or ignore the provisions of the Servicemembers Civil Relief Act (SCRA), what adjustments do you believe may be necessary to that SCRA to protect the interests of our 

service men and women? 

Secretary LAMONT and General BOSTICK. The Servicemember’s Civil Relief Act 

(SCRA) should be amended in two ways: 

(1) The SCRA (codified at 50 U.S.C. App. §§ 501–597b) should be amended to 

make it easier for the lending industry to properly apply the 6 percent interest 

rate cap. Section 527 requires the servicemember to provide the lender with 

a copy of his or her official orders to show the period for which the 6 percent 

interest rate cap should apply. These orders, however, can be difficult to understand and interpret. 

Section 535 defines military orders to include ‘‘any notification . . . from the 

servicemember’s commanding officer, with respect to the servicemember’s current or 

future military duty status.’’ This basically allows the commander to write a letter 

clearly stating when the servicemember is or will be on active duty. This definition, 

however, only applies to section 535, and not to the 6 percent interest rate cap section, which, as noted, still requires a copy of the more complicated official orders. 

If the definition of military orders found in section 535 were made applicable to 

the entire SCRA by moving it to section 511—the definition section, which is applicable to the entire Act—then the lending industry could more readily determine 

when a servicemember was eligible for the 6 percent interest rate cap. 

This amendment would also make it easier for the lending industry to determine 

when the interest rate applied to Reserve component servicemembers who had received orders but had not yet reported for active duty. The SCRA extends some of 

457 

its protections and benefits (including the 6 percent interest rate cap) to those with 

orders even though they have not yet reported for duty. Determining when the orders were received can be complicated. But if servicemembers were allowed to provide a letter from their commander, the period of applicability could be stated clearly. 

(2) The SCRA should be amended to extend mortgage foreclosure protections to 

all servicemembers’ mortgages, not just those secured by pre-service obligations. Section 533 provides protections against the non-judicial sale, foreclosure, or seizure of the property secured by a mortgage obligation that originated before the period of the servicemember’s active duty. This means a court 

must enter a valid order before the sale, foreclosure, or seizure of such property can take place, and such an order cannot be entered unless and until the 

creditor files a lawsuit against the servicemember, gets service of the suit on 

the servicemember, and the servicemember has an opportunity to come into 

court and seek relief from the foreclosure. If the property is secured by a mortgage obligation created after the period of active duty, then the SCRA does 

not provide these protections. 

Losing one’s home to foreclosure almost inevitably leads to a cascade of financial 

complications. If it occurs while on active duty, these complications are no less painful and disruptive to mission accomplishment just because the obligation was created while on active duty, rather than prior to entering active duty. 

To ensure that servicemembers remain focused on the military mission, the mortgage foreclosure protection should be extended to cover all servicemembers’ mortgage obligations, not just pre-service ones. 

Such expanded protection would also simplify the process for the lending industry. 

If such an amendment were adopted, the foreclosing creditor would only have to determine whether the servicemember is on active duty at the time of the proposed 

sale, foreclosure, or seizure (or was on active duty within the nine months preceding 

the sale, foreclosure, or seizure). The foreclosing creditor would not have to sort 

through a possible series of prior mobilizations to determine the status of the 

servicemember at the origination of the mortgage obligation. 

Secretary GARCIA and Admiral FERGUSON. DOD is currently evaluating the need 

for three amendments to the Servicemembers Civil Relief Act (SCRA) (50 U.S.C. 

App. §§ 501–597b), which may warrant consideration by Congress: 

• Amend the SCRA to ease eligibility determination and proper application 

of the 6 percent interest rate cap by the lending industry. Under section 

527, a servicemember can secure an interest rate cap of 6 percent per year 

on all loans incurred before entering active duty if military service affects 

the member’s ability to meet the obligation. To qualify, the member must 

provide the lender with a copy of official orders to show that he or she is 

on active duty. However, military orders can be difficult for lenders to interpret. Section 535 provides a broader definition of military orders to include 

‘‘any notification . . . from the servicemember’s commanding officer, with respect to the servicemember’s current or future military duty status.’’ Applying section 535 definition of ‘‘military orders’’ to the entire SCRA would 

allow lending institutions to more readily determine eligibility for SCRA 

protections, including the 6 percent interest rate cap provision. 

• Amend the SCRA to extend mortgage foreclosure protections to all 

servicemember mortgages, vice only those secured by pre-service obligations. Section 533 requires a valid court order before sale, foreclosure, or 

seizure of a servicemembers mortgage-secured property, but only if the 

mortgage obligation of the servicemember was created before the period of 

active duty began; consequently, servicemembers who incur mortgage obligations after commencing active duty are not protected. Expanding protections to all servicemembers would ease lending institution compliance by 

removing the burden of determining whether the debt was incurred pre-active duty or after entry on active duty. Providing foreclosure protections for 

all servicemembers would ensure court oversight, help servicemembers remain mission-focused knowing they have this judicial supervision, and help 

them avoid or mitigate financial complications that often follow a foreclosure. 

• Increase penalty provisions for SCRA violations to enhance financial compliance with the act. 

Secretary GINSBERG and General JONES. We commend the Department of Justice 

for their recent investigations into violations of the SCRA. This Act is an important 

protection offered to our servicemembers, particularly those who are deployed, or 

have been deployed multiple times over the past 10 years. Enforcing this act greatly 

458 

contributes to peace of mind many of our personnel appreciate when they are deployed for extended time periods. The recent examples of nationally known mortgage companies being held accountable for violating SCRA should sound a clarion 

call to the industry. Lenders must ensure servicemembers are not harmed by their 

lack of due diligence in meeting the requirements of SCRA and working with our 

servicemembers to avoid home foreclosures. SCRA makes clear that lender’s responsibility to work with servicemembers is not negotiable. When a violation occurs, impacting the credit and financial status of any servicemember, the financial institution must take action to remedy negative consequences and ensure the 

servicemember’s credit rating is restored to pre-foreclosure value. 

General MILSTEAD. I do not currently foresee any necessary adjustments to the 

SCRA. The SCRA was completely rewritten in 2003 and substantially amended 

again in 2008. The SCRA currently offers expansive protections to servicemembers 

in the areas of default judgments, civil stay provisions, maximum interest rates (to 

include mortgages), eviction and foreclosure protection. 

UNIFORMED SERVICES EMPLOYMENT AND REEMPLOYMENT RIGHTS ACT

35. Senator CHAMBLISS. Secretary Lamont, Secretary Garcia, Secretary Ginsberg, 

General Bostick, Admiral Ferguson, General Milstead, and General Jones, the Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act (USERRA) protect millions of people, largely National Guard and Reserve members, as they transition between their Federal duties and civilian employment. USERRA is intended to eliminate or minimize civilian employment disadvantages resulting from service in the 

Reserve components and protect the rights of those members when they deploy. 

Since September 11, 2001, over 500,000 citizen soldiers have been mobilized to fight 

the war on terrorism. Many American soldiers have served more than one tour of 

duty and may be required to serve more. While some would argue that it is statistically reasonable for the number of employment discrimination complaints filed by 

service men and women during this time period to have increased—based on the 

number of deployments—the data needed to make such a judgment remains incomplete. Furthermore, data from a 2004 DOD survey showed that at least 72 percent 

of National Guard and Reserve members with USERRA problems never sought assistance for their problems, raising questions as to whether complaint numbers 

alone can fully explain USERRA compliance or employer support. Finally, the time 

it takes to process USERRA complaints, while somewhat improved, remains unacceptable when you are speaking in terms of whether or not a veteran and/or his 

family will lose their home due to a negligent or willfully mistaken foreclosure action. In light of these factors, do you see the need for any changes to USERRA to 

address these issues or provide additional protection to our Guard and Reserve 

members? 

Secretary LAMONT and General BOSTICK. Yes, based on the heightened operations 

of the last 10 years and anecdotal evidence gathered by ESGR Volunteers and Ombudsman, USERRA should be reviewed. Aside from minor amendments, USERRA 

has not been holistically reviewed since 1994. 

Based on information from the ESGR office, USERRA complaints and inquiries 

have risen statistically since September 2001, but the number of cases requiring 

ESGR intervention represents less than 0.01 percent of all Reserve component members. 

There are also some indications of employer fatigue from 10 years of continuous 

mobilizations. To verify the impact on employers, ESGR is sponsoring two efforts: 

(1) The ‘‘2011 Department of Defense National Survey of Employers’’ was sent to 

a cross-section of 80K civilian employers across America. The survey runs 

through July 6 with the results expected late in fiscal year 2011. 

(2) As a companion piece to this survey, ESGR is sponsoring a study to examine 

the results of the survey and incorporate information gleaned from four regional focus groups of civilian employers. The focus groups will participate in 

questions formulated based on the survey results and used to provide meaningful narrative to a report summarizing both efforts. The collective efforts of 

these employer engagements should be available late in CY 11. 

Secretary GARCIA and Admiral FERGUSON. I currently do not see a need to amend 

the USERRA. We continue to monitor the effects of continued and persistent usage 

of the Reserve component on sailors, marines, and their families. The DON has 

found that engaged leadership throughout the chain of command and use of Employer Support of the Guard and Reserve (ESGR) representatives coupled with existing USERRA legislation meets the challenges faced by Reserve component sailors 

and marines. 

459 

Secretary GINSBERG and General JONES. USERRA is crucial to protect the employment rights of our citizen airmen. We are not currently proposing changes to 

USERRA, but with the increased reliance on the National Guard and Reserve since 

September 11, it might be time for Department of Labor to reevaluate the authority. 

Regardless, the statute has served us well since its inception. Within the Air Force, 

we have experienced tremendous support from our civilian employers when we have 

asked our airmen to support their military commitments. Moreover, the Air Force 

has received a limited number of USERRA complaints. We believe this attests to 

the tremendous support our civilian employers extend to our citizen airmen while 

they are performing their military duties. The Air Reserve Components (ARC) conduct a number of ongoing employer out-reach programs to bring civilian employers 

into the fold of local Reserve component installations and provide them the opportunity to experience the military commitments of their employees. Additionally, 

through a number of ARC and Employer Support of Guard and Reserve (ESGR) 

awards programs, the Air Force recognizes the outstanding support of the employers 

to the military community. Finally, we provide relevant USERRA education to our 

citizen airmen on the benefits of this law to include points of contact should they 

experience concerns or issues. It should also be noted the ESGR has expanded its 

mission to provide a stronger advocate role for civilian employers by ‘‘developing and 

promoting a culture in which all American employers support and value the military 

service of their employees’’. The support of ESGR is a key component of maintaining 

good relations between our airmen and their employers. 

General MILSTEAD. I currently do not see a need to amend the USERRA. We continue to monitor the effects of continued and persistent usage of the Reserve component on our marines and their families. The Marine Corps has found that engaged 

leadership throughout the chain of command and use of Employer Support of the 

Guard and Reserve (ESGR) representatives, coupled with existing USERRA legislation, meets the challenges faced by Reserve Component Marines. 

RESERVE RETIREMENT

36. Senator CHAMBLISS. Secretary Lamont, Secretary Garcia, Secretary Ginsberg, 

General Bostick, Admiral Ferguson, General Milstead, and General Jones, the 2008 

NDAA included a provision which I authored which authorized members of the Reserve component who perform Active Duty for significant periods in support of contingency operations to collect retired pay early. Feedback I have gotten on how this 

provision is affecting the troops so far has been very positive. What feedback have 

you received on this issue? 

Secretary LAMONT and General BOSTICK. Overall, we have received positive feedback. Soldiers like the retirement as outlined in the NDAA 2008. We believe that 

it has been a very positive incentive in support of contingency operations. 

Secretary GARCIA and Admiral FERGUSON. Feedback from the Reserve Force on 

the early collection of retired pay for the performance of Active Duty in support of 

contingency operations is uniformly positive. 

Secretary GINSBERG and General JONES. The Air Force has received overall positive feedback from the ARC regarding this statute change. The provision is not only 

an incentive to support volunteerism for contingency operations; it may also be 

viewed as a retention tool for the Reserve components. 

General MILSTEAD. We have not received any negative feedback and believe the 

law has been successful in incentivizing and rewarding Reserve marines who mobilize in support of contingency operations. 

37. Senator CHAMBLISS. Secretary Lamont, Secretary Garcia, Secretary Ginsberg, 

General Bostick, Admiral Ferguson, General Milstead, and General Jones, how 

could Congress modify this provision to further incentivize and appropriately reward 

members of the Reserve components who deploy for significant periods of time? 

Secretary LAMONT and General BOSTICK. Currently, a Reserve component soldier 

who retires prior to age 60 under the 2008 NDAA provision receives retired pay, 

but no other benefits, e.g. medical care. At age 60, the retired Reserve soldiers receive the remainder of their retirement benefits. This benefit was established in the 

NDAA for Fiscal Year 2008 and supports the expanded role of Reserve component 

soldiers. 

Secretary GARCIA and Admiral FERGUSON. Thank you for the opportunity to provide my thoughts on provisions that may further incentivize and reward members 

of the Reserve components. Remaining consistent with administration policy and established budget guidelines, I believe that Congress would be best served if DOD 

460 

uses the standard authorization and budget process to request changes to existing 

authorities, if the Department determines that changes are needed. 

Secretary GINSBERG and General JONES. Our Reserve component has a longstanding heritage of selflessly supporting our national security, and we recognize 

the expanded role Air Force Reserve and Air National Guard airmen are fulfilling 

in accomplishing the mission. We are also keenly aware of the significant costs associated with incentives offered to our Reserve airmen and appreciate the generous 

support provided by legislative leadership. If after careful analysis it is determined 

a modificiation is needed to current Reserve benefits or entitlements, we will submit 

a proposal through the standard budget and authorization process. 

General MILSTEAD. There are several potential ways the provision could be modified if it is determined that the Services need to amend the retirement structure 

for reservists who serve on Active Duty for significant periods of time. This is an 

issue for further study, including within the context of the recent military retirement reform review. 

RESERVE RETIREMENT

38. Senator CHAMBLISS. Secretary Lamont, Secretary Garcia, Secretary Ginsberg, 

General Bostick, Admiral Ferguson, General Milstead, and General Jones, I understand that there is some confusion or lack of consistency regarding how the provision authorizing early receipt of retired pay is being interpreted within DOD. As the 

primary author of that provision, I would like to state my original intent for the 

record. First, my intent was to reward servicemembers who perform Active Duty for 

significant periods. We had to bind the provision somehow so we set the period during which members would be required to serve an aggregate of 90 days of duty to 

be the confines of a single fiscal year, fiscal year 2010, or fiscal year 2011, and so 

forth. The intent was not that a servicemember should be rewarded for any aggregate duty of 90 days that they served over their Reserve career. Second, my intent 

was to reward servicemembers who were activated, mobilized, deployed, or called to 

duty in support of a contingency operation. In my view this should include any duty, 

in the continental United States (CONUS) or outside the continental United States 

(OCONUS), which is related to a contingency operation or national emergency, regardless of the specific order type is utilized to call the member to duty. With that 

explanation, I would appreciate your feedback on how DOD is interpreting the current statute, what ambiguities you believe may exist in the language, and the extent 

to which the Services are interpreting the provision differently. 

Secretary LAMONT and General BOSTICK. The Army follows the DOD interpretation of the NDAA for Fiscal Year 2008 provision that is based on the fiscal year 

restriction. I am unable to comment on how the other Services interpret the NDAA 

for Fiscal Year 2008 provision. 

Secretary GARCIA and Admiral FERGUSON. DOD implementing instructions limit 

accrual of 90-day aggregate increments to service performed during a fiscal year. 

Given this interpretation, with which Navy agrees, an inequity exists by not permitting credit toward otherwise qualifying 90-day periods of Active Duty that happen 

to cross fiscal years. There also appears to be ambiguity regarding the types of active duty orders for which credit may be awarded. For instance, it is unclear whether periods of operational support duty performed while on Annual Training under 

title 10, U.S.C., sections 10147 or 12301(b) qualify. Navy reservists provide significant operational support while on Annual Training; thereby, contributing to contingency operations in ways which warrant the awarding of credit towards the 90-day 

aggregate. My understanding is that some of the other Services may not be awarding credit for early receipt of retired pay for reservists on Annual Training orders. 

Secretary GINSBERG and General JONES. We believe DOD has interpreted and 

subsequently issued implementation guidance based on the intent you have identified. We further believe the current language is written as ‘generic’ as it can in 

order to not constrain the department and services in implementation. Each of the 

services, are complying with the intent of acknowledging those called to duty in support of contingency operations. The OSD guidance is written in a manner to permit 

service secretaries latitude to establish service policy to implement the ‘full intent’ 

of this provision in rewarding our servicemembers for their continued sacrifices. 

There does not appear to be any discrepancy in the interpretation and application 

of this law by ARPC between the two Air Force Reserve components. 

General MILSTEAD. The Marine Corps adheres to the DOD policy, ‘‘Service Credit 

for Reserve Retirement’’ with the exception that, based on the clarifying language 

found in the NDAA for Fiscal Year 2011, we no longer limit qualifying Active Duty 

to periods wholly served within the same fiscal year. 

461 

39. Senator CHAMBLISS. Secretary Lamont, Secretary Garcia, Secretary Ginsberg, 

General Bostick, Admiral Ferguson, General Milstead, and General Jones, what sort 

of clarity could Congress provide to eliminate some of the ambiguity and inconsistency between the Services in this area? 

Secretary LAMONT and General BOSTICK. DOD Instructions that implement the 

2008 NDAA provision provide clear guidance to the Services, so the Army requires 

no additional guidance. 

Secretary GARCIA and Admiral FERGUSON. To eliminate ambiguity and uncertainty, Congress could amend title 10, U.S.C., to eliminate the per-fiscal year calculation of days of certain Active Duty or active service used to reduce the minimum 

age at which a member of a Reserve component of the uniformed services may retire 

for non-regular service, as proposed in S. 3406, introduced in the 111th Congress. 

Such an amendment will codify the intent expressed in the Sense of Congress enacted in section 635 of the NDAA for Fiscal Year 2011, by expanding the authority 

to permit credit when an otherwise qualifying 90-day period of Active Duty or active 

service crosses between 2 fiscal years. Additionally, amending the language to clarify that all types of active duty orders are to be included in calculations for early 

receipt of non-regular retired pay under title 10, U.S.C., section 12731, would ensure 

greater consistency in awarding credit under this law. 

Secretary GINSBERG and General JONES. There does not appear to be any discrepancy in the interpretation and application of this law by ARPC between the two Air 

Force Reserve components. 

General MILSTEAD. Given the clarification provided in the NDAA for Fiscal Year 

2011, we are not aware that ambiguity and inconsistency currently exists between 

the Services. 

40. Senator CHAMBLISS. Secretary Lamont, Secretary Garcia, Secretary Ginsberg, 

General Bostick, Admiral Ferguson, General Milstead, and General Jones, Senator 

Tester and I recently filed a bill which would change the requirement for the duty 

to be performed within ‘‘any fiscal year’’ and instead allow it to fall within ‘‘any 2 

consecutive fiscal years.’’ This would allow individuals who mobilize for 90 days to 

receive credit if the mobilization or deployment happened to span 2 fiscal years, 

which is often the case. I would appreciate your feedback on that proposed change 

and if you believe it might eliminate some of the confusion and inequity in the current provision. 

Secretary LAMONT and General BOSTICK. The Army would support a bill that removes the fiscal year constraints imposed by the original law, and believes such a 

provision would eliminate the confusion and inequity resulting from the current law. 

Secretary GARCIA and Admiral FERGUSON. I greatly appreciate your commitment 

to reward members of the Reserve component who perform Active Duty in support 

of contingency operations. As written, however, the ‘‘Reserve Retirement Deployment Credit Correction Act’’ (S. 866) would establish eligibility for early receipt of 

non-regular retired pay credit for certain Reserve personnel who complete an aggregate of 90 days Active Duty or active service which occurs across 2 fiscal years, 

which Navy supports, but would remove eligibility for reservists who currently qualify for early receipt of non-regular retired pay credit by completing 90-day increments of qualifying Active Duty or active service within a single fiscal year. We surmise that the latter is not intended and would clearly not be a desirable outcome 

of the legislation. As an alternative, Navy would support amendment of S. 866 to 

adopt the language reflected in S. 3406, 111th Congress, which would retain credit 

for all those currently eligible, while expanding the authority to permit credit when 

an otherwise qualifying 90-day period of active duty or active service crosses between 2 fiscal years. 

Secretary GINSBERG and General JONES. The proposed change will have positive 

impact. A number of deployments cross fiscal years as the member is on site to support the mission requirement. Allowing for the duty to be performed within any 2 

consecutive fiscal years will provide more Reserve component members the benefit 

of this provision. Finally, this action will support recruiting and retention in the Reserve components. 

General MILSTEAD. Given the clarification provided in the NDAA for Fiscal Year 

2011, we are not aware that ambiguity and inconsistency currently exists between 

the Services and do not believe an ‘‘any 2 consecutive fiscal years’’ change is warranted. 

462 

NAVY CHAPLAINS PERFORMING GAY MARRIAGES

41. Senator CHAMBLISS. Secretary Garcia, yesterday May 10th, the Navy suspended their decision to allow chaplains to perform same-sex unions. I applaud the 

Navy for that course of action. Regarding the Navy’s initial decision—once Don’t 

Ask Don’t Tell policy is repealed—to authorize chaplains to perform same-sex marriages on military bases located in States that permit same-sex marriage or union, 

did the Navy seek a ruling from the Navy and/or DOD General Counsel regarding 

how the Navy’s proposed policy may or may not conflict with the Defense of Marriage Act? If so, what ruling did the Navy and/or DOD General Counsel provide? 

Secretary GARCIA. Prior to the issuance of that guidance, the Office of the Judge 

Advocate General of the Navy discussed the issue with the Offices of the Judge Advocates Generals of the Army, the Air Force, and the Office of the General Counsel 

of DOD. Navy’s guidance was then developed and issued only after this discussion. 

Following the receipt of a letter from several Members of Congress questioning this 

guidance, the DOD General Counsel and the Navy General Counsel together personally decided that further legal review was warranted. 

42. Senator CHAMBLISS. Secretary Garcia, do you agree that, regardless of the 

Navy or the administration’s views on the Defense of Marriage Act, that it is, in 

fact—law—and therefore should be followed until it is repealed or deemed unconstitutional? 

Secretary GARCIA. Yes, the Navy will follow the law, including the Defense of 

Marriage Act, until such time as it ceases being the law. 

WOMEN IN COMBAT

43. Senator CHAMBLISS. General Bostick, the Army’s current policy for female soldiers allows women to serve in any officer or enlisted specialty or position except 

those in specialties, positions, or units (battalion or smaller) which are assigned a 

routine mission to engage in direct combat or which collocate routinely with units 

assigned a direct combat mission. I understand this policy is undergoing a routine 

review. I also understand that a military advisory commission known as the Military Leadership Diversity Commission recently released a report recommending 

that DOD create an equal playing field for women. At this time, do you personally 

support a change in the current Army policy in this area? 

General BOSTICK. I do personally support a change to current Army policy in this 

area at this time. The Army recently completed a routine cyclic review of its current 

assignment policy for female soldiers. As a result of this review, the Army is prepared to align its policy with that of DOD by adopting DOD terminology and definitions and by eliminating its collocation restriction. However, the Army does not intend to take action to change Army policy until after the comprehensive NDAA for 

Fiscal Year 2011 mandated review is completed, as this review may generate 

changes that extend well beyond the scope of our routine cyclic review. Any change 

in policy will increase further career opportunities for female soldiers and provide 

a larger pool of qualified soldiers. 

Women will continue to be assigned to units and positions that may necessitate 

combat actions within the scope of their restricted positioning—situations for which 

they are fully trained and equipped to respond. 

RESERVE COMPONENT INTEGRATION

44. Senator CHAMBLISS. General Bostick, during a decade of sustained engagement in combat operations, the Reserve components of our Armed Forces have been 

transformed from a strategic force of last resort to an Operational Reserve Force 

that provides full-spectrum capability to the Nation. While DOD and the military 

Services have come a long way in realizing the vision of an Operational Reserve, 

more work needs to be done to fully implement this concept. In addition to the items 

you mention in your written statement, what additional steps are required to truly 

make the Reserve components the Operational Force of the future? 

General BOSTICK. As DOD continues to transform the National Guard and Reserves from a strategic to an operational force, a revised ‘‘limited’’ title 10 U.S.C. 

authority is needed to provide the Secretary of Defense and the Military Departments an authority for employing the Reserves and National Guard to support 

peace-time (non-emergency) force generation requirements. Such authority, would 

allow DOD components to program and budget for a greater use of the Reserves and 

National Guard to meet steady-state requirements within our base budget, such as 

463 

theater security cooperation missions, rotational forces to Europe and/or Korea, and 

other force generation requirements that are longer than 29 days in duration. The 

President has requested that Congress consider amending 10 U.S.C., section 12304, 

to permit the use of the Reserve components for non-emergency requirements. We 

ask for your consideration of this request. Ideally, the Army would like an authority 

to permit the Secretary to begin programming and budgeting for involuntary use of 

the RC to perform missions vital to U.S. national interests at home and abroad as 

part of a flexible, accessible, cost effective Total Force. 

FORCE BALANCE—CIVIL AFFAIRS

45. Senator CHAMBLISS. General Bostick, in your written statement you note that 

‘‘the Reserve components make up 51 percent of the Army’s manpower. Moreover, 

many of the capabilities that the combatant command would prefer to use in theater 

security cooperation activities do not exist in sufficient quantities in the Active component. For example, approximately 90 percent of the Army’s Civil Affairs forces are 

in the USAR.’’ Given that the majority of Civil Affairs personnel will continue to 

reside in the Army Reserve and continue to deploy primarily in support of conventional forces, why should Special Operations Command retain proponent responsibility for all Civil Affairs forces, Active and Reserve? 

General BOSTICK. Civil Affair Operations are a core activity of Special Operation 

Forces. 

46. Senator CHAMBLISS. General Bostick, is Civil Affairs an Army or a Special Operations capability? 

General BOSTICK. Civil Affairs is an Army capability that is housed within U.S. 

Army Special Operations Command. 

47. Senator CHAMBLISS. General Bostick, if the Army maintained proponent responsibility for Civil Affairs, how would you recommend better integration of the Active and Reserve Civil Affairs forces in support of the overall war effort? 

General BOSTICK. As the 2010 QDR noted, Civil Affairs forces serve as the vanguard of DOD’s support to partner nations in the fields of rule of law, economic stability, governance, public health and welfare, infrastructure, and public education 

and information. The Army’s current plan for Civil Affairs force modernization at 

U.S. Army John F. Kennedy Special Warfare Center and School is no longer tenable, given the recent decision by the Secretary of Defense to transfer proponent responsibility for U.S. Army Reserve (USAR) Civil Affairs forces from Commander, 

U.S. Special Operations Command (SOCOM) to the Department of the Army. The 

Commander, SOCOM is tasked with developing options for transferring proponent 

responsibilities for USAR Civil Affairs to the Department of the Army. The Army 

should establish a new force modernization and branch proponent for Civil Affairs 

within the U.S. Army Training and Doctrine Command that supports the Army’s 

total force, with common standards between the Active and Reserve Forces. 

QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY SENATOR SUSAN COLLINS

YELLOW RIBBON REINTEGRATION PROGRAM

48. Senator COLLINS. Secretary Lamont, Secretary Garcia, and Secretary 

Ginsberg, Reserve component members returning from combat to civilian communities are often geographically dispersed from military bases. The additional pressures of finding or resuming civilian employment and finding behavioral health support make it more difficult to provide them with an effective reintegration experience. The National Guard Bureau’s YRRP and the Office of Secretary of Defense’s 

Military and Family Life Counseling (MFLC) programs are designed to help assist 

these servicemembers and their families in making this transition. Do you have 

metrics that demonstrate whether or not these programs are meeting their objective? 

Secretary LAMONT. The Defense Management Data Center (DMDC) conducted a 

web-based survey in fiscal year 2010. This survey, Status of Forces Survey of Reserve Component Members: Reunion and Reintegration, solicited input from 86,000 

Reserve component members (31,815 responded). DMDC findings show respondents 

found YRRP to be very effective compared with other DOD programs with which 

they were familiar in the following areas: Overall effectiveness of reunion and reintegration support; Helpfulness of support services for members dealing with deployment related stress; Overall satisfaction with reunion and reintegration support; 

464 

Helpfulness of support services for spouse or significant other dealing with deployment related stress; and Overall assessment of readjustment. 

The success of YRRP is largely predicated on the effectiveness of its events. It is 

for that reason Yellow Ribbon event planners are required to submit an After Action 

Report (AAR) following every Yellow Ribbon event. These AARs allow the National 

Guard and Reserve program leadership and the YRRP office to identify the needs 

and gauge the effectiveness of the program. Based on the reports from the Services, 

it is evident that YRRP is meeting the needs of its Service and family members and 

community partners. 

The National Guard will continue to work with The Yellow Ribbon Center for Excellence which is the analytical element of the YRRP to enhance and improve the 

development of data collection, analysis and distribution systems to provide best 

practices and measures of performance and effectiveness of YRRP. 

Although National Guard servicemembers and their families utilize MFLC programs offered within the States, the National Guard Bureau does not manage this 

program or track metrics that demonstrate their effectiveness. 

Secretary GARCIA. The Navy and Marine Corps YRRPs have consistently received 

praise for its ability to smooth the process for reservists transitioning from mobilized service to the civilian sector. However, it remains voluntary and feedback is 

provided on a case-by-case basis. Exit surveys have been utilized which indicate a 

strong approval rating for both the workshop, as a whole and the material presented. In an effort to gain greater metrics, the Center for Naval Analysis (CNA) 

has been requested to conduct a comprehensive study of Navy’s implementation of 

the YRRP. Reserve component members also are protected from the pressures of 

finding and resuming civilian employment by current laws such as the USERRA. 

There are metrics that demonstrate whether or not these programs meet their objective. OSD(P&R) coordinated an independent third party evaluation of the MFLC 

Program by Virginia Tech University. OSD(P&R) can provide the specific results of 

the evaluation as they apply to DOD. 

Secretary GINSBERG. In fiscal year 2011, YRRP will continue to build on its successes by pursuing a number of objectives including publishing the DOD Instruction 

and developing a plan to execute Joint events. These objectives and others will allow 

for the most efficient use of resources when conducting events. 

For fiscal year 2011, approximately 1,700 Yellow Ribbon Events are scheduled 

across the country. This level of commitment, in terms of fiscal resources and service provider support being spread thin, appears unsustainable based on feedback 

from YRRP Advisory Board, YRRP Conference attendees, and service providers. In 

addition, an increased emphasis on the role YRRP will play in terms of decreasing 

unemployment/underemployment must be addressed. 

YRRP continues to work diligently to enhance and improve the Program by finding new and innovative ways to communicate and deliver information to 

servicemembers and their families. In addition, the Program has also placed more 

emphasis on Service collaboration to better serve servicemembers and their families. 

These efforts provide the foundation for the Program’s growth and achieving its mission to help, support, and ultimately increase the readiness of Service and family 

members throughout the deployment cycle. 

YRRP has made a difference in the lives of thousands of our soldiers, sailors, marines, airmen, and their families. Continuing support from Congress, the Military 

Departments, the National Guard and Reserve, Federal agencies, nongovernmental 

agencies, and State and local partners will ensure our National Guard and Reserve 

servicemembers and their families will remain strong and ready! 

49. Senator COLLINS. Secretary Lamont, Secretary Garcia, and Secretary 

Ginsberg, what is the projected funding for the next 5 years for the YRRP and the 

Military and Family Counseling programs? 

Secretary LAMONT. The Army National Guard (ARNG) uses the Army Community 

Services budget line for Base funding of all of their quality of life programs which 

include Yellow Ribbon, Family Programs, Survivor Outreach Services and Joint 

Staff. The Fiscal Year 2012 Operation/Maintenance (O&M) funding amount is 

$82.317 million; the Army is still working the numbers for the out years. 

The Air National Guard (ANG) funds their Yellow Ribbon program through Overseas Contingency Operations (OCO) funding. The fiscal year 2012 funding includes 

both O&M at $17.4 million and Military Personnel (MILPERS) at $9.4 million for 

a total of $26.8 million. The Army is still working the numbers for the out years. 

National Guard servicemembers and their families utilize MFLC programs offered 

within their States. However, the National Guard Bureau does not manage funding 

for this program or track metrics that demonstrate their effectiveness. 

465 

Secretary GARCIA. The YRRP is currently funded through fiscal year 2012. No additional funding has been sourced to support the program beyond fiscal year 2013. 

Secretary GINSBERG. YRRP currently remains adequately resourced to carry out 

the mission as mandated by law. The AFR fully supports the YRRP and will continue to work with the Service YRRP Managers, Liaisons, General Counsel, OSD 

Comptroller, and other OSD Offices to resolve issues that impact the ability to execute funds in support of servicemembers and their families. We anticipate funding 

for the next 5 years of approximately $75 million. 

50. Senator COLLINS. Secretary Lamont, Secretary Garcia, and Secretary 

Ginsberg, do you believe you have adequate mental health and behavioral health 

personnel in the appropriate locations to reach all of the returning Reserve and National Guard servicemembers? 

Secretary LAMONT. The U.S. Army Medical Command has sufficient behavioral 

health personnel to provide behavioral health screening to returning National 

Guard and Army Reserve soldiers. However, across the Army, we do not have sufficient numbers of behavioral health care providers in the appropriate locations to 

treat all of our returning soldiers with behavioral health care issues resulting from 

deployment. The Army is using numerous mechanisms, including bonuses, scholarships, and expansions in training programs, to recruit and retain both civilian and 

uniformed behavioral health providers. 

Secretary GARCIA. We are committed to improving the psychological health, resiliency and well-being of all our sailors, marines, and their family members, both Active and Reserve component. Our priority remains ensuring that our personnel and 

their families have access to the providers, programs and services they need. We 

recognize that shortfalls within the market of qualified mental health providers has 

led to challenges in contracting and filling provider and support staff positions; however, recruitment and retention of uniformed personnel have improved. We are also 

working hard to ensure that required civilian and contracted personnel positions are 

filled to meet the needs our personnel, regardless of location. Our programs are designed to make best use of our trained mental health personnel and resources including: 

• Reserve commands have trained Combat/Operational Stress Control

(C/OSC) caregivers and C/OSC training is conducted regularly in order to 

prevent suicide, sexual assault and family violence, and to normalize 

buddy-care and help-seeking behavior as early as possible. Like the Active 

component, these OSC concepts are integrated into all sailor and family 

programs in the RC, including alcohol awareness and SAPR—which also 

highlight the importance of bystander intervention. Together these efforts 

combine to create a culture of caring among shipmates, where seeking help 

for oneself or someone else in need is fast becoming the new social norm. 

• These efforts are further supported by trained Suicide Prevention Coordinators within each Reserve Command who provide effective interactive 

peer-to-peer training as part of an ongoing social media campaign to destigmatize help-seeking. 

• Reserve PHOP teams of five to six full-time licensed mental health providers are embedded within each geographic Navy Reserve Region or Marine Forces Reserve Region to help commands, reservists and their families, 

to meet their care needs. Each Region’s team provides a 24/7 on-call service. 

They also contact every reservist returning from a combat deployment, and 

provide mental health screening, find local, affordable resources, make referrals and then follow-up to ensure that the care was effective. This program continues to help RC personnel with finding appropriate care for medical and mental health needs by connecting them with available and accessible state-of-the-art face to face, telephonic and web-based Federal and 

State programs, including those offered by TRICARE, Military OneSource, 

Military and Family Life Consultants serving in the Joint Family Support 

and Assistance Programs and the VA. PHOP teams conduct local Navy 

Operational Support Center (NOSC) visits at least annually and have participated in the YRRP Warrior and Family Support pre-deployment family 

readiness conferences and annual Periodic Health Assessments at NOSCs. 

They also receive referrals for assistance as a result of Post Deployment 

Health Assessments conducted by health care providers for reservists returning from deployments. 

• Returning Warrior Workshops (RWWs), a 2-day weekend program designed specifically to support the successful reintegration of returning reservists and their families following mobilization are conducted within each 

Region usually each quarter. The PHOP teams serve as facilitators at these 

466 

YRRP signature events which normalize the impact of combat stress, provide support and opportunities to assess mental health needs, destigmatize 

help-seeking, and provide resources for identified issues or concerns. 

• Families OverComing Under Stress, a family-centered resilience training 

program based on evidence-based interventions that enhance understanding 

of combat and operational stress, psychological health and developmental 

outcomes for highly stressed children and families, is available for RC personnel serving in areas with a high active duty fleet concentration. 

Secretary GINSBERG. ANG implemented the Psychological Health Program (PHP) 

during this fiscal year. The ANG PHP places licensed mental health professionals 

as DPHs into each wing to provide subject matter expertise on psychological health 

to wing commanders and to provide consultation, information, referral, and case 

management for airmen and their family members in need of assistance. Though 

the ANG does not provide treatment, these professionals help distressed airmen 

navigate the complex mental health system in order to obtain the help they need. 

They support airmen throughout the deployment cycle and are a resource when 

post-deployment assessments determine an airman is experiencing difficulties. 

The Wing DPHs work collaboratively with other wing helping agencies, such as 

Chaplains and Airman and Family Readiness Program Managers. Additionally, they 

partner with State DPHs, Joint Family Support Assistance Program Military and 

Family Life Consultants, and others who support Guard members and their families. Wing DPHs serve as consultants to medical personnel conducting pre- and postdeployment assessments of airmen, providing further screening, referral and case 

management as appropriate. Wing DPHs are involved in the YRRP to provide support for Guard members and their families throughout the deployment cycle. 

The Wing DPHs play a critical role in addressing the mental health needs of returning Reserve and National Guard servicemembers. However, the ANG would 

benefit from additional resources, as a single asset cannot possibly meet all needs. 

For example, as members of the Reserve component return from deployments, they 

undergo assessments at multiple locations, and changes in their Federal/State status. The ANG has begun to address this issue using the Deployment Resiliency Assessment. 

51. Senator COLLINS. Secretary Lamont, Secretary Garcia, and Secretary 

Ginsberg, if there are additional resources or programs that must be implemented 

to ensure the behavioral and mental health needs of reservists and guardsmen returning from war and their families are fully met, please describe those proposals. 

Secretary LAMONT. Returning reservists and guardsmen are authorized extended 

care through the VA, TRICARE network, and direct care system as they transition 

from their combat experiences. However, they must be located near participating 

healthcare facilities or network providers to obtain such care. The Army is expanding a tele-behavioral health system that will greatly increase access for returning 

soldiers by enabling them to seek and receive care in remote locations. We are currently addressing the issues inherent in this expansion, with State licensure limitations of behavioral health professionals being one of the most critical challenges. 

Secretary GARCIA. We maintain a culture of continuous improvement in critically 

evaluating our programs of support for all our sailors, marines, and their families. 

At the same time, the leadership within the Navy and Marine Corps is committed 

to eliminating any stigma associated with seeking care or assistance. We continue 

to make progress in providing better care, as well as seamless services and support 

to our personnel and their families and believe we have the resources necessary to 

meet our requirements moving forward. 

Secretary GINSBERG. Air Force Reserve proposes to adding wing-level personnel 

who will focus specifically on increasing access to services, improving the psychological health needs and resilience of AFR personnel and their families, and, when 

possible, mitigating the negative effects of community risk factors. 

The challenges of serving as a citizen airman are many. To attempt to meet this 

challenge, ANG implemented the PHP during this fiscal year. This program supports the force health protection of airmen by promoting resilience and psychological 

health. The ANG PHP places licensed mental health professionals as DPHs into 

each wing to provide subject matter expertise on psychological health to wing commanders and to provide consultation, information, referral, and case management 

for airmen and their family members in need of assistance. Though the ANG does 

not provide treatment, these professionals help distressed airmen navigate the complex mental health system in order to obtain the help they need. They also support 

the psychological health of wing members by providing psychoeducational presentations on topics such as post-traumatic stress, improving sleep, communication, 

and relationships. 

467 

Mental health care of citizen airmen is complicated by geographic dispersal. Many 

members live in remote areas where access to care is limited. Continuing to expand 

funding for and availability of telehealth services, community mental health services 

and other population health efforts will be beneficial. 

Ongoing funding of the ANG PHP is essential. Funding is needed to continue the 

program beyond fiscal year 2012. The PHP is critical to ensuring the continuum or 

continuity of care for the Guard member. 

[Whereupon, at 2:59 p.m., the subcommittee adjourned.] 

Æ