Report to the Senate Committee on 

Armed Services and the House 

Committee on Armed Services 

United States General Accounting Office 

GAO 

April 2003 MILITARY 

PERSONNEL 

DOD Needs to Assess 

Certain Factors in 

Determining Whether 

Hazardous Duty Pay Is 

Warranted for Duty in 

the Polar Regions 

GAO-03-554 
Hardship duty pay is intended to compensate military personnel assigned to 

areas for more than 30 consecutive days where quality-of-life conditions are 

substantially below those in the continental United States. DOD did not 

support the hardship duty pay legislation on the basis that this pay was not 

intended to compensate stays of short duration and the legislation 

circumvented a DOD process designating hardship duty locations and rates. 

Granting an exception to the 30-day hardship duty pay threshold for 

109th Airlift Wing personnel deployed to the polar regions would result in 

minimal costs, but this exception could set a precedent for DOD personnel 

performing other short-term missions and could further increase costs. Had 

this exception been in effect in 2001-2002, the 109th Airlift Wing estimated the 

costs would have totaled about $127,000. The National Science Foundation 

would incur most of these costs because it reimburses DOD for logistic 

support in the polar regions. The costs of granting an exception for 

short-term missions conducted by DOD personnel at other hardship 

locations are unknown. Based on its review of the intent of hardship duty 

pay and the implications of granting an exception, GAO believes that an 

exception to the 30-day threshold is not justified under current DOD policy. 

The 109th Airlift Wing justified its proposal for hazardous pay on the basis of 

extreme working conditions and exposure to medical hazards. For example, 

maintenance personnel work in temperatures as cold as minus 59 degrees 

Fahrenheit without the protection of hangars and are exposed to potential 

medical hazards such as frostbite, hypothermia, and carbon monoxide 

poisoning. Unit officials expressed concern about the retention of personnel 

who require additional training for polar operations, but they did not know 

what impact hazardous duty pay would have on retention. Recent data from 

exit surveys show that dissatisfaction with pay was not among the most 

frequently cited reasons for leaving. 

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

MILITARY PERSONNEL

DOD NEEDS TO ASSESS CERTAIN 

FACTORS IN DETERMINING WHETHER 

HAZARDOUS DUTY PAY IS WARRANTED 

FOR DUTY IN THE POLAR REGIONS 

www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-03-554.

To view the full report, including the scope 

and methodology, click on the link above. 

For more information, contact Derek B. 

Stewart (202) 512-5140 or 

stewartd@gao.gov. 

Highlights of GAO-03-554, a report to the 

Senate Committee on Armed Services 

and the House Committee on Armed 

Services. 

April 2003 

The 109th Airlift Wing, New York Air 

National Guard, conducts supply 

missions for scientific research in 

the polar regions. Most unit 

members do not spend more than 

30 consecutive days in the polar 

regions. Therefore, they are not 

eligible for hardship duty pay, 

which requires more than 

30 consecutive days of duty in a 

designated hardship location. 

Congress considered legislation in 

2002 to make an exception to the 

30-day hardship duty pay threshold 

for polar duty. This legislation was 

not approved. In addition, the 109th

Airlift Wing proposed designating 

polar duty as a hazardous duty. 

The Conference Report 

accompanying the National 

Defense Authorization Act for 

Fiscal Year 2003 directed GAO and 

DOD to conduct separate reviews 

of special and incentive pays for 

polar duty. GAO assessed DOD’s 

rationale for hardship duty pay and 

the implications of making an 

exception to hardship duty pay. In 

addition, GAO assessed the 109th

Airlift Wing’s justification for 

hazardous duty pay for polar duty. 

GAO recommends that DOD, in 

conducting its congressionally 

mandated study of special and 

incentive pays for reservists 

performing polar duty, assess 

certain factors to determine if 

personnel performing polar duty 

should receive hazardous duty pay. 

DOD concurred with this 

recommendation. 
Page i GAO-03-554 Military Personnel 

Letter 1

Results in Brief 3

Background 4

DOD’s Rationale for Hardship Duty Pay 7

Granting a Hardship Duty Exception for the Polar Regions Could 

Set a Precedent for Other Short-Term Missions 8

Factors Cited as Justifying Hazardous Duty Pay for Personnel 

Performing Duty in Polar Regions 10

Conclusions 14

Recommendation for Executive Action 15

Agency Comments 15

Scope and Methodology 15

Appendix I Extreme Operating Conditions and Potential 

Medical Hazards Encountered by Personnel 

Deployed to the Polar Regions 17 

Difficult Working Conditions 17

Potential Medical Hazards 18

Appendix II Comments from the Department of Defense 20 

Figures 

Figure 1: Ski-Tipped LC-130 Aircraft Operated by the 109th Airlift 

Wing, New York Air National Guard 5

Figure 2: Main Factors Influencing Members of the 109th Airlift 

Wing to Leave the Unit (2001-2003) 13

Contents 

This is a work of the U.S. Government and is not subject to copyright protection in the 

United States. It may be reproduced and distributed in its entirety without further 

permission from GAO. It may contain copyrighted graphics, images or other materials. 

Permission from the copyright holder may be necessary should you wish to reproduce 

copyrighted materials separately from GAO’s product. 
Page 1 GAO-03-554 Military Personnel 

April 29, 2003 

The Honorable John W. Warner 

Chairman 

The Honorable Carl Levin 

Ranking Minority Member 

Committee on Armed Services 

United States Senate 

The Honorable Duncan Hunter 

Chairman 

The Honorable Ike Skelton 

Ranking Minority Member 

Committee on Armed Services 

House of Representatives 

Military personnel serving outside the continental United States may 

perform duty in locations with adverse living conditions. Personnel who 

spend more than 30 consecutive days in areas designated by the Office of 

the Secretary of Defense (OSD) as hardship duty locations are eligible for 

hardship duty pay.1

 OSD has designated 170 hardship duty locations and 

has authorized a monthly pay rate of $50, $100, or $150, depending on the 

severity of living conditions. The polar regions of Antarctica and 

Greenland have been designated as hardship duty locations qualifying for 

the maximum monthly pay rate of $150. The 109th Airlift Wing, New York 

Air National Guard, conducts supply missions in the polar regions in 

support of scientific research programs sponsored primarily by the 

National Science Foundation. However, according to a 109th Airlift Wing 

official, most unit members who perform polar duty do not serve more 

 1

 Section 305 of title 37 U.S.C. authorizes special pay for uniformed servicemembers 

performing hardship duty and directs the Secretary of Defense to prescribe regulations 

implementing hardship duty pay. There are two types of hardship duty pay. “Hardship duty 

pay for location assignment” is payable to members for duty in a designated hardship 

location for more than 30 consecutive days. Personnel must be in a designated hardship 

location at least 31 days to qualify for this pay. “Hardship duty pay for mission assignment” 

is payable to members who perform investigative or remains-recovery duty in remote, 

isolated areas such as Vietnam and Cambodia regardless of the time spent on the mission. 

This report focuses solely on hardship duty pay for location assignment, which hereafter is 

referred to as hardship duty pay. 

United States General Accounting Office

Washington, DC 20548 
Page 2 GAO-03-554 Military Personnel 

than 30 consecutive days and are therefore not eligible to receive hardship 

duty pay. 

With the goal of securing incentive pay for polar duty, the 109th Airlift 

Wing developed a proposal in 2000 to authorize hazardous duty pay for 

duty performed in the polar regions. Hazardous duty pay, which is 

separate from hardship duty pay, is intended as an incentive for personnel 

to occupy hard-to-fill occupations that involve risky or hazardous duty.2

The proposal was submitted to the New York Guard and subsequently 

brought to the attention of Congress, but it was not provided to the 

Department of Defense (DOD) for consideration in DOD’s process for 

reviewing personnel compensation proposals. Although the 109th Airlift 

Wing’s proposal addressed hazardous duty pay, Congress considered a 

legislative provision in 2002 to authorize hardship duty pay, on a prorated 

basis, for each day of work performed in the polar regions.3

 The provision 

would, in effect, have made an exception to DOD’s 30-day threshold 

requirement and would have increased the monthly rate established by 

DOD from $150 to $240. Although the provision was not approved, the 

Conference Report accompanying the National Defense Authorization Act 

for Fiscal Year 20034

 directed us to review special and incentive pays for 

reservists5

 who perform frequent and continuous duty on ski-equipped 

aircraft operating in the polar regions while assigned temporarily to 

locations where conditions are extremely harsh. The Conference Report 

also directed DOD to include a study of the same issue in a review of 

reserve component personnel compensation directed by the Senate.6

 In 

response to the mandate, we reviewed (1) DOD’s rationale for hardship 

 2

 Both hardship duty pay and hazardous duty pay are categorized as “special and incentive 

pays,” which are compensation to uniformed servicemembers in addition to their basic pay 

and allowances. These pays are authorized to help the uniformed services meet specific 

manpower requirements. 

3

 House Resolution 4546, National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2003, 

section 615. 

4

 H. Rept. 107-772. 

5

 For this report, we use the terms “reserves” and “reservists” to refer to the collective 

forces of the Air National Guard, the Army National Guard, the Army Reserve, the Naval 

Reserve, the Marine Corps Reserve, and the Air Force Reserve. 

6

 Senate Report 107-151 accompanying the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal 

Year 2003 directed the Secretary of Defense to conduct a reserve personnel compensation 

review aimed at determining the extent to which personnel compensation policies and 

statutes appropriately address the demands placed on guard and reserve personnel. The 

results of this review are to be submitted no later than August 1, 2003. 
Page 3 GAO-03-554 Military Personnel 

duty pay, including the 30-day threshold; (2) the potential implications, 

including costs, of making an exception to the 30-day threshold; and 

(3) the 109th Airlift Wing’s justification for granting hazardous duty pay for 

polar duty. In subsequent discussion with your staff, we agreed to provide 

an assessment of granting an exception to the 30-day hardship duty 

threshold for personnel performing duty in the polar regions. 

Hardship duty pay is intended to compensate military personnel assigned 

to areas where quality-of-life conditions are substantially below those 

experienced by most personnel assigned in the continental United States. 

OSD, which establishes and reviews hardship duty pay locations and rates, 

concluded that personnel on duty in a hardship location for 30 consecutive 

days or less do not endure the same range of physical hardships 

experienced by those who are permanently assigned. According to an OSD 

official, an OSD working group linked the 30-day hardship duty threshold 

to family separation allowance, which compensates military personnel 

deployed away from their family for more than 30 consecutive days. OSD 

did not support the legislative provision to create an exception to the 

30-day threshold for missions to the polar regions. OSD asserted that the 

proposed legislation circumvents DOD’s hardship duty location and rate 

designation process. We found no basis to disagree with the criteria DOD 

has established for hardship duty pay. 

Allowing an exception to the 30-day threshold for members of the 109th 

Airlift Wing deployed to the polar regions would result in minimal costs, 

but this exception could set a precedent for DOD personnel performing 

other short-term missions. The 109th Airlift Wing estimated that granting 

this exception for its personnel would cost approximately $125,000 to 

$130,000 a year based on past years’ deployment trends. The National 

Science Foundation, which reimburses DOD for 109th Airlift Wing logistic 

support in the polar regions, would incur most of these increased costs. 

DOD officials said granting this exception would set a precedent for 

additional exceptions at other hardship duty locations that, if approved, 

could increase future hardship duty pay costs. DOD refused a similar 

request from the Navy in 2002 for an exception to the 30-day threshold for 

duty on Vieques Island, Puerto Rico. The costs of granting an exception for 

DOD personnel performing short-term missions conducted at other 

hardship locations are unknown. 

The 109th Airlift Wing justified its proposal for hazardous duty pay for 

military personnel performing duty in the polar regions on the basis of the 

extreme working conditions they encounter and their exposure to 

Results in Brief 
Page 4 GAO-03-554 Military Personnel 

potential medical hazards. For example, flight crews routinely conduct 

takeoffs and landings in remote areas on snow and ice, and maintenance 

personnel work in temperatures as low as minus 59 degrees Fahrenheit, 

without the protection of hangars. Furthermore, personnel are exposed to 

potential medical hazards such as hypothermia, frostbite, carbon 

monoxide poisoning, ultraviolet radiation exposure, and dehydration. Unit 

officials also expressed concern about the retention of unit personnel who 

require additional training for the unit’s specialized missions in the polar 

regions. However, they did not know what impact the proposed hazardous 

duty pay for polar duty would have on retention. Exit surveys conducted 

at the unit with separating personnel show that dissatisfaction with pay 

was not among the most frequently cited reasons for leaving. 

Based on our review of the intent of hardship duty pay and the 

implications of granting an exception, we believe that granting an 

exception to the 30-day hardship duty threshold is not justified under 

current DOD policy. Concerning the 109th Airlift Wing’s request for 

hazardous duty pay for polar operations, this report contains a 

recommendation that DOD, in conducting its congressionally mandated 

study of special and incentive pays for reservists performing duty in the 

polar regions, assess certain factors in determining whether personnel 

performing polar duty should receive hazardous duty pay. In commenting 

on a draft of this report, DOD concurred with our recommendation. 

The National Science Foundation conducts scientific research in the polar 

regions of Antarctica and Greenland and funds and manages the U.S. 

Antarctic Program. This program sends nearly 3,000 scientists and support 

personnel to Antarctica each year to support scientific research in areas 

such as astrophysics, atmospheric chemistry, biology, earth sciences, 

ocean and climate systems, and glaciology. The National Science 

Foundation also chairs an interagency committee to coordinate the 

scientific research efforts of all federal agencies in the Arctic region, 

including Greenland. The 109th Airlift Wing is the main provider of air 

logistic support for National Science Foundation activities in Antarctica. 

The unit also supports the activities of the National Science Foundation 

and other agencies in Greenland. Members of the 109th Airlift Wing train 

on and operate unique LC-130 ski-equipped aircraft that take off and land 

on snow and ice (see fig. 1). The unit operates 10 LC-130 aircraft. 

Background 
Page 5 GAO-03-554 Military Personnel 

Figure 1: Ski-Tipped LC-130 Aircraft Operated by the 109th Airlift Wing, New York Air National Guard 

The 109th Airlift Wing supports U.S. Antarctic Program mission 

requirements from mid-October to the end of February each year.7

 It 

employs 220 full-time Active Guard and Reserve members whose principal 

task is to support this program. It receives additional support from 

“traditional” guardsmen, other Active Guard and Reserve members, and 

military technicians of the 109th Airlift Wing, as well as members from 

 7

 Under a 3-year transition period beginning in fiscal year 1997, the 109th Airlift Wing 

assumed responsibility for operating and maintaining the LC-130 aircraft from the 

Department of the Navy in support of the U.S. Antarctic Program. The National Defense 

Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1996 authorized the Air National Guard to assume the 

Navy’s role in air logistic support to the National Science Foundation. The Navy had 

provided support to this program since 1955 when U.S. presence at McMurdo Station, 

Antarctica, was established. The 109th Airlift Wing began to support the Navy in 1988. 
Page 6 GAO-03-554 Military Personnel 

other military units.8 Operations are conducted from McMurdo Station, the 

permanent logistics station for U.S. operations in Antarctica. The 

109th Airlift Wing schedules between 450 and 500 flights in Antarctica for 

the 5-month operational season to meet National Science Foundation 

requirements. According to the 109th Airlift Wing, personnel typically 

deploy for a period of 1 to 13 weeks, which includes up to 1 week of travel 

from New York to Antarctica. These deployments are conducted on a 

rotational basis. The 109th Airlift Wing maintains a presence of 

approximately 120 personnel (50 operational, 61 logistic, and 9 support) at 

McMurdo Station from October to the end of February. 

In Greenland, the 109th Airlift Wing performs training missions for unit 

personnel who will deploy to Antarctica. The unit also performs scientific 

support missions for the National Science Foundation as well as for the 

National Aeronautics and Space Administration and European research 

programs.9

 Unit operations in Greenland run from mid-March to 

September each year and are conducted from staging locations at Thule 

Air Base and Kangerlussuaq. Missions are flown to all parts of the 

Greenland Ice Cap, northern Canadian locations, and Arctic Ocean camps. 

The 109th conducts 10 to 12 1-week deployments to Greenland. 

Within OSD, the Under Secretary of Defense (Personnel and Readiness) is 

responsible for DOD personnel policy, including oversight of reserve 

affairs and military personnel pay and benefits. The Under Secretary of 

Defense (Personnel and Readiness) leads the Unified Legislation and 

Budgeting process, which was established in 1994 to develop and review 

personnel compensation proposals.10 In addition, the Office of the Under 

Secretary of Defense (Personnel and Readiness) is conducting the 

 8

 Active Guard and Reserve members provide full-time active duty support to Guard, 

Reserve, and Active Component organizations. Military technicians are dual status active 

duty members who perform day-to-day management, administration, and maintenance. 

They are civil service employees of the federal government who must be military members 

of the unit that employs them. 

9

 The 109th Airlift Wing took over the mission of supporting the Defense Early Warning 

radar installations located on the Greenland Ice Cap from the Air Force Alaskan Air 

Command in 1975 and has conducted support for scientific research since 1978. 

10 The Under Secretary of Defense (Personnel and Readiness) chairs biannual meetings, 

which are attended by the principal voting members from the Office of the Under Secretary 

of Defense (Personnel and Readiness), including the Assistant Secretary of Defense 

(Reserve Affairs), the Assistant Secretary of Defense (Health Affairs), and the Assistant 

Secretary of Defense (Force Management Policy); the Office of the Under Secretary of 

Defense (Comptroller); the Joint Staff; and the service secretaries. 
Page 7 GAO-03-554 Military Personnel 

congressionally mandated review of special and incentive pays for 

reservists performing duty in the polar regions. 

Hardship duty pay compensates military personnel on duty for more than 

30 consecutive days in harsh or difficult living conditions. The Secretary of 

Defense has the authority to establish implementing regulations for such 

pay, including the designation of hardship duty locations and rates.11

Within OSD, the Assistant Secretary of Defense (Force Management 

Policy) tasked a working group in 1998 to develop hardship duty pay 

policy.12 The working group determined that (1) uniformed members who 

perform duty in designated hardship locations for more than 

30 consecutive days are eligible for hardship duty pay and (2) this pay is 

not intended to compensate for difficult working conditions. According to 

DOD, personnel assigned to an area for a short period do not endure the 

same range of physical hardships as those in the area on a long-term basis. 

According to an OSD official, the working group linked the 30-day 

hardship duty threshold to family separation allowance,13 which 

compensates members who are away from their families for more than 

30 consecutive days. We found no basis to disagree with the criteria DOD 

has established for hardship duty pay. 

OSD, in its appeal submitted in response to the National Defense 

Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2003, opposed the legislation creating an 

exception to the 30-day hardship duty threshold for missions to the polar 

regions on the grounds that it “unnecessarily circumvents a process that 

has proven to be a fair and equitable means of setting hardship duty pay 

location rates worldwide.” The Assistant Secretary of Defense (Force 

Management Policy)14 regularly reviews and determines hardship duty 

locations and rates. In certain instances, the Assistant Secretary of 

Defense (Force Management Policy) automatically designates hardship 

duty locations. All installations located on land areas or an ice shelf above 

66 degrees 33 minutes north latitude (Arctic region) or below 60 degrees 

south latitude (Antarctica) are designated as hardship duty locations. For 

 11 37 U.S.C. 305. 

12 Hardship duty pay was authorized in 1999 and went into effect on January 1, 2001. 

13 37 U.S.C. 427. 

14 This position has been replaced by the Principal Deputy Under Secretary of Defense 

(Personnel and Readiness). 

DOD’s Rationale for 

Hardship Duty Pay 
Page 8 GAO-03-554 Military Personnel 

all other locations, unified commanders with regional responsibilities 

submit a completed Hardship Duty Location Assessment Questionnaire to 

the Assistant Secretary of Defense (Force Management Policy), who 

reviews these requests twice a year. Monthly pay rates for hardship duty 

are $50, $100, and $150 and are based on the severity of living conditions. 

Living conditions are placed into three categories: (1) physical 

environment, which includes factors such as climate and physical and 

social isolation; (2) living conditions, including sanitation, disease, medical 

facilities, housing, food, and recreational and community facilities; and 

(3) personal security, including political violence, harassment, and crime. 

Hardship duty performed for more than 30 consecutive days in Antarctica 

and Greenland qualifies at the $150 monthly rate. 

Allowing an exception to the 30-day hardship duty threshold for members 

of the 109th Airlift Wing who deploy to the polar regions would result in 

minimal additional costs. The National Science Foundation reimburses 

DOD for 109th Airlift Wing logistic support in the polar regions and would 

incur most of these additional costs. However, allowing this exception 

could set a precedent for DOD personnel performing other missions 

lasting 30 days or less. The costs of granting an exception for short-term 

missions conducted at other hardship locations are unknown. 

The 109th Airlift Wing estimated that granting an exception to the 30-day 

hardship duty threshold for unit members deployed to the polar regions 

would cost approximately $125,000 to $130,000 a year based on 

deployment trends in past years. We did not verify the cost data. In fiscal 

year 2002, for example, the unit had a total of 1,478 deployments to the 

polar regions, including 690 to Antarctica and 788 to Greenland.15 Unit 

members deployed for a total of 15,846 days, including 11,906 days in 

Antarctica and 3,940 days in Greenland. According to a unit official, 

approximately 30 unit members deployed for more than 30 consecutive 

days. The 109th Airlift Wing estimated that if the exception to the 30-day 

threshold had been in effect in fiscal year 2002, hardship duty pay costs for 

that year would have increased by about $127,000, including 

 15 These figures include unit members who deployed more than once to the polar regions. 

Thus, the total number of individuals deployed was less than the total number of 

deployments. 

Granting a Hardship 

Duty Exception for 

the Polar Regions 

Could Set a Precedent 

for Other Short-Term 

Missions 

Estimated Costs of 

Granting the 109th Airlift 

Wing an Exception to the 

30-Day Threshold 
Page 9 GAO-03-554 Military Personnel 

approximately $95,000 for deployments to Antarctica and approximately 

$32,000 for deployments to Greenland. 

The National Science Foundation would incur most of these increased 

costs. It directly reimburses DOD for 109th Airlift Wing logistic support 

performed in Antarctica, including personnel and training costs above and 

beyond the unit’s wartime task requirements. The reimbursements from 

the National Science Foundation include funding for the 220 full-time 

Active Guard and Reserve members employed for the polar mission and 

for all flying training hours required for these personnel to maintain their 

qualifications. The National Science Foundation reported that the total 

costs in fiscal year 2002 for the unit’s support of Antarctic missions were 

$22.7 million. For operations in Greenland, the 109th Airlift Wing is 

reimbursed by its customers, including the National Science Foundation, 

based on a rate structure established by DOD for each particular mission. 

For example, the National Science Foundation reimbursed the 109th Airlift 

Wing about $375,000 in fiscal year 2002 for missions in Greenland. 

Other military personnel performing short-term assignments in the polar 

regions would also benefit from an exception to the 30-day hardship duty 

threshold. For example, the Air Force Reserve’s 445th Airlift Wing and the 

452nd Airlift Mobility Wing conduct passenger and cargo flights on 

C-141 wheeled aircraft between Christchurch, New Zealand, and McMurdo 

Station, Antarctica. An OSD official said information was not readily 

available on the additional estimated costs of granting the exception for 

these personnel. 

According to officials within the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense 

(Personnel and Readiness), allowing an exception to the 30-day hardship 

duty threshold would set a precedent for other short-term missions that 

last 30 consecutive days or less. Of the 170 hardship duty locations, 

67 locations (39 percent) qualify at the maximum monthly pay rate of 

$150.16 In 2002, DOD refused a request by the Navy for an exception to the 

30-day threshold for duty on Vieques Island, Puerto Rico.17 The Navy stated 

that security personnel who are deployed to the island on a 14-day 

 16 Locations qualifying at the $150 monthly rate include Kazakhstan, Turkmenistan, and 

Vietnam. 

17 While DOD rejected the Navy’s request for an exception to the 30-day threshold, DOD 

approved the Navy’s request to designate Vieques Island as a hardship duty location. 

Other Short-Term Missions 

Could Claim an Exception 

to the 30-Day Threshold 
Page 10 GAO-03-554 Military Personnel 

rotational schedule live in “substandard conditions.” DOD, in turning down 

the request, stated that “members on a short-term duration tour-of-duty do 

not endure the range of physical hardships experienced by those who are 

permanently assigned.” According to an official within the Office of the 

Under Secretary of Defense (Personnel and Readiness), granting an 

exception to the 30-day threshold for other short-term missions would 

result in additional hardship duty pay costs, but these costs are unknown 

because DOD has not conducted a cost analysis. 

The 109th Airlift Wing justified its proposal for hazardous duty pay for 

military personnel performing duty in the polar regions on the basis of the 

extreme working conditions they encounter and their exposure to 

potential medical hazards. Unit officials also expressed concern about the 

retention of unit personnel, but they did not know what impact hazardous 

duty pay for polar duty would have on retention. 

A senior unit official said the unit submitted a proposal in 2000 to the New 

York Guard seeking modifications to a DOD regulation18 to designate polar 

operations as hazardous duty. Hazardous duty pay is a type of incentive 

pay intended to induce personnel to volunteer for duties that may be 

hazardous. According to the senior unit official, the New York Guard 

submitted the proposal to Congress. The proposal was not provided to 

DOD for consideration in the DOD Unified Legislation and Budgeting 

process, which reviews personnel compensation proposals. Although the 

109th Airlift Wing’s proposal addressed hazardous duty pay, Congress 

developed a legislative provision in 2002 to grant an exception to the 

30-day hardship duty pay threshold. The senior 109th Airlift Wing official 

said the unit’s justification for hazardous duty pay for polar operations 

could also be applied to hardship duty pay. 

According to information provided by the 109th Airlift Wing, military 

personnel performing duty in the polar regions encounter extreme 

working conditions and face exposure to potential medical hazards. Flight 

crews routinely conduct takeoffs and landings in remote areas on snow 

and ice. In zero visibility conditions, they must use emergency whiteout 

landing procedures. Maintenance personnel work in temperatures as low 

 18 DOD Financial Management Regulation 7000.14-R, vol. 7A, ch. 24, “Parachute Duty, Flight 

Deck Duty, Demolition Duty, Experimental Stress Duty and Others Listed.” 

Factors Cited as 

Justifying Hazardous 

Duty Pay for 

Personnel Performing 

Duty in Polar Regions 

Extreme Operating 

Conditions and Exposure 

to Potential Medical 

Hazards 
Page 11 GAO-03-554 Military Personnel 

as minus 59 degrees Fahrenheit without the protection of hangars. 

Operations in these conditions expose personnel to potential medical 

hazards such as hypothermia, frostbite, carbon monoxide poisoning, and 

ultraviolet radiation exposure. In addition, the unit indicated that the dry 

conditions in Antarctica can lead to dehydration and fatigue. A small clinic 

at McMurdo station is capable of treating minor injuries, but all major 

injuries and surgeries must be treated in Christchurch, New Zealand. 

(App. I provides a more detailed description of the conditions in which 

deployed members operate and their exposure to potential medical 

hazards.) 

National Science Foundation officials acknowledged that the operating 

environment in Antarctica can be harsh and that employees from all 

participating agencies and organizations – not just 109th Airlift Wing 

personnel – face difficult working conditions.19 They said the National 

Science Foundation has adopted a variety of procedures that mitigate the 

hazards faced by U.S. Antarctic Program participants, including scientists, 

support contractor personnel, civilian federal employees, and DOD civilian 

and military personnel. National Science Foundation officials said 

operational improvements were implemented to make Antarctic flight 

operations safer and to mitigate the impact of the harsh environment on 

personnel. For example, an emergency divert airfield was established in 

2002, and navigational aids and more accurate weather forecasting 

capabilities have been implemented and remain a high priority. 

While duty performed for more than 30 consecutive days in the polar 

regions of Antarctica and Greenland qualifies for hardship duty pay, duty 

in the polar regions has not been designated as a hazardous duty. 

Section 301 of title 37 of the United States Code designates certain duties 

entitled to hazardous duty pay. These duties include parachute jumps, 

demolition of explosives, and participation in flight deck operations on an 

aircraft carrier. Other hazardous duties include exposure to above-normal 

levels of toxic fuels or propellants, and the handling of chemical 

munitions. Personnel handling these materials are compensated for the 

potential for accidental or inadvertent exposure and not for actual 

detectable exposure to these materials. 

 19 The National Science Foundation reimburses its personnel for travel expenses in 

addition to their regular salary while deployed to the polar regions. National Science 

Foundation personnel also receive a pay differential equivalent to 25 percent of their 

regular salary effective on the 43rd day of their deployment and continuing through the end 

of their deployment. This pay differential is not retroactive. 
Page 12 GAO-03-554 Military Personnel 

A 109th Airlift Wing official expressed concern over the retention of unit 

personnel who require additional training for polar duty. Flight crews 

receive training in Greenland and Antarctica on how to land on and take 

off from snow and ice and in zero visibility conditions. Flight crews are 

also required to attend arctic survival training in Greenland where they 

learn how to survive on an ice cap for extended periods with no heat and 

limited survival gear. Flight crews typically take 3 years to receive their 

qualification to fly ski-equipped aircraft. Maintenance personnel attend a 

maintenance recovery school in Greenland, which teaches basic polar 

survival skills to enable them to cope with the extreme conditions they 

confront when they repair aircraft with little support equipment. 

A 109th Airlift Wing official said the unit is experiencing a high turnover of 

Active Guard and Reserve members who directly support polar missions 

in aerospace maintenance (pay grades E-5 and E-7) and aircraft hydraulics 

(pay grades E-5 and E-7). For the entire 109th Airlift Wing, the unit has 

difficulty retaining “traditional” guardsmen in the following critical skills: 

aerospace maintenance and ground equipment, avionics, and aircraft fuels. 

Despite retention difficulties in some critical skills, the unit filled 

98 percent of the Active Guard and Reserve positions who directly support 

operations in Antarctica in 2002. The retention fill rate for the entire unit 

was 97 percent during the same year. 

A unit official said it is unknown what impact hazardous duty pay for polar 

duty would have on retention of unit personnel. Exit surveys conducted 

with separating personnel show that dissatisfaction with pay is one of 

several reasons for leaving, but is not the primary separation factor. 

Between 2001-2003, 165 members left the unit. The most frequently cited 

separation factors were family conflict, civilian job conflict,20 and weekend 

drills (see fig. 2). 

 20 According to a unit official, civilian job conflict would be a separation factor only for 

traditional guardsmen and for not Active Guard and Reserve members since the latter serve 

full time. 

No Clear Linkage between 

Retention and 

Performance of Duty in 

Polar Regions 
Page 13 GAO-03-554 Military Personnel 

Figure 2: Main Factors Influencing Members of the 109th Airlift Wing to Leave the 

Unit (2001-2003) 

Notes: 

Includes 2003 data as of February 3, 2003. 

One hundred sixty-five persons completed the exit survey, and each respondent could give multiple 

reasons for separating. 

The unit cannot track specific mission concerns such as deployments to 

the polar regions as separation factors. The exit surveys used by the 

109th Airlift Wing do not indicate whether an individual’s reason for 

leaving is connected specifically with polar duty. A unit official stated that, 

based on responses for reasons for leaving, it is possible to “subjectively 

deduce that length of deployments and distance from home, as in polar 

deployments, are key factors influencing retention decisions.” The exit 

surveys also do not track separation factors based on personnel categories 

such as military technicians, Active Guard and Reserve, Active Guard and 

Reserve who support the U.S. Antarctic Program, and drilling reservists. 

Based on our discussions with the 109th Airlift Wing concerning the exit 
Page 14 GAO-03-554 Military Personnel 

surveys, the unit has modified the exit survey to track deployments to the 

polar regions as a separation factor. 

The hardship duty pay legislation introduced in 2002 — directed at the 

109th Airlift Wing — would have created an exception to (1) the 30-day 

hardship duty pay threshold and (2) the monthly hardship duty rate 

established by DOD for the polar regions. We believe that granting such an 

exception for hardship duty pay is not justified under current DOD policy. 

First, DOD intends for hardship duty pay to compensate military personnel 

who endure a range of hardship on a long-term basis — defined by DOD as 

more than 30 consecutive days. Granting this exception could set a 

precedent for DOD personnel performing other missions that do not meet 

the 30-day threshold, which could increase hardship duty pay costs. 

Second, under current DOD policy, hardship duty pay is intended to 

compensate personnel for harsh or difficult living conditions, rather than 

for difficult working conditions. However, the 109th Airlift Wing cited the 

extreme working conditions encountered by personnel deployed to the 

polar regions. 

According to the 109th Airlift Wing, unit personnel are subjected to 

extreme conditions and are exposed to potential medical hazards while on 

duty in the polar regions. These factors warrant consideration as part of 

DOD’s review of special and incentive pays for personnel performing duty 

in the polar regions. In addition, because one of the purposes of hazardous 

duty pay is to induce personnel to volunteer for duties that may be 

hazardous, we believe that retention data should also be considered as 

part of DOD’s review. Officials from the 109th Airlift Wing expressed 

concerns about current retention rates, but they did not know what impact 

hazardous duty pay for polar duty would have on retention. Exit surveys 

conducted with separating personnel show that dissatisfaction with pay 

was not among the most frequently cited reasons that members of the unit 

provided for leaving. At the time we conducted our review, the 109th 

Airlift Wing was not collecting retention data related to members who 

were deployed to the polar regions. Collecting this data would be helpful 

to target retention incentives to the personnel categories experiencing the 

highest turnover rates. According to an official of the 109th Airlift Wing, 

the unit has modified the exit survey it uses to track deployments to the 

polar regions as a separation factor. 

Conclusions 
Page 15 GAO-03-554 Military Personnel 

Congress has directed DOD to study special and incentive pays for 

reservists performing duty in the polar regions. As part of this study, we 

recommend that the Secretary of Defense direct the Under Secretary of 

Defense (Personnel and Readiness) to assess certain factors in 

determining whether personnel performing polar duty should receive 

hazardous duty pay. These factors are 

• the extreme working conditions that military personnel encounter 

while performing polar duty, 

• the exposure of military personnel to potential medical hazards related 

to polar duty, and 

• retention data for military personnel performing polar duty. 

In written comments on a draft of this report, DOD concurred with our 

recommendation on assessing certain factors to determine whether 

personnel performing polar duty should receive hazardous duty pay. 

DOD’s comments are reprinted in appendix II. 

DOD and the National Science Foundation also provided technical 

comments that we incorporated as appropriate. 

Our review focused on special and incentive pay for DOD personnel 

performing duty in the polar regions. To develop the information in this 

report, we interviewed DOD officials in the Office of the Assistant 

Secretary of Defense for Reserve Affairs, the Office of Military 

Compensation, and the Air National Guard. We also met with officials at 

the National Science Foundation. We visited Stratton Air Guard Base, 

where we interviewed officials from the 109th Airlift Wing, New York Air 

National Guard. In addition, we reviewed DOD Financial Management 

Regulations related to hardship duty pay and hazardous duty pay. 

To assess DOD’s rationale for hardship duty pay, including the 30-day 

threshold, we reviewed the legislative history concerning hardship duty 

pay, analyzed DOD policies implementing this pay, and interviewed OSD 

officials. To assess the potential implications, including costs, of making 

an exception to the 30-day threshold, we reviewed cost data from the 

109th Airlift Wing and interviewed officials from OSD, the 109th Airlift 

Wing, and the National Science Foundation. We did not verify cost data 

provided by the 109th Airlift Wing. To assess the justification for 

Recommendation for 

Executive Action 

Agency Comments 

Scope and 

Methodology 
Page 16 GAO-03-554 Military Personnel 

hazardous duty pay for polar duty, we obtained documentation on the 

109th Airlift Wing’s operational activities and the conditions unit members 

encounter when deployed to polar regions. We also obtained and analyzed 

retention data for 109th Airlift Wing personnel performing duty in the 

polar regions. 

We conducted our review from December 2002 to March 2003 in 

accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards. 

We are sending copies of this report to the Secretary of Defense; the Under 

Secretary of Defense (Personnel and Readiness); the Director, National 

Science Foundation; and the Director, Office of Management and Budget. 

In addition, the report will be available at no charge on GAO’s Web site at 

www.gao.gov. 

If you or your staff have any questions regarding this report, please call me 

at (202) 512-5140 or Brenda S. Farrell at (202) 512-3604. Major contributors 

to this report were Kelly Baumgartner, Thomas W. Gosling, and 

Timothy Wilson. 

Derek B. Stewart 

Director, Defense Capabilities and Management 
Appendix I: Extreme Operating Conditions 

and Potential Medical Hazards Encountered 

by Personnel Deployed to the Polar Regions 

Page 17 GAO-03-554 Military Personnel 

The 109th Airlift Wing submitted a proposal in 2000 to the New York 

Guard seeking to modify the Department of Defense’s (DOD) current 

hazardous duty pay regulation by designating as hazardous duty (1) duty 

involving frequent and regular participation in flight operations in skiequipped LC-130 aircraft conducting ski landings and takeoffs on snow in 

polar locations and (2) duty involving maintenance of LC-130 ski-equipped 

aircraft as a primary duty in polar locations. The 109th Airlift Wing 

justified its proposal to designate polar operations as hazardous duty on 

the basis of two primary factors — difficult working conditions, including 

cold temperatures, and exposure to potential medical hazards. 

According to the 109th Airlift Wing, flight crews and maintenance personnel 

operate and maintain LC-130 ski-equipped aircraft in difficult working 

conditions. Specific hazards and risks include the following: 

• Ski takeoffs include steering with asymmetrical use of the throttles and 

the rudder only, since use of the nose wheel will cause aircraft damage. 

The aircraft is highly susceptible to sliding off ski ways in high winds, 

particularly at low speeds (below 60 knots), when the rudder is not 

effective. 

• Ski landings are performed in extreme, remote areas of Antarctica and 

Greenland, hundreds of miles from any station or site; on glaciers and 

open snow locations in areas not surveyed and never before visited by 

humans; on crevasses that are hidden under snow bridges; and in 

katabatic winds that often make landing and taxiing on skis extremely 

difficult. 

• Whiteout procedures require flight crews to perform an approach and 

landing in a designated area in zero visibility weather conditions. 

• Ski approaches in bad weather include a lack of external navigation 

aids to orient the aircraft on approach, flying in weather conditions 

down to 300 feet above ground and 1 mile visibility, and flying in 

conditions that can induce extreme vertigo when there is no contrast 

between the white snow and white clouds. 

• Many missions are flown to high altitude elevations. Each year over 

250 missions are flown to the South Pole at an elevation of over 9,300 

feet. Many missions are flown to camps in Antarctica and Greenland at 

field elevations greater than 10,000 feet and some as high as 12,000 feet. 

Appendix I: Extreme Operating Conditions 

and Potential Medical Hazards Encountered 

by Personnel Deployed to the Polar Regions 

Difficult Working 

Conditions 
Appendix I: Extreme Operating Conditions 

and Potential Medical Hazards Encountered 

by Personnel Deployed to the Polar Regions 

Page 18 GAO-03-554 Military Personnel 

• Assisted take-off rockets are routinely used for getting an aircraft 

airborne on a takeoff from high altitude sites. Aircraft must achieve a 

higher than normal ground speed to reach the proper indicated 

airspeed to get enough lift for takeoff due to thin air. The snow at high 

altitude locations is often unprepared, which creates additional drag 

and makes it more difficult to build up speed during the takeoff slide. 

• Unit personnel fly missions to locations where there is no camp, no 

personnel, and no equipment, which creates the risk of being stranded. 

There is no rescue capability at these locations other than another 

LC-130 aircraft. 

• Personnel are exposed to extremely cold temperatures as low as minus 

59 degrees Fahrenheit. Wind chills can be as high as minus 100 degrees 

Fahrenheit. 

• All fueling and cargo operations are conducted with engines running, 

which requires a flight engineer to operate the refueling panel outside 

for 30 to 40 minutes directly behind running engines. Loadmasters are 

also outside of the aircraft for periods of 1 to 3 hours off-loading and 

on-loading cargo from the snow with engines running. 

• Cargo loading and unloading are extremely difficult, often with little or 

no material handling equipment. Two to three hours of manual labor 

are often required by the flight crews to load and unload cargo in the 

snow. This activity is extremely hazardous due to the extreme physical 

exertions required with little oxygen in the atmosphere and exhaust 

fumes from the aircraft engines. 

According to the 109th Airlift Wing, polar operations expose 109th Airlift 

Wing personnel to a variety of potential medical hazards. Potential medical 

hazards include the following: 

• Frostbite and hypothermia — Brief exposure to polar temperatures can 

have a severe impact. For example, exposed flesh freezes at 

minus 59 degrees Fahrenheit within 1 minute, with no wind. 

• Carbon monoxide poisoning — Aircraft maintenance and unloading 

activities expose flight crews over a prolonged period to potentially 

hazardous exhaust fumes. 

• Continuous exposure to intense sunlight — Operations during the 

5 months in Antarctica are conducted in 24-hour direct sunlight. 

Potential Medical 

Hazards 
Appendix I: Extreme Operating Conditions 

and Potential Medical Hazards Encountered 

by Personnel Deployed to the Polar Regions 

Page 19 GAO-03-554 Military Personnel 

Exposure to ultraviolet radiation is greatly increased due to the hazard 

of the “ozone hole” over the Antarctic continent. 
Appendix II: Comments from the Department 

of Defense 

Page 20 GAO-03-554 Military Personnel 

Appendix II: Comments from the Department 

of Defense 
Appendix II: Comments from the Department 

of Defense 

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

The General Accounting Office, the audit, evaluation and investigative arm of 

Congress, exists to support Congress in meeting its constitutional responsibilities 

and to help improve the performance and accountability of the federal 

government for the American people. GAO examines the use of public funds; 

evaluates federal programs and policies; and provides analyses, 

recommendations, and other assistance to help Congress make informed 

oversight, policy, and funding decisions. GAO’s commitment to good government 

is reflected in its core values of accountability, integrity, and reliability. 

The fastest and easiest way to obtain copies of GAO documents at no cost is 

through the Internet. GAO’s Web site (www.gao.gov) contains abstracts and fulltext files of current reports and testimony and an expanding archive of older 

products. The Web site features a search engine to help you locate documents 

using key words and phrases. You can print these documents in their entirety, 

including charts and other graphics. 

Each day, GAO issues a list of newly released reports, testimony, and 

correspondence. GAO posts this list, known as “Today’s Reports,” on its Web site 

daily. The list contains links to the full-text document files. To have GAO e-mail 

this list to you every afternoon, go to www.gao.gov and select “Subscribe to daily 

E-mail alert for newly released products” under the GAO Reports heading. 

The first copy of each printed report is free. Additional copies are $2 each. A 

check or money order should be made out to the Superintendent of Documents. 

GAO also accepts VISA and Mastercard. Orders for 100 or more copies mailed to a 

single address are discounted 25 percent. Orders should be sent to: 

U.S. General Accounting Office 

441 G Street NW, Room LM 

Washington, D.C. 20548 

To order by Phone: Voice: (202) 512-6000 

TDD: (202) 512-2537 

Fax: (202) 512-6061 

Contact: 

Web site: www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm 

E-mail: fraudnet@gao.gov

Automated answering system: (800) 424-5454 or (202) 512-7470 

Jeff Nelligan, managing director, NelliganJ@gao.gov (202) 512-4800 

U.S. General Accounting Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7149 

Washington, D.C. 20548 

GAO’s Mission 

Obtaining Copies of 

GAO Reports and 

Testimony 

Order by Mail or Phone 

To Report Fraud, 

Waste, and Abuse in 

Federal Programs 

Public Affairs