U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

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

http://bookstore.gpo.gov. For more information, contact the GPO Customer Contact Center,

U.S. Government Printing Office. Phone 202–512–1800, or 866–512–1800 (toll-free). E-mail, gpo@custhelp.com.

i 

75–667 2013

[H.A.S.C. No. 112–145] 

BACK FROM THE BATTLEFIELD: DOD AND 

VA COLLABORATION TO ASSIST SERVICE 

MEMBERS RETURNING TO CIVILIAN LIFE 

JOINT HEARING 

BEFORE THE

COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES 

MEETING JOINTLY WITH

COMMITTEE ON VETERANS’ AFFAIRS 

[Serial No. 112–71] 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

ONE HUNDRED TWELFTH CONGRESS 

SECOND SESSION 

HEARING HELD 

JULY 25, 2012 
HOUSE COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES 

ONE HUNDRED TWELFTH CONGRESS

HOWARD P. ‘‘BUCK’’ MCKEON, California, Chairman 

ROSCOE G. BARTLETT, Maryland 

MAC THORNBERRY, Texas 

WALTER B. JONES, North Carolina 

W. TODD AKIN, Missouri 

J. RANDY FORBES, Virginia 

JEFF MILLER, Florida 

JOE WILSON, South Carolina 

FRANK A. LOBIONDO, New Jersey 

MICHAEL TURNER, Ohio 

JOHN KLINE, Minnesota 

MIKE ROGERS, Alabama 

TRENT FRANKS, Arizona 

BILL SHUSTER, Pennsylvania 

K. MICHAEL CONAWAY, Texas 

DOUG LAMBORN, Colorado 

ROB WITTMAN, Virginia 

DUNCAN HUNTER, California 

JOHN C. FLEMING, M.D., Louisiana 

MIKE COFFMAN, Colorado 

TOM ROONEY, Florida 

TODD RUSSELL PLATTS, Pennsylvania 

SCOTT RIGELL, Virginia 

CHRIS GIBSON, New York 

VICKY HARTZLER, Missouri 

JOE HECK, Nevada 

BOBBY SCHILLING, Illinois 

JON RUNYAN, New Jersey 

AUSTIN SCOTT, Georgia 

TIM GRIFFIN, Arkansas 

STEVEN PALAZZO, Mississippi 

ALLEN B. WEST, Florida 

MARTHA ROBY, Alabama 

MO BROOKS, Alabama 

TODD YOUNG, Indiana 

ADAM SMITH, Washington 

SILVESTRE REYES, Texas 

LORETTA SANCHEZ, California 

MIKE MCINTYRE, North Carolina 

ROBERT A. BRADY, Pennsylvania 

ROBERT ANDREWS, New Jersey 

SUSAN A. DAVIS, California 

JAMES R. LANGEVIN, Rhode Island 

RICK LARSEN, Washington 

JIM COOPER, Tennessee 

MADELEINE Z. BORDALLO, Guam 

JOE COURTNEY, Connecticut 

DAVE LOEBSACK, Iowa 

NIKI TSONGAS, Massachusetts 

CHELLIE PINGREE, Maine 

LARRY KISSELL, North Carolina 

MARTIN HEINRICH, New Mexico 

BILL OWENS, New York 

JOHN R. GARAMENDI, California 

MARK S. CRITZ, Pennsylvania 

TIM RYAN, Ohio 

C.A. DUTCH RUPPERSBERGER, Maryland 

HANK JOHNSON, Georgia 

BETTY SUTTON, Ohio 

COLLEEN HANABUSA, Hawaii 

KATHLEEN C. HOCHUL, New York 

JACKIE SPEIER, California 

RON BARBER, Arizona 

ROBERT L. SIMMONS II, Staff Director 

JEANETTE JAMES, Professional Staff Member 

DEBRA WADA, Professional Staff Member 

JAMES WEISS, Staff Assistant 

COMMITTEE ON VETERANS’ AFFAIRS 

JEFF MILLER, Florida, Chairman 

CLIFF STEARNS, Florida 

DOUG LAMBORN, Colorado 

GUS M. BILIRAKIS, Florida 

DAVID P. ROE, Tennessee 

MARLIN A. STUTZMAN, Indiana 

BILL FLORES, Texas 

BILL JOHNSON, Ohio 

JEFF DENHAM, California 

JON RUNYAN, New Jersey 

DAN BENISHEK, Michigan 

ANN MARIE BUERKLE, New York 

TIM HUELSKAMP, Kansas 

MARK E. AMODEI, Nevada 

ROBERT L. TURNER, New York 

BOB FILNER, California, Ranking 

CORRINE BROWN, Florida 

SILVESTRE REYES, Texas 

MICHAEL H. MICHAUD, Maine 

LINDA T. SA ́ NCHEZ, California 

BRUCE L. BRALEY, Iowa 

JERRY MCNERNEY, California 

JOE DONNELLY, Indiana 

TIMOTHY J. WALZ, Minnesota 

JOHN BARROW, Georgia 

RUSS CARNAHAN, Missouri 

HELEN W. TOLAR, Staff Director and Chief Counsel 

(II) 
(III) 

C O N T E N T S 

CHRONOLOGICAL LIST OF HEARINGS 

2012 

Page 

HEARING: 

Wednesday, July 25, 2012, Back from the Battlefield: DOD and VA Collaboration to Assist Service Members Returning to Civilian Life .............................. 1 

APPENDIX: 

Wednesday, July 25, 2012 ....................................................................................... 43 

WEDNESDAY, JULY 25, 2012 

BACK FROM THE BATTLEFIELD: DOD AND VA COLLABORATION TO 

ASSIST SERVICE MEMBERS RETURNING TO CIVILIAN LIFE 

STATEMENTS PRESENTED BY MEMBERS OF CONGRESS 

Filner, Hon. Bob, a Representative from California, Ranking Member, Committee on Veterans’ Affairs ................................................................................. 5 

McKeon, Hon. Howard P. ‘‘Buck,’’ a Representative from California, Chairman, Committee on Armed Services .................................................................. 1 

Miller, Hon. Jeff, a Representative from Florida, Chairman, Committee on 

Veterans’ Affairs ................................................................................................... 3 

Smith, Hon. Adam, a Representative from Washington, Ranking Member, 

Committee on Armed Services ............................................................................ 4 

WITNESSES 

Panetta, Hon. Leon E., Secretary of Defense, U.S. Department of Defense ....... 7 

Shinseki, Hon. Eric K., Secretary of Veterans Affairs, U.S. Department of 

Veterans Affairs ................................................................................................... 12 

APPENDIX 

PREPARED STATEMENTS: 

Buerkle, Hon. Ann Marie ................................................................................. 54 

McKeon, Hon. Howard P. ‘‘Buck’’ .................................................................... 47 

Miller, Hon. Jeff ................................................................................................ 49 

Panetta, Hon. Leon E. ...................................................................................... 56 

Shinseki, Hon. Eric K. ...................................................................................... 64 

Smith, Hon. Adam ............................................................................................ 51 

DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD: 

[There were no Documents submitted.] 

WITNESS RESPONSES TO QUESTIONS ASKED DURING THE HEARING: 

Mr. McKeon ....................................................................................................... 84 

Mr. McKeon and Mr. Miller ............................................................................. 83 

QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY MEMBERS POST HEARING: 

Mr. Barber ......................................................................................................... 98 

Ms. Bordallo ...................................................................................................... 92 

Mr. Cooper ........................................................................................................ 88 

Mr. Franks ........................................................................................................ 93 
Page

IV 

QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY MEMBERS POST HEARING—Continued 

Mr. Garamendi ................................................................................................. 97 

Mr. Kissell ......................................................................................................... 96 

Mr. Langevin ..................................................................................................... 87 

Mr. Loebsack ..................................................................................................... 94 

Mr. Schilling ..................................................................................................... 97 
(1) 

BACK FROM THE BATTLEFIELD: DOD AND VA COLLABORATION TO ASSIST SERVICE MEMBERS RETURNING 

TO CIVILIAN LIFE 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, COMMITTEE ON ARMED

SERVICES, MEETING JOINTLY WITH COMMITTEE ON VET- ERANS’ AFFAIRS, Washington, DC, Wednesday, July 25, 

2012. 

The committees met, pursuant to call, at 10:00 a.m., in room 

2118, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Howard P. ‘‘Buck’’ 

McKeon (chairman of the Committee on Armed Services) presiding. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. HOWARD P. ‘‘BUCK’’ MCKEON, 

A REPRESENTATIVE FROM CALIFORNIA, CHAIRMAN, COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES 

The CHAIRMAN. Good morning. The committee will come to order. 

Good morning, I welcome everyone for this special joint hearing 

with the Committee on Veterans’ Affairs. Our focus is the collaboration between the Department of Defense [DOD] and the Department of Veterans Affairs [VA] to assist service members transitioning to civilian life. We have two of America’s leaders with us, Secretary Panetta and Secretary Shinseki, to discuss how we as a Nation can best serve those who have served us in uniform. 

I also welcome Chairman Jeff Miller and Ranking Member Bob 

Filner and of course Ranking Member Adam Smith from our committee. I thank them all for their significant efforts to address a 

range of transition issues. 

It is no secret that I oppose plans to reduce the size of our military, especially when contingency operations are still ongoing in Afghanistan. I find it strange that at a time when we are still at war, 

the Department of Defense has announced it will actually reduce 

the size of the Army and Marine Corps. Such cuts put strain on 

our service members and their families. 

Moreover, I have been very vocal regarding the threat sequestration poses to the strength and integrity of our military. Reductions 

in end strengths represent additional service members that will be 

asked to leave the military on top of the over 175,000 service members that separate every year. I will continue to voice my staunch 

opposition to further cuts to the Defense budget which, if they take 

effect, will not only increase the damage to our national security, 

but also put significant strains on the transition system that is already working too slowly. 

Today’s hearing demonstrates our joint longstanding commitment that there be no gap in services and support provided to our 

service members and their families as they transition from the Department of Defense to the Department of Veterans Affairs. 
2 

The transition that service members experience from active service into civilian life must be improved. Veterans of Iraq and Afghanistan know that the hardships don’t end when they leave the 

war zone. We in Congress are painfully aware that at this very moment 26,000 service members are in the midst of the disability 

evaluation process and are forced to wait over 400 days on average 

before they can return home to their communities. 

To further assist this transition the Congress mandated over a 

decade ago that the DOD and the VA create a joint integrated Electronic Health Record [iEHR] to facilitate the transfer of service 

members’ personal health information between the DOD and the 

VA health facilities. Unfortunately, after continuing delays we are 

now told that it isn’t expected to be completed until 2017. 

And finally we hear about the veteran unemployment numbers; 

23.3 percent of veterans between the ages of 18 and 24 are unemployed. This highlights the difficulty our younger veterans are having to find employment. The idea that our service members can go 

from the front lines to the unemployment lines is unacceptable. 

These men and women whom I have called the next greatest generation, and who with their families have sacrificed so much for 

this country, deserve better than to have to face the uncertainty of 

leaving the military in these very hard economic times. We must 

never stop working on their behalf, and there is much work still 

to be done. 

During my meeting with Secretary Shinseki I came away impressed by his commitment to improving the transition. He met 

multiple times with Secretary Gates where a joint commitment to 

action was born. That commitment has continued with Secretary 

Panetta. I would like to hear from both of you today on the 

progress that you have made and also what you believe to be the 

critical next steps, and I would like to compliment both of you for 

working so hard together to make these things happen. 

Specifically, I want both of your views on the Transition Assistance Program, TAP, which facilitates the transition from Active 

Duty. With regard to objectives, do you both agree on TAP’s objectives? For example, is TAP designed to prepare service members 

for entry into the job market or is the purpose to actually get a 

service member a job? How do you measure whether TAP is achieving its objectives? 

Service members transitioning deserve a government-wide approach that includes support from the Departments of Defense, 

Veterans Affairs, Labor, Education, Small Business Administration, among others. How is TAP providing such an approach? 

The unfortunate consequence of over a decade of war is that 

service members return with serious life-changing injuries. Even as 

the numbers of service members being deployed to combat zones 

goes down, projections are that the numbers of service members 

and veterans needing support will grow substantially for the foreseeable future. What are both Departments doing to help service 

members transition as quickly as possible while providing this generation of veterans the treatment they need to return to their families and live fulfilling, independent and productive lives? 

Given the significant evolution of medical science, service members now survive horrific injuries that would have been fatal even 
3 

during the first Gulf War. Many of these wounded veterans will 

need long-term, comprehensive services and support that can only 

be provided by the military and by the VA. How are the Departments resourced for this long-term effort? What are the plans to 

maintain an equitable joint venture in light of the fact the Department of Defense is facing another half trillion dollar reduction due 

to sequestration? But the Department of Veterans Affairs is exempt. 

I now recognize Chairman Jeff Miller for his opening remarks to 

be followed by Ranking Member Adam Smith and Ranking Member 

Bob Filner for their opening remarks. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. McKeon can be found in the Appendix on page 47.] 

STATEMENT OF HON. JEFF MILLER, A REPRESENTATIVE 

FROM FLORIDA, CHAIRMAN, COMMITTEE ON VETERANS’ AFFAIRS 

Mr. MILLER. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, and to our 

ranking members for helping set up this really truly historic meeting today. According to a quick search, it appears that we never 

had these two Secretaries simultaneously appearing before our two 

committees. And I would suggest that we don’t wait so long before 

we do it again. And if we are going to ask the VA and DOD to work 

together, I think our committees should be doing exactly the same. 

Secretary Panetta, Secretary Shinseki, it is a pleasure to have you 

both with us here today, and your presence I think underscores the 

goal that we all share that our separating service members have 

a seamless transition from their military life to the civilian life. 

Our committee, the Veterans’ Affairs Committee, and the Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigation have held at least 13 

oversight hearings on transaction related issues. These topics include improving the joint disability evaluation system that your 

Departments administer, ensuring that the highest quality of 

health care for the severely wounded who can no longer continue 

on Active Duty and ensuring that our service members leaving the 

military are equipped successfully to enter today’s workforce. 

We have also focused on the tools that your Departments must 

use effectively to deliver these 21st century services such as the 

electronic health records and other IT [information technology] solutions. The testimony that we have received so far on matters that 

we talked about has been somewhat mixed. Although we have 

heard a number of initiative plans and processes and improvements from your testimony today, I see that it echoes much of 

those improvements, but I think what we all want to see is clear 

bottom-line results. Several examples would include notwithstanding the resources that Congress has provided over the last 

several years to improve Iraq and Afghanistan veterans’ access to 

mental health care, many, many concerns remain. 

A VA psychologist testified that, ‘‘VA clinicians are overrun with 

veterans in need. Mental health service lines are pushing as many 

veterans into clinicians’ schedules as possible to meet their performance measures but those veterans are not getting effective 

treatment.’’ 
4 

Secondly, 5 years ago Secretary Shalala and Senator Dole called 

for the establishment of an effective Federal recovery coordinator 

program for the seriously wounded and their families. But rather 

than a single point of contact they called for, VA and DOD created 

two separate programs. The GAO [Government Accountability Office] testified that ‘‘proliferation of these programs has resulted not 

only in inefficiencies but also confusion for those being served. So 

consequently the intended purpose, which is to better manage and 

facilitate care and service, may actually have had the opposite effect.’’ 

Five years ago Senator Barack Obama said, ‘‘All of us are in 

agreement that we need to make the DOD disability review process 

less complex and better coordinated with the VA process.’’ However, that process remains slow and continues to be complex. GAO 

has reported that case processing times have increased over time 

and measures of service member satisfaction have shown shortcomings. 

Finally, despite repeated assertions about the need for VA and 

DOD to share medical and other information electronically, it 

seems the goalpost continues to move over and over again on when 

this is finally going to take place. GAO says VA and DOD still 

don’t fully agree on key planning and operational elements that 

would ensure future success. 

So it is my hope that raising these important issues to both of 

you here today will serve as a benchmark going forward by which 

all of us can hold you or your successors accountable. I know that 

both of you and I sincerely believe that both of you are committed 

to solving these problems. However, if what we have been doing 

isn’t working or isn’t showing the measurable results that we need, 

then let’s work together to get things back on track. 

I look forward to your testimony and yield back my time. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Miller can be found in the Appendix on page 49.] 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you. Mr. Smith. 

STATEMENT OF HON. ADAM SMITH, A REPRESENTATIVE FROM 

WASHINGTON, RANKING MEMBER, COMMITTEE ON ARMED 

SERVICES 

Mr. SMITH. Thank you, Mr Chairman. I thank both of our chairmen for holding this hearing. The service member transition is one 

of the most important issues that we face I believe as a country. 

We are going to have a large number of men and women who have 

served in the military transitioning out. How we take care of them 

is going to be I think one of the ultimate measures of how strong 

a society we are. I want to thank Secretary Panetta and Secretary 

Shinseki for being here today and also for your leadership. Having 

met with both of you, I know how committed you are to this issue 

and I see it with your DOD and Veterans Affairs personnel. They 

are absolutely committed to tackling the problem and making 

changes and making it better. And I think progress has been made 

in terms of health care and in terms of finding jobs we’ve seen a 

slight down-tick in the unemployment rate of service members. But 

we all know that much more needs to be done. I won’t repeat everything that the two chairmen said except to say that I agree with 
5 

them on the challenges in this area and how much more we need 

to do and how much better we need to get at coordinating that 

service. 

I think one of the things that really struck me about this issue 

is how so many people in this country want to help. Certainly it 

is true with your two Departments, it is true in Congress, but business leaders, community leaders, and we have so many people out 

there coming up with creative ideas every day for how to help our 

service members and their families as they transition out of the 

military. I think one of the great challenges is how do you bring 

those resources together and come up with the best practices approach? What works best and how can you then use all of that enthusiasm for helping the people who have served in the military 

make the most out of those resources and best coordinate it. I think 

that is a challenge you will have. There are folks outside of the 

government who are anxious to help, we need to work them in as 

well. But I agree with both of the chairmen and the challenges that 

they have outlined. I look forward to your testimony and the questions and answers about how we can best step up to this critically 

important challenge for our Nation. And with that, I yield back. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Smith can be found in the Appendix on page 51.] 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you. Mr. Filner. 

STATEMENT OF HON. BOB FILNER, A REPRESENTATIVE FROM 

CALIFORNIA, RANKING MEMBER, COMMITTEE ON VETERANS’ AFFAIRS 

Mr. FILNER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you for holding this hearing. I mean the picture of our two Secretaries sitting 

there together says it all. I will tell you, Mr. Chairman, when I was 

chairman of the Veterans’ Committee I was trying to work with our 

party to have such a joint session and we never could accomplish 

it. So thank you for getting it done. We appreciate that. Thank you, 

Mr. Secretaries. We are going to use the word ‘‘transition’’ a lot 

here. I just want to thank—can I say Leon here? When I first came 

to Congress the Secretary was very helpful in me transitioning 

from local government to the Congress. And I will never forget your 

kindness in mentoring, so thank you, Leon, for all of your work 

over the years with so many people. You have a legacy here of 

course that we will never forget. 

The issues that we have, we have been talking as a Congress and 

with the executive branch for many, many years, decades in fact, 

and we’ve got to break down the bureaucratic stuff that keeps us 

from having a common, for example, health record system. I mean 

it just, people die because that system is not integrated closely 

enough. And it seems that this is not beyond our capacity as a people to get those systems integrated. 

I want to say one word, we want to thank the President for announcing this reverse boot camp. I think it is a good start, the recognition of that. But I think it is just a start. And I have been talking for at least a decade about a deboot camp. I don’t think, Mr. 

Secretaries, that you ought to build it on the TAP program. If any 

of you have attended those programs—what shall I say kindly— 

they are a waste of time for most people. The only people more 
6 

bored than the service members actually sitting there—they are 

just thinking about getting out, they are not taking into account 

anything at these lectures—the only thing more bored than them 

is the people giving the lectures. It is not a very exciting time and 

to expand it to 5 days doesn’t seem to get at the heart. I think 

you’ve got to seriously look at—and I know there is cost factor and 

your predecessors would not look at it seriously—a real deboot 

camp. When we send our young men and women to military, they 

go through 10, 12 weeks to get the military ethos; you need almost 

as much time to transition. 

And first and foremost, which the President’s program I don’t 

think has, is adequate medical evaluation. You know we have thousands, tens of thousands, probably hundreds of thousands of young 

people leaving the military without adequate diagnosis of either 

their mental health or their physical health. We know PTSD [posttraumatic stress disorder] and TBI [traumatic brain injury] could 

be undiagnosed, they are unrecognized, people are in self-denial. 

And so they will transition and then have enormous problems, as 

you know, suicide, homelessness, whatever. We can stop that with 

an adequate diagnosis. 

If you did it in a setting where there was a transitional setting 

on a campus or, I don’t know, some base somewhere with their 

families, with their company of soldiers, they get the support they 

need, that they lack when they do a sudden transition. Their families are with them, that is important. You can do their medical 

stuff, you do the job counseling, you do the educational counseling 

but in a relaxed atmosphere where everybody is paying attention. 

It would be part of Active Duty, 8, 10, 12 weeks, whatever you 

think you can afford. But I tell you 5 days is a start, it is not going 

to do it. As you know, you know better than all of us, the rate of 

suicides, the homelessness, the convictions for crimes of recent veterans are symptoms of an incredible problem. It is an epidemic and 

we are not focusing on—we really don’t want to know about it, it 

seems to me. 

And yet if you look at a reverse or deboot camp, and take it seriously, and deal with the medical and psychological and economic 

and educational issues over a period of time, I think you can greatly reduce this blot on our record after these young men and women 

serve so professionally in Iraq and Afghanistan or wherever they 

happen to serve and then come home and have domestic violence, 

and suicide, and homelessness, and joblessness. 

We are not doing our country a service. And I think you have the 

leadership skills, you have the ability, you work well together that 

we can get this blot off of our country’s record and really do something seriously. 

So thank you all for being here. We thank you for your personal 

cooperation, your personal leadership. You can really change the 

two biggest bureaucracies we have in the Nation. You two can 

change them and we look forward to working with you to do it. 

Thank you. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you. Given the interest in the hearing 

today and it is a joint and that fact that it is a joint hearing and, 

after consultation with Mr. Smith, Mr. Miller, and Mr. Filner, I ask 

unanimous consent that each member shall have not more than 2 
7 

minutes to question the panel of witnesses, starting with me. Hearing no objection, so ordered. 

In addition, we will follow our committee rules and recognize 

members who arrived before the gavel in the order of seniority, alternating between Armed Services Committee majority and minority members followed by Veterans’ Affairs majority and minority 

members. 

Lastly, I want to give special recognition to one of our committee 

staff, John Johnson, better known as JJ, who is responsible for artfully configuring this hearing room that normally holds 64 members, but today had been expanded to comfortably seat 82. You 

have my personal thanks, JJ. 

Now, Mr. Secretary, Secretary Panetta, if you would please 

begin. 

STATEMENT OF HON. LEON E. PANETTA, SECRETARY OF 

DEFENSE, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 

Secretary PANETTA. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I would ask that 

my full statement be made part of the record, and I will try to summarize it if I could. 

The CHAIRMAN. Both of your statements will be fully entered into 

the record. Hearing no objection, so ordered. 

Secretary PANETTA. Thank you very much, Chairman McKeon, 

Chairman Miller, Ranking Member Smith, and Ranking Member 

Filner, dear former colleagues of mine, and I appreciate the opportunity to be here, and I also want to pay my respects to the members of both committees. This is a unique event, it is an important 

event. And first and foremost I want to thank all of the members 

of both the Armed Services and Veterans’ Committee for the support that you provide the Department of Defense, our men and 

women in uniform and our veterans. We could simply not do the 

work that needs to be done in protecting this country and in serving those that are warriors and their families. We just could not 

do it without the partnership that we have with all of you. And for 

that reason let me just express my personal appreciation to all of 

you for your dedication and for your commitment to those areas. 

I also want to thank you for the opportunity to appear this morning alongside Secretary Shinseki. He is a great friend, a great public servant, a great military leader and a great friend to me and 

to our Nation’s veterans. I appreciate the opportunity to appear 

alongside of him. 

I am pleased to have this chance to discuss the ways that the Department of Defense and the Department of Veterans Affairs are 

working together to try to meet the needs of our service members, 

our veterans, and their families. This hearing comes at a very important time for our Nation and for collaboration between our two 

Departments. DOD and VA are in the process of building an integrated military and veterans support system. It is something that 

should have been done a long time ago, but we are in the process 

of trying to make that happen, and develop a support system that 

is fundamentally different and a lot more robust than it has been 

in the past. 

Today, after a decade of war, a new generation of service members, of veterans is coming home, our Nation has made a lifetime 
8 

commitment to them for their service and for their sacrifice, for 

their willingness to put their lives on the line for this country. 

These men and women have shouldered a very heavy burden. They 

have been deployed, as you know, time and time and time again. 

They fought battles in Iraq; they fought battles in Afghanistan; 

they have been targeted by terrorists and by IEDs [improvised explosive devices]; they have been deployed from Kuwait to South 

Korea, from the Pacific to the Middle East. Many are dealing with 

serious wounds, as well as with complex and difficult problems, 

both seen and unseen. They have fought and many have died to 

protect this country and we need to fight to protect them. We owe 

it to those returning service members and to the veterans to provide them with a seamless support system so that they can put 

their lives back together, so that they can pursue their goals, so 

that they can not only go back to their communities but be able to 

give back to their communities and to help strengthen our Nation 

in many ways. 

None of this, none of this is easy. It takes tremendous commitment on the part of all Americans, those in government, those in 

the military, it takes tremendous commitment on the part of those 

in the private sector, our business leaders and, frankly, all citizens 

across our country. 

There is no doubt that DOD and VA are working more closely 

together than we have before, but frankly we have much more to 

do to try to reach a level of cooperation to better meet the needs 

of those who have served our Nation in uniform, especially our 

Wounded Warriors. 

Since I became Secretary a little over a year ago, Secretary 

Shinseki and I have met on a regular basis in order to personally 

guide efforts to share resources and expand cooperation between 

our Departments. Partnership between our Departments extends to 

all levels led by a joint committee cochaired by the Under Secretary 

of Defense for Personnel and Readiness and the Deputy Secretary 

of Veterans Affairs. Senior military leaders have been deeply committed to this effort. This is about the care of their troops, but it 

is also about recruiting and retaining the very best military force 

in the world. When it comes down to it, caring for those who have 

served and their families is not only a moral imperative, it is a national security imperative as well. 

For those who have fought for their Nation we need to protect 

their care and their benefits, but we also need to protect their integrity and their honor. It is for that reason that before I discuss 

the specifics about DOD and VA collaboration I want to announce 

an important step that my Department is taking in order to help 

maintain the integrity of the awards and honors that are earned 

by our service members and their veterans. You are all aware of 

the Supreme Court decision that determined that free speech allows someone to lie about military awards and honors. Free speech 

is one thing, but dishonoring those who have been honored on the 

battlefield is something else. For that reason, today we are posting 

a new page on the Defense Department’s Web site that will list 

those service members and veterans who have earned our Nation’s 

highest military awards for valor. Initially the Web site will list the 

names of those who have earned the Medal of Honor since 9/11. 
9 

But in the near term it will include the recipients of the services 

Crosses and the Silver Star since 9/11. We will look at expanding 

that information available on the Web site over time. This effort 

will help raise public awareness about our Nation’s heroes and help 

deter those who might falsely claim military honors, which I know 

has been a source of great concern for many veterans and members 

of these committees and Members of the Congress. I want to thank 

you for your concerns and for your leadership on this issue, and our 

hope is that this will help protect the honor of those who serve the 

United States in battle. 

Now let me discuss the five priority areas that DOD and VA are 

trying to work on to enhance collaboration. The first is this transition program, Transition GPS program. At the Department of Defense our goal is to provide a comprehensive Transition Assistance 

Program that prepares those who are leaving the service for the 

next step, whether that is pursuing additional education, whether 

it is trying to find a job in the public sector or the private sector, 

or whether it is starting their own business. 

On Monday the President announced the new Transition GPS 

program that will extend transition preparation through the entire 

span of each service member’s military career. The program will 

ensure that every service member develops their own individual 

transition plan, meets new career readiness standards, and is prepared to apply their valuable military experience however and 

wherever they choose. 

Second area that we focused on is trying to integrate the disability evaluation system. We have overhauled the legacy disability 

evaluation system and trying to make improvements with regards 

to developing a new system. In the past, as you know, service members with medical conditions preventing them from doing their 

military jobs had to navigate separate disability evaluation systems 

at both DOD and VA. We have replaced that legacy system with 

a single Integrated Disability Evaluation System [IDES] that enables our Departments to work in tandem. Under the new system 

currently in use, service members and veterans have to deal with 

fewer layers of bureaucracy, and they are able to receive VA disability compensation sooner after separating from the military. 

But let’s understand as we try to do this, this is a tough challenge to try to make this work in a way that can respond to our 

veterans effectively. After all, veterans have rights, they have the 

right to ensure that their claims are carefully adjudicated, but at 

the same time we need to expedite the process and to ensure that 

as we do that we protect their benefits, and that is what we are 

trying do with this system. 

The third area is to try to integrate, as was pointed out, a new 

electronic health record system. We are working on a major initiative to try to do that. For too long efforts to achieve a seamless 

transition between our health care systems have been hamstrung 

by separate legacy health record systems. In response to challenge 

that was issued by the President and frankly Presidents in the 

past who have tried to address this issue, DOD and VA is finally 

working steadily to build an integrated Electronic Health Record 

system. When operational that system will be the single source for 

service members and veterans to access their medical history and 
10 

for clinicians to use that history at any DOD and VA facility. 

Again, this is not easy, and so the way we are approaching it is 

to try to see if we can complete this process at two places, San Antonio and Hampton Roads, and then try to expand it to every other 

hospital. It is tough, but if we can achieve this, it would be a very 

significant achievement that I think could be a model not only for 

the hospitals that we run, but for hospitals in the private sector as 

well. 

Fourthly, we need greater collaboration on mental and behavioral health. Beyond these specific initiatives that I mentioned, we 

are trying to focus on enhancing collaboration in areas that involve 

some of the toughest challenges we face now related to mental and 

behavioral health. Post-traumatic stress has emerged as a signature unseen wound of this last decade of war. Its impact will be 

felt for decades to come and both the DOD and VA must therefore 

improve our ability to identify and treat this condition, as well as 

all mental and behavioral health conditions, and to better equip 

our system to deal with the unique challenges these conditions can 

present. For example, I have been very concerned about reports of 

problems with modifying diagnosis for post-traumatic stress in the 

military disability evaluation system. Many of these issues were 

brought to my attention by Members of Congress, and I appreciate 

their doing that, particularly the Senate Veterans’ Affairs Committee chairman, Patty Murray, who addressed this issue because 

it happened in her own State in a particular way. To address these 

concerns I have directed a review across all of the uniformed services. This review led by the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness Erin Conaton will help ensure that we are 

delivering on our commitment to care for our service members. The 

review will be analytically sound, it will be action oriented, and it 

will provide hopefully the least disruptive impact to behavioral 

health services for service members. The effort here is to determine 

where those diagnoses take place, why they were downgraded 

downward, what took place so that we know exactly what has happened. I hope that the entire review will be completed within approximately 18 months. 

The last area is an area that has really concerned me, which is 

the area of trying to prevent military suicides. We have strongly 

focused on doing what we can to try to deal with this issue, which 

I have said is one of the most frustrating problems that I have 

come across as Secretary of Defense. Despite increased efforts and 

attention by both DOD and VA, the suicide trends among service 

members and veterans continues to move in a very troubling and 

tragic direction. And part of it is reflected in larger society. The 

fact is numbers are increasing now within the military. In close cooperation with the VA, DOD is taking aggressive steps to try to address this issue, including promoting a culture to try to get people 

to seek help, seek the kind of help that they need to improve access 

to mental and behavioral health care, to emphasize mental fitness 

and to work to better understand the issue of suicide with the help 

of other agencies, including the VA. One of the things I am trying 

to stress is that we have got to improve the ability of leadership 

within the military to see these issues, to see them coming and to 

do something to try to prevent it from happening. 
11 

Our efforts to deliver the best possible services depend on the 

dedication of our DOD and VA professionals who work extremely 

hard every day on behalf of those who have served in uniform, and 

I extend my thanks to all who help support our men and women 

in uniform today, to our veterans and to our families. 

Let me just say we are one family, we have to be one family at 

the Department of Defense and the Department of Veterans Affairs, a family that supports one another and all those who have 

answered the call to defend our country. Together we will do everything possible to ensure that the bond between our two Departments and between our country and those who have defended it 

only grows stronger in the future. 

Let me also say this. As a former Congressman, now as Secretary 

of Defense and someone who has spent over 40 years involved in 

government in some capacity or another, I am well aware that too 

often the very best intentions, very best intentions for caring for 

our veterans can get trapped in bureaucratic infighting, it gets 

trapped by conflicting rules and regulations, it gets trapped by 

frustrating levels of responsibility. This cannot be an excuse for not 

dealing with these issues. It should be a challenge for both the VA 

and DOD, for the Congress and for the administration to try to 

meet that challenge together. Our warriors are trained not to fail 

on the battlefield. We must be committed not to fail them on the 

home front. I realize that there have been a lot of good words and 

a lot of good will and a lot of good intentions, but I can assure you 

that my interest is in results, not words. I am grateful for the support of the Congress, particularly these two committees, and I 

thank you and look forward to your questions. 

[The prepared statement of Secretary Panetta can be found in 

the Appendix on page 56.] 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, Mr. Secretary. You know there have 

been comments made about how unique this is to have this joint 

hearing between these two committees. It resulted from Chairman 

Miller coming to me with the idea and I want to thank him for 

that, and I think it also happened because we have two such outstanding Secretaries, both of whom are veterans, both of whom 

have devoted their life to service of this country. Secretary Panetta, 

many years in Congress, was here when I first came here and a 

couple of others of us that are still here, Mr. Barton and Mr. Filner. We are the old, old people on this committee now. But you 

were taken from our midst over to serve the President as Director 

of OMB [Office of Management and Budget] and then as his Chief 

of Staff, and then later was Director of Central Intelligence Agency 

and now as Secretary of Defense. I think that is a lifetime to be 

commended. 

And Secretary Shinseki, starting with entrance into the United 

States Military Academy, lifetime of service in the Army, culminating as Chief of Staff of the Army. No one could have a better 

career, leading troops in battle and leading the entire Army in the 

start of this war against terrorism. Thank you both for your service. 

Mr. Secretary. 
12 

STATEMENT OF HON. ERIC K. SHINSEKI, SECRETARY OF VETERANS AFFAIRS, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS 

Secretary SHINSEKI. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Chairman 

McKeon, Chairman Miller, Ranking Member Smith, Ranking Member Filner, other distinguished members of both committees, the 

House Armed Services and House Veterans’ Affairs Committees, 

thank you for your steadfast support of service members and veterans and for this opportunity to testify before you. 

I am honored to be here with my friend as well, Secretary Leon 

Panetta. His leadership and close partnership on behalf of those 

who wear and have worn the uniforms of our Nation has been monumental. 

I would also like to acknowledge I believe we have here and 

other places veterans service organizations [VSOs] and veterans 

who are here today. I acknowledge them because with the VSOs, 

their insights have been helpful in developing, resourcing, and improving the programs that we overwatch in the Department of Veterans Affairs. 

I have said it often enough and I will say it one more time, little 

of what we do in VA originates in VA. Much of what we work on 

originates in DOD. And so what this means is that we in VA must 

be aware, must be agile and then must be fully capable of caring 

for those who have, in Lincoln’s words, borne the battle. As a footnote, we still today in VA care for two children of Civil War veterans. The promises of President Abraham Lincoln are being delivered today by President Barack Obama, this Congress, and the VA. 

And 100 years from now we will still be fulfilling our commitment 

to the current generation of veterans, their families, and our survivors. 

History also shows, and this is VA’s piece of history, also shows 

that our requirements in VA continue to grow for about a decade 

and maybe sometimes a little more after the last combatant comes 

back from operation. And so in this case about a decade or more 

after the last combatant leaves Afghanistan, VA’s requirements 

will continue to grow; the operation will be over and budget will 

begin to reflect that, but at VA our requirements will still be growing. 

So for us it is important that we spend the time now to better 

anticipate their needs for care, for benefits and for a successful 

transition to civilian life for this current generation, without losing 

sight of the needs of previous generations that we also care for. 

Collaboration and cooperation between VA and DOD have never 

been more important and I think for the next two decades it will 

be entirely important because this will be in large measure the 

work of the Nation and focusing on how we care for the less than 

1 percent of Americans who serve in uniform today and provide for 

us this way of life. 

Most significantly, we are looking initially here at four areas. 

Three of those areas will match up with what Secretary Panetta 

just provided. That doesn’t mean that in his five and my four we 

are disconnected, but we describe them just a little bit differently. 

The integrated Electronic Health Record, the iEHR, which you 

have remarked has been in the process of discussion for 10 years 
13 

now, I think both Secretary Panetta and I have agreed on what 

that will be and we are moving towards a solution. 

The second point, more comprehensive sharing of data through 

a virtual lifetime electronic record, of which integrated Electronic 

Health Record is a key component. 

The third area of focus, the Integrated Disability Evaluation System, which is primarily a DOD enterprise with significant VA support to ensure an efficient process. 

And the fourth of our VA’s areas of focus, the President’s initiative to redesign the transition process and the implementation of 

the VOW [Veterans Opportunity to Work] to Hire Heroes Act. 

My testimony submitted to the committee expands on each of 

these areas in some detail, and I thank the chairman for accepting 

that written testimony into the record and I won’t go into them in 

detail at this time. 

Well, let me briefly emphasize that it is especially important that 

we assure the greatest collaboration between VA and DOD in that 

critical phase before service members leave the military. We simply 

must transition them better. And I speak as one who has watched 

that process from a different vantage point over time. We do this 

best with warm handoffs between the Departments. That is key to 

assuring the success of transitioning service members back to their 

communities in productive ways. But it is also key in preventing 

the downward spiral that some face in being challenged. 

Transitioning doesn’t work quite as well for them and in some 

cases homelessness and sometimes suicide are what we have to 

deal with. 

So I echo Secretary Panetta’s comments. While we are pleased 

with the progress made to date on critical issues common to both 

VA and DOD, we know we have a responsibility to better harmonize our two large Departments in ways to better serve service 

members, families, veterans, and our survivors. Their well-being is 

the strongest justification of why we should be working together 

more closely and more collaboratively and we are today. There is 

more important work to be done, and I am proud to move forward 

with Secretary Panetta to make the most progress possible in our 

time on behalf of those who wear and have worn the uniforms of 

our Nation. 

And with that, Mr. Chairman, thank you and to the members of 

this committee for your unwavering support of our efforts, and I 

look forward to your questions. 

[The prepared statement of Secretary Shinseki can be found in 

the Appendix on page 64.] 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much. I ask unanimous consent 

to include the record of all member statements into the record. 

Without objection, so ordered. We have already agreed that we will 

have about 2-minute questions, so I would encourage members to 

make their questions short so that we can have the answers complete, and we will start with me. 

As I have already said, we know that there is high unemployment among our veterans, our young veterans. And we know with 

the $487.0 billion cut in defense we will have 100,000 leaving the 

military. We will have another 100,000 if the sequestration takes 

effect. 
14 

What plans do we have to ensure that these service members 

will not go from the front lines to the unemployment lines? And 

how do you see potential reduction in the defense workforce resulting from the sequestration? What effect will that have on what will 

you be able to do to try to move them into some meaningful employment, Mr. Secretary? 

Secretary PANETTA. Well, I sure as hell hope that sequestration 

doesn’t happen. 

The CHAIRMAN. I am with you. 

Secretary PANETTA. It would be, as I have said time and time 

again, a disaster in terms of the Defense Department as far as our 

budget is concerned and as far as our ability to respond to the 

threats that are out there and it would have a huge impact. It doubles the cuts in the military. It would obviously add another 

100,000 that would have to be reduced, and the impact of that on 

top of the reductions that are currently going to take place would 

place a huge burden on the systems to be able to respond to that. 

I think it would be near impossible to try to do the kind of work 

that we are trying to do and make it work effectively. 

I think we can handle what we have proposed in our budget and 

the drawdown numbers that are coming now. We have tried to do 

this pursuant to a rational strategy over these next 5 years. And 

I think the systems we are working on and what we are trying to 

put in place I am confident can respond to that. But if sequester 

should happen and if an additional burden is suddenly put on top 

of it, I think it could really strain the system. 

The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Secretary, could you please give us that 

input for the record? 

Secretary PANETTA. Absolutely. 

[The information referred to can be found in the Appendix on 

page 84.] 

The CHAIRMAN. In keeping with it. My time has expired. Mr. Miller. 

Mr. MILLER. Both Secretaries, in 1961 John F. Kennedy said we 

would put a man on the Moon, 8 years later America was there. 

We are talking about an integrated Electronic Health Record by 

2017. Why could we put a man on the Moon in 8 years and we are 

not starting from ground zero with electronic health record. Why 

is it taking so long? Because it so vital especially, Secretary 

Shinseki, to solving the backlog issue that exists out there today 

in regards to disability claims. 

Secretary SHINSEKI. Mr. Chairman, I can’t account for the previous 10 years. I do know there is a history here. But let me just 

suggest that two large Departments, each having their own electronic health record, which happened to be two very good, maybe 

the two best, electronic health records in the country, and trying 

to bring that culture together to say we are going to have one, and 

it is entirely possible. And I agree with you it is not technology, it 

is leadership here. And between Secretary Panetta and I, we have 

in the last year met four times. We are going to meet again in September. We are here today testifying together. I think this is a 

great signal to both of our Departments. Prior to that I recall meeting with Secretary Gates four or five times. So in 17 months, with 

two Secretaries of these two large Departments have sat side by 
15 

side in direct communication on issues like this, with the integrated Electronic Health Record being the primary topic of discussion. It has taken us 17 months to get to an agreement that both 

Secretary Panetta and I signed that describes the way forward. 

And the way forward for us is a single joint common integrated 

Electronic Health Record. Each of those words means something. 

But key here is an agreement that it will be open in architecture, 

nonproprietary in design. That is a significant change from previous discussions which were wrapped around which proprietary 

contractor were we going to be interested in in establishing an arrangement with. I believe that was part of the challenge. The fact 

that we have agreed on a concept I think is groundbreaking here, 

and both Secretary Panetta and I have agreed to move forward on 

this. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much. The gentleman’s time has 

expired. Again if you could complete the record on those questions 

that would be good. 

Mr. Smith. 

[The information referred to can be found in the Appendix on 

page 83.] 

Mr. SMITH. Thank you, Mr Chairman. I have a question about 

the TAP program, following up on some of the comments Mr. Filner 

made. Exit interviews are notoriously difficult to get people interested in and I think the problem is service members are out, they 

are moving on. I met with some of your folks from both your offices 

that showed me how they had refined the program; they used to 

have a book this big, now they have a book this big. 

The bottom line is what are your thoughts on what you can do 

to get the service members to pay attention to the two or three 

most important things in that transition. It strikes me like we are 

overwhelming them with information, eyes just glaze over. If you 

had to explain it to them in 15 minutes, what are the critical pieces 

of information that you want to give them? How can we make that 

work better? 

Secretary PANETTA. I will yield to Secretary Shinseki as well on 

this. You know, I remember when I got out of the service I couldn’t 

wait to get the hell out of there and I didn’t really want to spend 

a lot of time having people tell me what I was or was not going 

to do. In this instance I think the best way to try to bring these 

opportunities to attention of members is the counselors. We are assigning individual counselors as part of the transition program. 

They are going to sit down individually with them. I think that is 

the best way to get their attention and try to get them moving with 

regards to the potential benefits that are available to them. 

Secretary SHINSEKI. Just very quickly, I would echo Secretary 

Panetta here. I know that when I got ready to get out of the military I couldn’t wait to get the hell out of there either. I would just 

say if we look at this as a transition assistance program, and the 

focus is on assistance, I think we come at it with a different attitude. If we look at this as an education responsibility of preparing 

folks for at least the next phase of their lives to make the right decisions, whether it is education, whether it is a work choice and 

certainly from the VA’s point of view we are entirely interested in 

getting as many departing service members enrolled with us. 
16 

Whether or not they have a requirement for health care today, having them enrolled 5 or 10 years down the road when issues crop 

up we have the evidence necessary to be able to deal with it. So 

we need to look at this as more than just assistance, but this is 

really preparing them, making them career-ready for the next 

phase of their lives. 

Mr. SMITH. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you. 

Mr. Filner. 

Mr. FILNER. You know, in a democracy where you need obviously 

the support and vote of people to go to war, the cost of war is a 

pretty important item to understand. And treating our veterans is 

obviously a part of the cost of war or should be considered that. I 

have tried on several occasions to add an amendment to any war 

appropriations, I don’t know 15 to 20 percent surcharge, because 

that is the difference in your budgets for veterans. And of course 

since we have been borrowing money for war and nobody wants to 

borrow the money for veterans. So it is not looked on kindly. 

But part of the cost of war, you know, we have the statistics, so 

about 6,000 killed in action—I am sorry, 5,000 killed in action since 

9/11, and almost 50,000 wounded. And yet, those who have showed 

up at the VA for help, and I know there are different definitions 

and different circumstances, I think it is close to, or could be over 

a million. Why is there such a disparity between—and it is important for the public to understand, what is the cost of war? How do 

you account for 1 million veterans seeking help for problems in 

war, and only 50,000 considered casualties? 

Mr. Panetta, I will go to you first. Since you know how to manipulate the 2 minutes, you are looking to him, I know, so you don’t 

have to answer. 

Secretary PANETTA. No. I mean, it clearly is the impact of war 

over the last 10 years and how it has affected those who have 

served. And when they do return, when they come back, the reality 

is that, you know, that not all of them, not all of them are getting 

the kind of care and benefits that they should get. And it is our 

responsibility to try to respond to those needs as they return. 

Look, this system is going to be overwhelmed. I mean, you know, 

let’s not kid anybody. We are looking at a system that is already 

overwhelmed. The likelihood is as we draw down further troops 

and, you know, over these next 5 years, assuming sequester doesn’t 

happen, we are still going to—you know, we are going to be adding 

another 100,000 per year. And the ability to be able to respond to 

that in a way that effectively deals with the health care issues, 

with the benefits issues, with all of the other challenges, that is not 

going to be an easy challenge. And you talk about the cost of war, 

this is inherently part of the cost of war. It is not just dealing with 

the fighting, it is also dealing with the veterans who return. And 

that is going to be a big ticket item if we are going to do this right. 

Mr. FILNER. I just hope you look at that boot camp idea as a way 

to really get at that issue. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you. Mr. Bartlett. 

Mr. BARTLETT. Thank you. By almost every account, we are failing our veterans. More of them are killing themselves than are 

killed by the enemy in Afghanistan, and the suicide rate is increas-
17 

ing. Homelessness is approaching the percentage of Vietnam veterans, and that is increasing. Unemployment is more than twice 

the unemployment percentage of the general population. The inservice disability evaluation delays are unacceptable. And after 

they are out, it may take more than a year. They are unemployable 

because of a disability, it may take more than a year for them to 

get that disability. 

Secretary Panetta, you mentioned that you hope that an 18- 

month review could be completed on time. I would suggest, sir, that 

that does not reflect the sense of urgency that this challenge requires. What do we need to do in the Congress to address this 

problem? 

Secretary PANETTA. You know, I think that the one thing I have 

seen is that all of us share the same concern with regards to our 

ability to respond to these issues. The challenge is that as we try 

to make these systems work, there is a lot of built in resistance to 

adapting and changing the way we do things. And to the extent 

that we can work together, to try to make sure that we push for 

these changes to take place, and do it in a way that effectively responds to the challenges, that is something I think both the Congress as well as the administration have to push. 

We cannot accept the old way of doing things. Things are going 

to have to change. Things are going to have to be modified. People 

are going to have to respond differently. If we expect the same old 

responses to the problems we are having, then we are going to 

have the same old problems. We have got to change the way people 

respond to these issues. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you. Mr. Reyes. 

Mr. REYES. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And thank you, Secretaries, for being here. First of all, I wanted to thank both of you 

because you have put your personal leadership in areas that have 

never been done before. The issue of women have been very important to both of you in the military, both in terms of sexual harassment and attacks and those kinds of things. 

Secretary Panetta, you have been a stalwart there. And Secretary Shinseki, your leadership in prioritizing homelessness 

among veterans, especially among women veterans, is very much 

appreciated. I can tell you because veterans very much appreciate 

those priorities and your personal leadership in that. So I know 

both of you face immense challenges. But reflecting on what Chairman Miller said, I hope we continue to do these kinds of joint hearings because this truly is an important—I think one of the most 

important things that both of these committees can focus on. Just 

echoing what my chairman, Chairman Bartlett said, can each of 

you comment briefly on where we can be most helpful in terms as 

a Congress, especially from these two committees? 

Secretary SHINSEKI. I can speak on the VA piece of this. Actually, 

the Congress has already provided some significant assistance to 

VA. I would recall in 2008 and 2009, our budgets were enhanced 

by Congress. Since then, you have provided us advanced appropriations. Now, not all agree that it was a good move, but for VA, it 

provided us an opportunity to have a 2-year look at our budgets. 

And what it assured is that for the health care piece of our budget, 

every year on 1 October, whether or not there is a continuing reso-
18 

lution, we are able to fund our health care requirements so that 

veterans—there isn’t a gap in care for veterans. In those ways, 

meaningful support has been provided. 

I would also say that we are dealing with issues that grow over 

time, and some of them very quickly, mental health, PTSD. The 

budgeting process is based on knowing requirements well out, and 

methodically reacting to growth in trend. When you have large 

growth in a short period of time, the budget process is not quite 

as agile, and it is a bit reactive. And so our efforts to try to harmonize, the reason that we are here is so that VA has some good 

ideas on what to expect and be able to put that into our budgeting 

process. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you. Mr. Bilirakis. 

Mr. BILIRAKIS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate it very 

much. Thank you, Secretary Panetta and Secretary Shinseki. You 

both mentioned in your testimony the prevalence of PTSD and TBI. 

And I believe we certainly need more research to establish better 

diagnostic tools and treatments. Through what channels are the 

DOD, VA, and the private sector sharing the research findings and 

collaborating on the direction of future research? 

Secretary SHINSEKI. I would just offer in 2009, the DOD and VA 

held its first mental health summit, a joint effort to bring our mental health programs to the same table and have a discussion. 

Twenty-eight strategic findings that came out of that, those findings we continue to execute today. While it was a broad look, inside 

that discussion were issues on PTSD, TBI. We spent about $30 million in the VA budget on research for PTSD. We learned a lot from 

DOD because they have extensive experience in this area in terms 

of diagnosis and dealing with PTSD, with formations, with people 

in formations, in combat, going back to combat. 

So there is much that we learn from our collaboration with DOD, 

through our research. More to be done, to be sure. 

Secretary PANETTA. Let me add, what we try to do is to do mental health assessments both before and after deployments, so that 

we can identify and try to treat somebody who might have a problem, specifically with a PTSD. We have done about 600,000 of these 

assessments. Our greatest limitation, our greatest limitation is the 

number of care providers is simply not sufficient for the demand. 

And we are competing with VA and with private health care systems to hire these people. But that is a real—that is an area of tremendous need in order to address the amount of problems we are 

facing. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you. Mr. Michaud. 

Mr. MICHAUD. Thank you very much. I want to thank you both 

for your service and for your both being here this morning. A quick 

question, and I want to read from a veterans service organization 

letter that they actually sent to Senator Webb just last week, and 

just part of it that says: ‘‘The only branch of the military to show 

a marked improvement decreasing the number of persons taking 

their own lives is the United States Marines. They should also be 

praised for their active leadership from the very top in addressing 

the problem and implementing the solutions. The remaining services have yet to be motivated to take any substantive action.’’ 
19 

Secretary Panetta, I have been to Iraq and Afghanistan several 

times, and I looked the generals in the eye and I asked them what 

are they doing personally to help destigmatize TBI, PTSD. And the 

second question is do they need any help? I get the same answer 

over there as I do here in DC, everything is okay. We have all the 

resources we need, we don’t need any help. But the interesting 

thing is someone of much lesser rank came up to me after I asked 

the general that question outside and said we need a lot more help. 

And he suggested I talk to the clergy to find out what they are seeing happening. 

And I did, that trip, and every trip since then. And I am finding 

that our service members are not getting the help that they need. 

And my questions, particularly after looking at this letter that was 

sent to Senator Webb, it appears the Marines are doing a good job. 

So why is it so different between the Marines, the Army, and other 

branches? And can you address that? 

Secretary PANETTA. You know, obviously there is no silver bullet 

here, I wish there were, to try to deal with suicide prevention. We 

have a new Suicide Prevention Office that is trying to look at programs to try to address this terrible epidemic. I mean, we are looking just—if you look at the numbers, recent totals are, we have got 

about 104 confirmed, and 102 pending investigations in 2012. The 

total is as high as 206, almost one a day that we are seeing. That 

is an epidemic. Something is wrong. 

I think one of the areas—I mean, look, part of this is people are 

inhibited because they don’t want to get the care that they probably need. So that is part of the problem is trying to get the help 

that is necessary. Two, to give them access to the kind of care that 

they need. But three, and again, I stress this because I see this in 

a number of other areas dealing with good discipline and good 

order and trying to make sure that our troops are responding to 

the challenges, it is the leadership in the field, it is the platoon 

commander, it is the platoon sergeant, it is the company commander, it is the company sergeant. The ability to look at their 

people to see these problems, to get ahead of it, and to be able to 

ensure that when you spot the problems, you are moving that individual to the kind of assistance that they need in order to prevent 

it. The Marines stay in close touch with their people. That is probably one of the reasons that, you know, the Marines are doing a 

good job. But what we are stressing in the other services is to try 

to develop that training of the command so that they, too, are able 

to respond to these kinds of challenges. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you. Mr. Thornberry. 

Mr. THORNBERRY. Secretary Panetta, there was a cover story on 

military suicides in Time Magazine within the past couple weeks. 

And some statistics really jumped out at me. One fact they said is 

that 33 percent of military suicides had never deployed overseas at 

all, and 43 percent had been deployed once. That is 76 percent, if 

you add it together. I am wondering, number one, are those statistics accurate? And number two, what does that tell us about the 

problem if a third of all the suicides—we are focused so much on 

the PTSD and so forth, if they have never deployed at all and a 

third of the suicides, maybe we are not looking at all the factors. 
20 

Secretary PANETTA. Those numbers are accurate as far as we 

know. And I think what you are seeing is that it reflects the larger 

problem in the society. Because the fact is that suicides are on the 

increase in the rest of society as well. So, problems with drinking, 

problems with finances, problems within the family, problems, you 

know, of trying to deal with conflicts that they are confronting, 

problems of dealing with just the general pressures that we are 

seeing in a society that is dealing, obviously, with economic pressures, at the same time is dealing with social pressures. 

All of that is impacting on families. And that is true in the military as well. And that is why we are seeing this occur not just from 

those that are deployed to the battlefield, but we are seeing it with 

regards to families that are here. 

Mr. THORNBERRY. It just seems to me that puts a little different 

perspective on the scope of the issues that both you gentlemen 

have to deal with if it is not just combat, but the entire gamut of 

those problems. Thank you, I yield back. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you. Mr. Secretary, do you know if there 

is any correlation between this age group in the military committing suicide and those not in the military, but of the same age 

group committing suicide? 

Secretary SHINSEKI. Mr. Chairman, an important question. The 

CDC [Centers for Disease Control] publishes every year the top 10 

leading causes of death amongst Americans. And as I recall, the 

last report—and it is a continuous track in the age group 15 to 24, 

suicides is the third leading cause of death in the top 10 of Americans. In the age group 25 to 34, it is the second leading cause of 

death. 

So suicides, it is a national discussion here. And when you recruit out of that population and put youngsters through the 

stresses we all are familiar with in combat, very small percentage 

serve in uniform, yes, suicides become a matter of great focus, interest, and importance to both Secretaries. I guess the follow-on 

question is how do we try to decide who are best suited to serve 

in the recruiting effort? But I no longer have those responsibilities. 

I used to at one time. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you. Ms. Sanchez. 

Ms. LORETTA SANCHEZ. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And thank 

you, gentlemen, again, for being before us today. In preparing for 

this hearing, I asked my staff back in Orange County to go through 

the casework we have with respect to veterans in transition. And 

although we have a great relationship with our VA Hospital in 

Long Beach, and we have two clinics, one in Santa Ana and one 

in Anaheim in our district, the reality is that the most troublesome 

area with respect to these cases involve the quality and the lack 

of health care for our service members who are transitioning from 

active, or having been called up and are now out into the veterans 

world, if you will. And in fact, I have a lot of veterans who come 

to my office and they express real concern about not receiving 

treatment or having a long time to wait for a specialty doctor, for 

example. 

In Long Beach, it would be oncology, where we must be shortstaffed or something of the sort. And the other really big concern 

for them is the issue of being prepped up for a surgery and then 
21 

somebody on the surgery team doesn’t show up out of whatever, 

and the surgery is then postponed. And it isn’t until these people 

come to my office and we call in directly that we are able to get 

that rescheduled. 

So my question is, how are you addressing these types of concerns with respect to health care? And why, if a surgery is scheduled, why aren’t people showing up to be on that surgery team? 

And more importantly, why does it take a congressional office to 

call to ask that it be rescheduled? 

Secretary SHINSEKI. All fair questions, Congresswoman. If you 

would give me the details, I am more than happy to research both 

your frustration and mine. We owe veterans better. And I agree 

with you. 

Ms. LORETTA SANCHEZ. My second question is with respect to 

homelessness. We have a lot of great organizations helping us with 

that, but they are low on funds. Is there any grant program coming 

up for something like that for local 501(c)(3)s to help? 

Secretary SHINSEKI. We have provided grants for the past 2 

years. Two years ago, about $60 million worth of grants were provided under the Supportive Services to Veterans’ Families Fund. 

Just recently announced this year’s investment of $100 million. 

And in the 2013 budget we have a request for an increase to that 

investment as well. 

Ms. LORETTA SANCHEZ. Thank you so much, Mr. Secretary. 

Mr. THORNBERRY [presiding]. Mr. Stutzman. 

Mr. STUTZMAN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you to both 

you gentlemen for being here today. The President has announced 

a new model of the TAP program. As we understand it, everyone 

will be required to attend a 1-day DOD pre-separation class, followed by a 3-day employment workshop, and a 1-day VA benefits 

briefing. 

Other training in non-job seeking, such as determining readiness 

for postsecondary education and entrepreneurship, will be offered 

as voluntary, and not subject to the mandatory provisions of law. 

This is hardly a tailored approach that would meet the needs of 

those whose post-discharge intentions are to attend school or to 

start a business. Offering nonemployment-related instruction as 

voluntary ignores the fact that it is difficult enough to get supervisors to allow service members to attend the current 31⁄2-day 

course, much less 7 or 8 days away from the unit, especially if that 

unit is preparing to deploy. Will you make all 8 days of TAP, including the voluntary nonemployment, mandatory? 

Secretary PANETTA. I think we have got to move in that direction. You know, we are doing nine pilots that are basically going 

to test this out. And we are hoping to complete those pilots by November and learn, you know, just exactly what we have to require, 

how do we have to mandate it, how do we have to revise it. But, 

you know, my sense is the only way it works is if you make it mandatory. 

Mr. STUTZMAN. The model that the Marine Corps is using in giving the options to those who are about to discharge, is that a model 

that is worth looking at as well? 

Secretary PANETTA. I would think so. 
22 

Mr. STUTZMAN. It seems like that would give a lot of flexibility, 

because not every service member is going to be coming out planning on just going into the workforce. 

Secretary PANETTA. That is right. Some will want to stay. 

Mr. STUTZMAN. Absolutely. Yes. Thank you. I yield back. 

Mr. THORNBERRY. Mr. Walz. 

Mr. WALZ. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I would like to thank both 

chairmen and the ranking members for making this happen. I have 

talked seamless transition for most of my adult life, and it appears 

like it is happening. So I thank you. And to both of you, you have 

my deepest gratitude, and the people of the First District, for the 

defense of this Nation and the care of our veterans. I have got kind 

of a tough one here, it is a troubling one, I know it troubles both 

of you. The issue that came out in the GAO report of the 26,000 

soldiers discharged under personality disorders. My question is, 

and it is brought to the fact by the Vietnam Veterans Commission 

to study at Yale Law School about what are we doing about that? 

And my question to you, probably to you, Secretary Panetta, is 

what are we doing to review and correct the records of those veterans who may have been improperly discharged with a personality 

disorder diagnosis? 

Secretary PANETTA. We are conducting a complete review of 

those areas. We have responded to the situation that took place up 

in Washington. That was the focus of the GAO report. And that is 

what concerned us a great deal. And as a result of that, we are not 

only running a review there, we are running a review elsewhere to 

make sure that the same kind of problems have not occurred elsewhere. You know, it is important that we determine why someone 

would get this diagnosis and then it would be downgraded. I mean, 

there may be some legitimate reasons for it. But in this instance, 

it happened to too many people. And that raised tremendous concerns. 

Mr. WALZ. I appreciate that sentiment. Because my concern, I 

am sure like yours and now Secretary Shinseki’s, is that one of the 

biggest problems here is it is not benefits compensation, it is the 

inability to get care for existing, and that could have been whether 

it was existing or exacerbated by their combat experiences, their 

time in the military, they are not getting that care through our 

wonderful folks at the VA, and how do we fix that? I would add, 

too, that as these have decreased, personality order discharges, adjustment disorder have increased. And so I thank you both for paying close attention to this. I yield back. 

Mr. MILLER [presiding]. Mr. Jones. 

Mr. JONES. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Secretary Panetta, 2 

years ago in the NDAA [National Defense Authorization Act] bill, 

the House had a provision that said if you have served this country 

at war and you come back home and you are in the process of a 

medical review of your condition, but in that period of time, you 

self-medicate and get yourself in trouble, so therefore you have 

been given less than an honorable discharge before the Medical Review Board finalized their decision, the House position basically 

said to that individual, if you are given less than an honorable discharge, you can go back to the Department of Defense and ask the 
23 

Department of Defense to review your medical records and maybe 

change your discharge. 

And I would like to know how you all are handling this issue, 

how you are contacting those who maybe were given less than an 

honorable discharge? 

Secretary PANETTA. Congressman, let me respond to you directly 

through the Department. Because this is the first time I am familiar with the issues you just presented. And I want to give you an 

accurate answer. And let me give you that answer through the Department, if I could. 

[The information referred to was not available at the time of 

printing.] 

Mr. JONES. Thank you, Mr. Secretary. That would be very satisfactory. And thank you very much. I yield back. 

Mr. MILLER. Ms. Davis. 

Mrs. DAVIS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And thank you both for 

your really unparalleled leadership in trying to work and coordinate these programs. I wanted to ask you about coordination, about 

resolving the misalignment between the two care coordination programs between the DOD and the VA. You talked about traps and 

trying to get over those. What is it that is causing these problems? 

I know one of my colleagues mentioned earlier that it seems to be 

creating more confusion than anything else. 

Secretary PANETTA. You know, the biggest problem here is these 

things have developed on separate tracks. And as a result, you 

know, you got two bureaucracies that basically developed their own 

approach to dealing with these systems. And they get familiar with 

them, that is what they use, they resist change, they resist coordination, they resist trying to work together. And that is the fundamental problem we have. 

Mrs. DAVIS. Have we tried to switch off occasionally? I think one 

of the other issues I really wanted to ask about was counseling, because the coordination programs as well as the Transition GPS program that the President has proposed and we are moving forward 

on, call for counselors. And we know the problems in mental 

health, but how are we planning for the kind of counselors that are 

going to be needed for this? Because clearly, they are going to have 

to be cross-trained in many ways, understanding both systems as 

well as small business, et cetera. How are we planning for the immersion of these kinds of folks who are really going to be critical 

to this, yet we really don’t have them in any great number? 

Secretary PANETTA. That, I think, is the fundamental key to 

making this transition work, is to have counselors that are familiar 

both with veterans and defense areas. What are the benefits? What 

are the opportunities that are available? And be able to present 

that. So it is going to take some training of the people that are 

going to be part of this effort so that they provide good counseling 

to those that are involved. 

Mrs. DAVIS. Is there a cost factor involved in that as well that 

we need to address? 

Secretary PANETTA. There is going to be a cost factor involved 

here. And, you know, we will have to discuss it. 

Mrs. DAVIS. May I just suggest as well that there may be some 

great models around the country? We think we have one in San 
24 

Diego. And if we could look at some of those models, that would 

be helpful. Thank you. Thank you, both. 

Mr. MILLER. Mr. Flores. 

Mr. FLORES. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you, Secretary 

Panetta and Secretary Shinseki for being here today. Also Secretary Panetta, thank you for protecting valor for those that have 

earned it. My question is a little bit more theoretical. And what 

prompts this is the claims processing time at the Waco Claims Regional Center in Texas, which is the worst in the country when it 

comes to adjudicating disability claims. What can we do if the 

IDES doesn’t work? I mean, what are you thinking about in terms 

of a new paradigm to fix this issue? And both of you can answer, 

either one of you. It seems to me like we have got cultural issues 

that cannot be fixed by having new systems. So how do you make— 

I mean, you are doing your best to get the systems right, but what 

are we doing to fix the culture so that we do what we promised our 

military men and women, our veterans that we would do in terms 

of providing benefits to them for their service? 

It just seems to me like, you know, we have spent all our time 

on systems, we are not spending any time on culture. So can you 

help me with that? And let me interrupt before you answer. One 

other thing. Are you thinking about a pilot program so that if IDES 

doesn’t work, what are you going to do? Where is the clean sheet 

of paper? Where is the whiteboard that has the big ideas to fix 

this? 

Secretary SHINSEKI. Congressman, I just want to be sure I am 

answering the right question here. Waco and claims would sound 

to me like disability claims that we normally handle. IDES is a 

joint program that DOD and VA. So it is the IDES question that 

you have here. We have piloted IDES. We started off with 27 sites. 

These are a DOD initiative with VA in support. We are at 139 sites 

now, fully operational across the Nation. And I think we both have 

put in place controls that will drive this to the target, which is 295 

days for processing. Now, that sounds like a lot of time. On the one 

hand, when we did our systems independently, sequentially, DOD 

first and then VA, it was like 540 days. Right now, with an Integrated Disability Evaluation System, that is down below 400 days, 

and we are targeted on 295. 

When we get to 295, which is going to be a bit of work, and it 

sounds like a long time, but involved in the 295 days is care and 

surgical procedures that veterans who have been injured are still 

going through. And there is leave associated with that. Whenever 

a surgery occurs, an individual is provided X amount of days for 

recuperation leave, so to speak. All of that is factored into this 295. 

So when the 295, while it sounds large, it is a treatment and transition program. I think we have a right model here. What is incumbent on us is to get to the targets we have described. In the 295, 

VA’s piece of that is about 100 days. Right now we are at 145 days. 

We have been as low as 103, and then we get a surge from our 

friends in DOD and we adjust. But we know we can get to 100 

days. And we are proceeding. 

Mr. MILLER. Mr. Forbes. 

Mr. FORBES. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Secretary Shinseki, we 

know right now that VA topped out in May at about 904,000 
25 

claims. And as you just mentioned, we have got about 65 percent 

of them are over 125 days, and 1.25 million is projected for 2013. 

My question is, can the current system handle the expected reductions in end strength projected in the President’s budget and under 

sequestration? And if you could give me a yes or no answer on that, 

and then elaborate any way you want to to clarify it? 

Secretary SHINSEKI. Your number is a little higher than mine, 

but I will accept it. It is a big number, nearly 900,000 by my count. 

Let me explain why the inventory, that is the total number of 

claims in processing, and the backlog portion of that, 65 percent or 

so, 550,000 of those are backlogged, why these numbers result. In 

the last 3 years, the VA has made three significant decisions. We 

awarded Agent Orange service connection for Vietnam veterans, 

three new diseases; we awarded Gulf War illness, nine new diseases for veterans who had been waiting in the case of Gulf War 

veterans 20 years since the conclusion of that conflict; for Vietnam 

veterans, 50 years. 

We also granted, the third decision was combat verifiable PTSD 

service connection for anyone who served in combat and has been 

diagnosed with verifiable PTSD. 

Mr. FORBES. Mr. Secretary, my time is running out. How will sequestration and these end strength reductions impact these claims 

going forward? 

Secretary SHINSEKI. Well, I would say that in the case of VA, we 

have been informed that VA is exempt from sequestration except 

for administrative costs. I don’t have a definition of administrative 

costs right now. But what I would, Congressman, say, that I am 

with Secretary Panetta, the reason you have the two of us here, 

whatever impacts him is going to have some effect here, even 

though I have been exempted. And it has my attention. 

Mr. FORBES. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. MILLER. Mr. Secretary, you just said that possibly administrative costs would be affected by sequestration. The President the 

other day at the VFW [Veterans of Foreign Wars] said no veteran 

issues would be touched by sequestration. Could you explain to this 

committee? Because there is still some conflicting information that 

is out there from the acting OMB [Office of Budget and Management] director letter that I got back in June. How much is VA 

going to be affected by sequestration? 

Secretary SHINSEKI. I will go back to I believe what you received 

in that letter, is that VA is exempt from sequestration. And I don’t 

have the letter in front of me, Mr. Chairman. I think administrative costs were listed in that. 

Mr. MILLER. So it is your understanding no benefit, function, program, account would be subject to, only administrative costs? And 

again, if you would like to take it for the record because of time. 

Secretary SHINSEKI. I think this would be one that I best provide 

to you a response for the record. 

[The information referred to was not available at the time of 

printing.] 

Mr. MILLER. Thank you, Mr. Secretary. Ms. Bordallo. 

Ms. BORDALLO. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Secretary Panetta 

and Secretary Shinseki, thank you very much for being with us 

this morning. 
26 

Secretary Shinseki, we talked about suicides quite a bit. But can 

you provide us with an update on your efforts to end veterans’ 

homelessness? Can you give an estimated number? Is it as serious 

as suicides? And what programs do you have in place? 

Secretary SHINSEKI. Congresswoman, I think you may be familiar with the fact that we in the Department of Veterans Affairs 

have established 2015 as the point in time where we intend to end 

veterans’ homelessness. And when I say end veterans’ homelessness, there are two pieces to veterans’ homelessness: One is the 

rescue. That is getting everyone on the street off the street, into 

housing, into programs that get them treatment for substance 

abuse or depression, training for employment, and moving on with 

their lives. 

What won’t end in 2015 is prevention. Prevention will be ongoing. What do I mean by ‘‘prevention’’? Right now we have about 

900,000 veterans in the GI Bill programs. And that is colleges, universities, community colleges, tech trade schools. Any youngster 

who fails out of that program right now in this economy is at high 

risk of homelessness. And so our prevention effort here is to make 

sure youngsters get into school, stay in a school, graduate, and 

have an opportunity to go on and work. 

Our housing mortgage program, last year about 90,000 veteran 

mortgage holders who had defaulted on their home loans, we were 

able to defer roughly 75 percent of them from being evicted from 

their homes. And that is with VA’s financial counselors getting in 

there, helping them get control of their finances, lowering the 

monthly payments, extending the payment period. The return to us 

is that we are able to then share stability. We will deal with these 

veterans as homeless veterans otherwise. And our records indicate 

that a homeless veteran’s health care costs is about 31⁄2 times what 

the health care costs are for veterans who are not homeless. So 

there is a—it is an important aspect of this. And while I say we 

were able to save 75 percent, there is still 25 percent we did not 

save. And we have got to just do better at it. 

Ms. BORDALLO. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Secretary. 

Mr. MILLER. Mr. Johnson. 

Mr. JOHNSON OF OHIO. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And both of 

you, General Shinseki and Secretary Panetta, I have come to respect greatly both of your commitments and your heart for our veterans. I will tell you, though, that I am not convinced that all the 

members of your organizations, your Departments share that commitment and will follow through with the commitments that you 

two are making. I understand that you can’t account for the last 

10 years, Mr. Secretary. And I understand that you’ve got two bureaucracies that don’t necessarily like to be told what to do and get 

along all the time. But I will submit to you that another 5 years 

is unacceptable. It is unacceptable to me, and gentlemen, it ought 

to be unacceptable to you. This is not a matter of can do or should 

do. This is a matter of want to and will do. This is 2012. And one 

of the underlying issues, Mr. Secretary, quite honestly, is the VA’s 

lack of an overall information technology architecture. 

You and I have talked about this before. And it still doesn’t exist 

today, as far as I know. I have pointed that out. My committee has 

pointed that out. Organizations outside that have looked at the 
27 

VA’s IT department have pointed that out. You know, I am just not 

convinced that 5 years from now, given that I don’t know where 

you two will be, but my fear is that we are going to be sitting right 

here talking about this same issue again because we are not going 

about it with the discipline that is needed. 

I come from an information technology career of over 30 years. 

I worked at U.S. Special Operations Command as the director of 

the CIO [Chief Information Officer] staff. I know what it takes to 

get this stuff done. And 5 years, gentlemen, is totally unacceptable. 

And I don’t really have a question for you. I just want you to fix 

this, for crying out loud. 

Secretary SHINSEKI. May I respond? Congressman, you and I, but 

more primarily Roger Baker and you have had this discussion. I 

will work with you. And we believe we have a good mark on an architecture. Obviously, we haven’t satisfied you. We will come back 

and work it again. 

Mr. MILLER. Mr. Turner. 

Mr. TURNER OF OHIO. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. To both of our 

Secretaries, thank you for being here. I appreciate your leadership. 

And Secretary Panetta, I want to particularly thank you also for 

your work on sexual assault, which I know that you are working 

on in coordination with the Secretary of the VA, and your efforts 

to try to change the culture throughout DOD to both prevent sexual assault and to assist the victims. And thank you for your leadership there. 

Many of the questions that you have received from members 

have been about service members and their families transitioning 

out of the military. Secretary Panetta, one of the most important 

things for the service members in transitioning with their family 

is obviously to keep their family together. And that raises the issue 

of custody. I want to thank Chairman Miller, Chairman McKeon, 

Subcommittee Chairman Wilson, and also I want to acknowledge 

Chairman Skelton, former Chairman Skelton, and of course, Erin 

Conaton and her work on the issue of custody in this committee. 

The House, as you are aware, has passed eight times legislation 

that would protect the custody rights of service members, the VA 

Committee twice, HASC six times. Secretary Gates had endorsed 

the provisions that the committee had passed. You had sent a letter suggesting a compromise that Senator Boozman is going to be 

drafting in the Senate. I just want to ask for your support for that, 

and also, to tell you that we are going to need your additional assistance. 

The Uniform Laws Commission just brought out a draft uniform 

bill that would change the State laws, actually reversing all the 

progress that we have made actually in favor of taking service 

members’ custody rights away. We hope to have your support for 

Senator Boozman’s legislation. Secretary. 

Secretary PANETTA. I appreciate that. As I indicated to you in my 

letter, I support the efforts that you have made. You have provided 

tremendous leadership on this issue. And I will do the same with 

regards to the amendments on the Senate side. 

Mr. MILLER. Ms. Tsongas. 

Ms. TSONGAS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And thank you both for 

being here today. Like others before me, Congressman Turner, I 
28 

want to thank you, Secretary Panetta. I appreciate very much your 

efforts that you have made over the last several months to improve 

the treatment of survivors of military sexual assault. And Secretary Shinseki, I was so heartened to learn of your recent interest 

in the documentary film, ‘‘The Invisible War.’’ As you say, that 

which starts during military service ends up in the VA. And that 

movie so painfully highlights the multiple bureaucratic hurdles 

survivors of such assaults, which are all too frequent across all the 

services, must endure to prove that their physical or their psychiatric symptoms are connected to an incident of military sexual 

trauma. 

And it shows that too often, victims are unsuccessful in pursuing 

their claims for assistance. To address one aspect of this problem, 

the fiscal year 2012 Defense Authorization Act included language 

that required the Secretary of Defense, in consultation with the 

Secretary of Veterans Affairs, to develop a comprehensive policy for 

the Department of Defense on the retention of and access to evidence and records relating to sexual assaults involving members of 

the armed services. 

This policy is to be in place by October 1, 2012. Can you both 

comment on the status of this policy? I would also welcome any further thoughts you may have on how these claims can be processed 

faster and more accurately. 

Secretary PANETTA. Well, it is a very important issue for me. I 

am not going to wait for the legislation in trying to put that policy 

in place, because I think it ought to take place in providing that 

kind of guidance and assistance to those that have been the victims 

of sexual assault so that they get the kind of support that they 

need in order to not only get the care they need, but if they want 

to continue in their career, to get the support system that would 

allow them to continue their career. And I think it is fair to say 

that Secretary Shinseki and I are going to work together on this 

issue to make sure that we can deal with this on both sides, not 

only the Defense side, but on the Veterans side for those that ultimately move in that direction. 

Ms. TSONGAS. Thank you both. I look forward to seeing that policy in effect. Thanks. 

Mr. MILLER. Mr. Denham. 

Mr. DENHAM. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Mr. Panetta, Mr. Shinseki, 

great to see you both here. Mr. Panetta, I have been working on 

these veterans issues for quite some time with you in our area of 

central California. By the way, thank you for support on the Veterans Skills to Jobs Act that was signed this week into law. A good 

bipartisan effort that Mr. Walz and I worked on after our Afghanistan trip. Another issue that came up during that same trip was 

working with our veterans on Active Duty that were transitioning 

back that had disabilities. And further conversations with General 

Bostick afterwards. You know, he had said that this is the number 

one issue, the evaluation process of those disabled before they get 

discharged, making sure that not a day goes by that they are having to wait for disability, or the issue of 20,000 nondeployable men 

and women that are disabled on Active Duty. 

So he said it was the number one issue dealing with—legislative 

issue that needs to be fixed back from 1940. The question I would 
29 

have for you, is what can we get done? What would be your recommendation? What is the legislative fix that you need us to pass 

that would help with this overall disability evaluation system? 

Secretary PANETTA. My view is that one of the most important 

things we can do is address the needs of our Wounded Warriors 

and the ability of those individuals. If they want to stay in the 

service, we ought to do everything we can to help them stay in the 

service. If they want to move on, then it becomes something where 

we have got—we and the VA have to work together to make sure 

that that transition is as smooth as possible. We have a tremendous amount of focus on this. I guess probably the one key is, 

again, helping us in terms of funding to make sure that we have 

the funds necessary to complete these evaluations and give them 

the assistance they are going to need once they move on. That is 

a key area for me. 

Mr. DENHAM. Outside of funding, is there a legislative fix that 

you are looking for? 

Secretary PANETTA. At this point, I have to tell you, I mean, I 

think we have the pieces we need. I mean, we have got large numbers that we have to deal with. But the programs are in place. The 

assistance is in place. We have just got to make sure that we provide the resources necessary so that we can do what we have to 

do to help them. That is the key. 

Mr. DENHAM. Thank you. 

Mr. MILLER. Mr. Wittman. 

Mr. WITTMAN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Secretary Panetta, 

Secretary Shinseki, thank you so much for joining us. Secretary Panetta, I want to ask you about how we can better align military to 

civilian jobs in transition, especially as it relates to licenses and 

certifications. Give you a great example. You take a highly trained 

combat medic, comes back home, wants to go into the civilian side, 

wants to become an emergency medical technician. Unfortunately, 

as you know, certifications there prevent him or her from doing 

that. Has to go through lengthy schooling, take on lots of debt. 

Many times, they could probably be teaching the class. How can we 

better align the skills that are obtained in the military to parallel 

what they could be pursuing in jobs on the civilian side? That is 

one of many categories that I know that you are aware of. And it 

is really a matter of taking that military job description and figuring out how do we align that, or how do we get some paralleling 

with what they are doing in the military versus outside? 

Secretary PANETTA. Well, it is a great point. It is something actually the First Lady has dedicated a lot of time to. We have got to 

push States to try to develop some common standards here with regards to accreditation in these various jobs. These guys come out 

and they have got great skills, they have worked in these areas, 

they have done tremendous work in their particular skill area. And 

to come out and then have to drag them through a whole process 

in order to be able to take those skills and make them applicable, 

that is something that—there are a number of States that are willing to basically take these individuals and take the accreditation 

that we provide and incorporate that at the State level. We have 

got to get all of the States to recognize that kind of credentialing. 
30 

Mr. WITTMAN. Mr. Secretary, is it something we could do within 

DOD so as these individuals come out, if they become a trained 

medic, they would also, at the same time, that they get that certification would get something within the military to say by the way, 

now you have a credential that is an EMT [emergency medical 

technician] within that particular State, say where they are based 

or they have some kind of way that there is an equivalency there? 

Because they are obtaining the same skills there as they would 

outside. 

Secretary PANETTA. I think that is a good point. One of the 

things I am looking at is can we develop some kind of certification 

within the military that would then be transferable in terms of 

their getting a job within the State. 

Mr. WITTMAN. It seems like if you just align things that align 

with outside, there could be some reciprocity. 

Secretary PANETTA. That is right. Good point. 

Mr. WITTMAN. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield 

back. 

Mr. MILLER. Mr. Courtney. 

Mr. COURTNEY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank both witnesses for your attendance here today. Secretary Shinseki, you 

know, I am wondering if you could talk for a minute about an initiative that I think falls under today’s hearing, which I think is a 

very exciting example of the work the VA has been doing with 

health IT, which is the Blue Button program, which, again, is 

something that again, I think you have surpassed even the private 

sector in terms of really trying to give patients control over their 

own medical situation, as well as make a smarter system in our 

health care delivery. 

Secretary SHINSEKI. I will just say it is one of several IT initiatives, but Blue Button is the one that has received a lot of attention. And there are civilian health care systems now that are 

adopting the concept. And that is with a single stroke of a mouse 

on the Internet, you are able to access your data, personal data regarding health care. And you can download your records, you can 

take those records and use them as you would with your own private physician. It has tremendously grown in size, into the millions. And we think this is also helpful for the private sector in 

having that kind of concept capability. 

Mr. COURTNEY. And the nice thing about it is it gives the patient 

control in terms of being able to move, go from one provider to another. And again, just congratulations to you and your team for 

really leading the way for the whole health care sector really in 

terms of that initiative. And I know comments have come up, and 

I am running out of time, the issue of regionalizing claims is 

emerging as an issue in Connecticut as well. And again, I look forward to working with your Department in terms of trying to solve 

that problem. 

Secretary SHINSEKI. We will do that. 

Mr. MILLER. Ms. Buerkle. 

Ms. BUERKLE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And thank you both for 

being here this morning and for your service to our Nation. It is 

an honor to have you both here. My question has to do with, and 

you have heard some references to it, the Dole-Shalala Commis-
31 

sion, and the fact that now 5 years later, after they issued this urgent call to streamline, to make sure we have a single point of reference for the care and the services and the benefits of our military, we have two very distinct entities. We have had multiple 

hearings trying to get assurance from DOD and from the VA as to 

how you are going to get this together so that we can make sure 

our veterans get the services without being overwhelmed by an extremely complex system. 

So I would ask both of you today, please, how specifically, what 

are the goals, what is the plan to get these two entities under one 

roof so that you are complying with the Dole-Shalala Commission 

and their recommendations for our veterans? I thank you both. 

Secretary SHINSEKI. The program, the Federal Recovery Coordination Program, in existence since 2007. And I think as Secretary 

Panetta indicated earlier, two good Departments launched and essentially developed good programs that don’t quite harmonize. We 

have a task force with the specific direction to study and bring harmony to these programs. Where are we being—duplicating one another? Where are we not doing things that we should be doing? So 

it is going to get a good look here, and I say in the next couple of 

months. And I would be happy, and I think Secretary Panetta 

would be as well, to make our people available to provide the results of that. 

Secretary PANETTA. You know, look, Secretary Shinseki and I 

share the same frustration. I mean, we have been working on this, 

and, frankly, we have been pushing to try to say why can’t we get 

faster results? Why can’t we get this done on a faster track? And, 

you know, bottom line is, frankly, we just have got to kick ass and 

try to make it happen. And that is what we are going to do. 

Ms. BUERKLE. I would suggest in your opening statement, Mr. 

Panetta, you mentioned commitment, and that we look to our military as an example, their commitment to our country. We should 

be that committed to them to make sure we get this job done. I 

thank you both very much. 

Mr. MILLER. Dr. Heck. 

Dr. HECK. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank both of you for 

being here today. Likewise for your long and distinguished service 

to our country. Secretary Panetta, I am happy to hear about your 

initiative on the Stolen Valor Web site, realizing that any Web site 

will probably have limitations. As you may know, myself and Senator Brown have introduced legislation to reinstitute the Stolen 

Valor that will meet constitutional scrutiny. So hopefully, we will 

be able to gain your support on that. We have heard a lot about 

the Integrated Disability Evaluation System, something that after 

spending over 20 years in the Army Medical Department I think 

was far too long in coming. And I am encouraged by the pilot results. In fact, I have two down-trace units that are getting set to 

mobilize in October to support those efforts, CONUS [continental 

United States]. But we have seen over time the processing times 

start to creep back up. 

And even though there has been—customer service has increased 

over the legacy system, that was really a low bar to overcome. And 

we are hearing a lot of the fact that the program is somewhat complicated and convoluted. Other than volume driving the creep in 
32 

processing times going back up, what other issues are there that 

are causing that processing time to increase, and what can we do 

to help you decrease those times? 

Secretary SHINSEKI. Well, I think I indicated earlier that we 

have a target of 295 days. Within, I would say, the DOD’s portion 

of that is the medical care of seriously wounded and injured individuals who still have their care to be completed, and also recuperation leave as part of that. So it is a little bit—individuals have 

some control here. And also, I think Secretary Panetta alluded to 

this, these youngsters know the military health care system. They 

know it very well. They are very comfortable with it. It is world 

class. They know VA’s health care system less. And there is a point 

in time where a decision has to be made to make that psychological 

commitment you are going to leave the military. 

We in VA can do a lot to help educate folks to make them comfortable about being able to let go of—you know, like wing walking, 

one hand hold before taking the next one. And I think that will 

help streamline the process. But as I say, we have both agreed to 

this 295-day target, and we are moving to that point. 

Mr. MILLER. Mr. Johnson. 

Mr. JOHNSON OF GEORGIA. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank 

you, gentlemen, for being here. Secretary Panetta knows how much 

I appreciate his service to the Nation over the years. And I certainly thank you again, sir, in public. And General Shinseki, I have 

not had the opportunity to spread my love for you publicly, but you 

are a true gentleman. 

You served admirably in the United States Army, became a fourstar general, became the Secretary of the Army—or chairman of 

the Army. Army Chief of Staff. That is what it was. And in that 

capacity, you put in place strategies, very innovative, that have 

held us in good stead up to this point. 

You are a forward-thinking leader. And you are also a courageous and honest leader. I would be remiss not to point out the fact 

that during the run-up to the war in Iraq, you took a public bashing from high-level members of the previous administration for 

your assessment as to the number of troops we would need to effectively occupy Iraq in the aftermath of the war going in. And you 

paid the price for that in being it said that you were perhaps forced 

to resign early. But nevertheless, the underdog is now on top. 

And you bring the same innovative, strategic thinking to your 

new post that you had in the old post. And it is definitely needed. 

And I think it is going to pay off. And I am glad that your Department and the Department of Defense have both become more integrated in how we address the needs of our service men and women 

as they make the transition from military force—has my time expired already? Okay. I keep hearing a—you want me to move on 

from what I am saying, or what? 

Mr. MILLER. Your time has expired, Mr. Johnson. 

Mr. JOHNSON OF GEORGIA. Has my time already expired? 

Mr. MILLER. A minute ago. 

Mr. JOHNSON OF GEORGIA. Oh, 2 minutes. I am sorry. All right. 

But thank you, sir, for your service. And I yield back. 

Secretary SHINSEKI. Mr. Chairman, may I just a small point 

here. I thank the Congressman for his compliments. I would just 
33 

say there are more than this one individual who held that opinion. 

And I was not forced to resign. I served a full and complete tour 

as the Army Chief, and I was very proud do that. Thank you. 

Mr. JOHNSON OF GEORGIA. Thank you. I stand corrected. 

Mr. MILLER. Mr. Johnson, I am trying to save you from yourself 

because the next person up is Mr. Runyan. 

Mr. JOHNSON OF GEORGIA. Oh, I don’t think I need to be saved 

from myself. 

Mr. MILLER. You haven’t seen Mr. Runyan. 

Mr. RUNYAN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and, gentlemen, thank 

you for being here. I want to touch on the IDES process. I know 

in Secretary Panetta’s opening statement the last sentence of that 

particular paragraph or the end of the IDES statement says you 

are going to have a senior level working group in coordination with 

the VA and provide recommendations on how to move forward. I 

know Secretary Shinseki knows that I happen to chair the DAMA 

[Disability Assistance and Memorial Affairs] Subcommittee in the 

House VA Committee. We just had a hearing on this back in 

March, and I asked the DOD to acknowledge the specific roles the 

VA has in the process and distinguish the roles that the VA and 

DOD carry out. And I have also been briefed by the GAO that they 

have great concern of the overlapping responsibilities in the two. 

There is a couple of issues and time running out that I just want 

to bring to both of your attention you can have here, specifically 

dealing too with the medical evaluation narrative summaries, is 

that clear, and they lack clear and complete diagnosis of the service 

member which a lot of times renders an unfair decision. And the 

arbitrary time date of 7 days to challenge that, refuting that decision. I sometimes think to get the complete medical evaluation you 

need I don’t think that is possible. Dealing with the PEBLOs 

[Physical Evaluation Board Liaison Officers] and their ability or 

lack of—I don’t know—I know quality control has been used a couple of times by some VSOs [veteran service organizations] but not 

so much they are not reaching out to the veteran. And I know some 

of the VSOs brought up instances where JAGs [Judge Advocate 

Generals] have been involved and the process went a lot smoother 

because they understand the process a lot better. There are some 

points I wanted to bring to both of your attention that I hope would 

come up in those discussions and I yield back. 

Mr. MILLER. Mr. Scott. 

Mr. SCOTT. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Secretary Panetta, you mentioned earlier one the problems was the limitation 

of the number of health care providers. I have got some information I would like to share with you. I represent Georgia, which has 

a tremendous number of veterans, a proud military history. And 

one of the medical providers gave me this list and it is actually a 

list of reimbursements versus Medicare reimbursements. And I will 

just give you a couple of examples. For the exact same code, Medicare reimburses about $2,000 and TRICARE reimbursement is 

somewhere in the $630 range. That is one of the reasons that many 

of the private sector providers out there are having to limit the 

number of our veterans that they are seeing; they are covered 

under TRICARE. So I will just share this with you, and it is not 

that they don’t want to see them, it is that if they are the only per-
34 

son that is signed up in that area, then it becomes a huge portion 

of their practice. And quite honestly the practices have to be revenue positive. But I will leave this for you and we will go from 

there. 

Mr. Shinseki, if I had a second copy I would give it to you and 

I can get copy for you as well. We kind of beat around this a little 

bit. I trust both of you as great leaders. We beat around this issue 

of having two bureaucracies that resist change. And so my question, open-ended to either one of you that wants to take it, is would 

the men and women that are serving this country be better served 

if the health care benefits were handled under either one of the 

agencies instead of both of the agencies in having to make that 

transition? 

Secretary PANETTA. Well, you know, I thought about that a lot. 

But I think the reality is we have got these systems in place. The 

veterans are very tied to their health care system and, you know, 

the benefits that they receive there, and obviously DOD is very tied 

to our system. But the key—I don’t think that ought to inhibit our 

ability to bring these two systems together, let me put it that way. 

I don’t think we have to create another monster. I think all we 

have to do is be able to get both of these two systems to work together and get it done. 

Secretary SHINSEKI. Mr. Chairman, might I add a little bit here. 

Two huge Departments, we are already collaborating, both bringing 

together in a number of locations joint and integrated activities; 

North Chicago, a Federal health care center, the director is a VA 

person, the second in command is a Navy captain. And we are 

learning a lot from that and we look for other areas where we can 

do this and there are several other examples of that. We look at 

bundling acquisition, large acquisition decisions. We are working 

on right now trying to see whether there is a benefit to bringing 

our pharmacy programs together. 

So I think there is great opportunity from efficiencies and a business standpoint. I would be cautious about saying we are going to 

create one system here. He has a to-go-to-war requirement and the 

go-to-war requirement has with it a whole list of preparations that 

you have to have competent leadership who have been trained how 

to do this in combat from the top of the organization all the way 

down to the youngest medic in that formation. That is an enormous 

responsibility, and that is a culture we don’t want to change. We 

have the best go-to-war medical capability anywhere, and that has 

got to be a primary function here. 

Mr. MILLER. Ms. Hanabusa. 

Ms. HANABUSA. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you both for 

being here. A special aloha to General Shinseki. My questions are 

for you, General. On page 7 of your testimony you talked about of 

course the VOW to Hire Heroes Act of 2011 which Congress and 

the President signed into law. Do you have any statistics or any 

report you can give us as to how that is coming along? And in that 

same light also on page 7 you talked about removing the impediments to credentialing with of course the DOD and I would like to 

know where we are in that as well. Thank you. 

Secretary SHINSEKI. On the VOW to Hire Heroes Act implementation, there are various pieces of that. I would say one piece, 
35 

VRAP [Veterans Retraining Assistance Program], is up and running. We have veterans who are signing—this is between veterans 

between the age of 35 and 60 who have exhausted their unemployment benefits, have a capability for 1 year of training in a high priority work area. That is up and running, in the tens of thousands 

people have signed up. In the transition arena both Secretary Panetta and I are working this very hard. We think we have a good 

plan being put together, but in our case we are still looking at the 

details of that. 

I am not sure I have addressed all of your questions, Congresswoman, but—was there something I missed. 

Ms. HANABUSA. No, I will follow up with any specific questions 

that I may have for the record. Thank you very much. I yield back. 

Mr. MILLER. Dr. Roe. 

Mr. ROE. Thank both of you all for being here today and your 

service to our Nation. Yesterday we had a hearing, just a briefing 

with Dr. David Rudd on the suicide problem and I would like to 

share with you, both of you all, I won’t do it today because of time, 

with his data which was very impressive about multiple deployments and how that affected soldiers. 

Number two, I know I have been to Great Lakes twice and it is 

clear when you are a freshman Congressman as I was two terms 

ago when your CODEL [congressional delegation] is to Great Lakes 

in January when it was 4 below zero. So I have been there and the 

question is how is that interconnect interactivity between DOD and 

VA doing now, General Shinseki? Is that working better? I was 

there about a year ago. I know it is up and running but how is that 

working? 

Secretary SHINSEKI. It just gets better over time, Congressman. 

New concept, bringing two good teams together, integrating them. 

I would say that the area of challenge is the single electronic 

health record. And for the most part there are great workarounds 

but when you get to some places like pharmacy, because of the sensitivity to the safety aspects of that there are a lot of checks and 

rechecks. I don’t think we have solved all of those issues and won’t 

until we get this integrated Electronic Health Record. So one team, 

veteran or an active service family member walks in a front door, 

they go wherever. So in terms of the provision of care and access 

to care I think it is first rate. It is the business aspects of this that 

still require more work and the integrated Electronic Health 

Record will go a long way to solving that. 

Mr. ROE. Mr. Chairman, I had a Wounded Warrior in my office 

yesterday lost a leg above the knee, and I personally cannot do 

enough for these Wounded Warriors. I know that you all feel exactly the same way, and I certainly appreciate your service. Mr. 

Secretary, I will ask you any further questions at the Harris Teeter. I see you there shopping from time to time. 

Mr. MILLER. Mr. Coffman. 

Mr. COFFMAN. Thank you, both of you, for your long and distinguished service to our country. Secretary Panetta, I just want to 

commend you and the Secretary and the Department of Defense for 

your work in dealing with combat stress. I have served in the Marine Corps in the first Gulf War, in the Iraq War. I remember the 

out-briefings I received in 1991 before I left the theater and they 
36 

were excellent, 2006 they were excellent as well. I tracked the improvements in the Department of Defense in terms of on the Active 

Duty side in working with our military personnel and those new 

programs and I think we are doing the best we can. 

And you see, the Department of Defense sees post-traumatic 

stress disorder as a wound. However, Secretary Shinseki, the VA 

sees it as a disability. And the signature wound of this war is posttraumatic stress disorder and it seems that we have a disabilitycentric approach and not a treatment-centric approach in the Veterans Administration. And wouldn’t it be wise if we invested dollars in treatment and reform the current system that was both 

compassionate, more compassionate I think to those who served 

our country and fair to the taxpayers and saving money in the long 

run by again investing in treatment in the short run and being 

able to allow veterans to see mental health practitioners within 

their private ones, within their own communities and not be relying upon the VA. And I would love it if you could respond to me 

now but also respond to me on the record because of our limited 

time. 

Secretary SHINSEKI. I would be happy to provide a more detailed 

response for the record. 

[The information referred to was not available at the time of 

printing.] 

Secretary SHINSEKI. Congressman, let me just say I am not sure 

when the decision to treat this as a wound occurred, but I think 

we have all used PTSD disorder as the descriptor for many, many 

years. We are closely linked with DOD on all things, we will go 

back and look at this. So on the one hand I don’t disagree with 

what you are suggesting, but I would offer that we treat PTSD, we 

screen every veteran who comes to VA for PTSD, TBI, substance 

abuse, sexual assaults. And so we have a pretty comprehensive 

record of who to treat and then we set about treating them. 

Mr. COFFMAN. There is no requirement for treatment once that 

disability determination is made and I think we need to really 

rethink that and take a look at that again. All the mental health 

professionals that I talk to feel that it is treatable down to a level 

to where it is no longer debilitating. And so we need to rethink and 

potentially reform this again to be more compassionate for those 

who have served our country in repairing their lives, and also I 

think in the long run certainly being fair to the taxpayers of this 

country. 

Secretary SHINSEKI. I don’t disagree. But I do say we treat, it is 

not just a disability. 

Mr. COFFMAN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back. 

Mr. MILLER. Ms. Speier. 

Ms. SPEIER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. To each of you, we are 

in awe of the extraordinary contributions you have made to this 

country. Thank you for being here today. 

I am going to try to cram three questions into my two minutes 

so I am going to move fairly quickly. On Schedule II drugs there 

is an addiction that often occurs while members are still in the 

military that also continues once they are in the VA system. What 

are we doing to try and deal with this addiction problem? 
37 

The for-profit colleges that many of our GIs are accessing, there 

are some bad actors. I want to know if you are sharing the bad actors with each other, both from the Department of Defense and the 

VA. 

And finally, I want to tell you about a 24-year-old Iraqi veteran 

who started community college, is starting community college next 

month, he wants to go to law school. His present worry is that his 

foot operation will make it difficult for him to get to class in this 

hilly community college campus. He and other injured veterans in 

my district all would like more time to complete their studies 

under the post-9/11 GI bill. I would argue that a 1-year extension 

would be in order for veterans with service-connected disabilities. 

I would like your opinions, both of your opinions on that. 

Secretary SHINSEKI. Let me just very quick try to take all three 

of them on. On addiction, I myself have asked our people whether 

or not we have medication policies that lead to addiction, and we 

are looking at it; I know that both DOD and VA look at this. I was 

speaking publicly at one point and I asked the question are we courageous enough to ask the question of whether or not our medication policies create other problems. It got a response out of the audience and so I think there is something here and we are looking 

at it. 

On the for-profits, we do share that information. In our case we 

found three bad actors and we have cut them off, and we will continue to look at that. But I would just say there are bad actors. It 

is just not for-profits, there are others that we need to be sensitive 

to. 

More time for individuals who are severely injured, you indicated. VA has a program for rehabilitating seriously injured folks 

that is a little more liberal and very capable. And I would like to 

ensure that the individuals you are talking to are aware of the voc 

rehab, we call it, vocational rehabilitation. 

Ms. SPEIER. I think you misunderstood my question, Mr. Secretary. Whether or not we can extend the GI bill for severely disabled veterans so that it does not elapse in the 4 or 5 years that 

it is presently the time limit in which they have to access those 

benefits. 

Secretary SHINSEKI. I would say on the voc rehab—let me come 

back to you on the record to see the amount of time on voc rehab 

is enough. For the GI bill, it is stipulated in law how much time 

is available. 

[The information referred to was not available at the time of 

printing.] 

Secretary PANETTA. I think it should be modified because it 

would give us that additional time in the event that they are dealing with the kind of serious wounds that your veteran is dealing 

with. 

Ms. SPEIER. Thank you. 

Mr. MILLER. Mr. Gibson. 

Mr. GIBSON. Thanks, Mr. Chairman. I thank the gentlemen for 

being here, for their distinguished careers and their leadership. 

And what they are doing is so important right now in terms of 

bringing us better transition. 
38 

I would like to make a couple comments here just based on my 

experience initially as a private in the New York Army National 

Guard and over the course of 24 years rising to the rank of colonel, 

including brigade command where I had troopers that made the 

transition from Active Duty back home and now in the vantage 

point of serving in these responsibilities, that I think over time the 

Department of Defense has really done incredible work before service men and women, before they separate in terms of education and 

training, understanding what is out there. And now all these efforts to integrate the DOD and the VA, but what I think is missing 

is that back home, just when we think we are making a difference 

we learn of a new case, somebody in a village or a town that I was 

not even aware was struggling and they are spiraling down and we 

are looking to make a difference and get them into a community 

of caring, including the VA, VFW, American Legion. 

So Peter Welch and I, my colleague from Vermont, we have been 

working on a program that is actually doing very well for the National Guard, the Yellow Ribbon Program, and seeing if are there 

ways we can learn from that that we can provide better situational 

awareness to State officials that are actually working this issue. In 

New York, for example, we have it to the county level. And many 

times they just don’t have the information knowing a veteran is 

coming home. Sometimes they get it a year of that after they get 

home but they don’t have it before they get home; that is to say, 

the service man or woman is coming home and then when they get 

home. So we are very enthused about what you are doing. We don’t 

want to duplicate what you are doing. What we are looking to do 

is to sort of evaluate it and see if there aren’t ways that we can 

have in the framework, DOD, VA, and then the transition in the 

framework to the State apparatus. So I wanted to mention that 

and just make you aware. I know we have been working with your 

offices and they are doing great work on this. 

And then finally thank you for your work on Agent Orange. I will 

tell you we are not done, we still have Navy veterans from Vietnam 

that don’t have the presumed coverage and we are working on that 

effort as well. 

Thank you, gentlemen. 

Mr. MILLER. Mr. Larsen. 

Mr. LARSEN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. General, continue to 

support HUD–VASH [Department of Housing and Urban Development Veterans Affairs Supportive Housing]. HUD–VASH program 

is well used in Washington State, especially in my district, the 

housing authorities are partnering very well with others to make 

that happen. 

Second, we started a program in my office to assist some of our 

community and technical colleges to translate the skills and abilities that veterans bring into the private sector language of what 

they need, especially as it applies to aerospace manufacturing and 

aerospace skills needed. What we found is that some of our community and technical colleges did not even know there actually was 

a translator available online. It is sad enough we have to translate 

that language from military to private sector, but we do. So there 

is a fellow in my office we hired who is a 30-year chief, retired after 

30 years out of the Navy as a command master chief. And so his 
39 

job now is doing some outreach to community colleges all over the 

State because they come to this one research or aerospace training 

center and let them know how this works. You might want to use 

that with the DOL [Department of Labor] and the Department of 

Education. 

But finally, where does this one kid fit? He comes home, he is 

discharged from the military, he goes home to a rural town, he is 

not enrolled in VA, has trouble adjusting, commits suicide, an actual story in my district. So he doesn’t fit the military, he doesn’t 

fit the VA. I am not asking you to solve that problem from 3 years 

ago, but I am asking you what is being done to reduce the likelihood of that kind of thing happening again? 

Secretary SHINSEKI. This is part of the reason you have two Secretaries sitting here, and our efforts are to create a warm handoff 

by and large across the board anyone departing the military, but 

especially for those that have indicated while they are serving in 

uniform that they have some mental health challenges. We need 

not to discover that the hard way. This handoff would give us the 

opportunity to bring to bear VA’s significant mental health treatment capability so that there is a smooth transition for this. 

Secretary PANETTA. I would agree with that. In these situations 

you have got to ring the bell, you have got to say there is a problem 

here, and the key right now is to be able to pick up that there are 

those problems, to make sure that that individual gets into the 

health care system and then to alert the VA so that they pick it 

up when we try to make this handoff, but that is one the keys we 

are focusing on. 

Secretary SHINSEKI. Mr. Chairman, just for one second, the 

translator that you were talking about, Congressman, we in VA 

have created one called VA for Vets. I am pretty sure your master 

chief is familiar with it, but there are about five others that touch 

on various aspects of translating skills. 

Mr. MILLER. Mr. Stearns. 

Mr. STEARNS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and let me compliment 

you for bringing these two committees together. I think this is fabulous. I have served on the Veterans Committee for 24 years, so 

I think this is a first and I just think it is a very good idea. 

Mr. Panetta and Mr. Shinseki, welcome. I am going to ask you 

sort of a basic question that the GAO has reported that basically 

it takes 200 days with a 68 percent accuracy to address the current 

backlog. And we are hoping that—I mean think the timeline is in 

2015 to get to 100 days with 98 percent accuracy. But the question 

would become how could you do this if roughly almost 700,000 new 

service members are coming in? I mean, come on now. How are you 

going to do this with 700,000 new members, new veterans coming 

in? How are you going to cut the backlog in half and increase the 

accuracy by almost 30, 40 percent? 

I will start with you Mr. Veteran Secretary. 

Secretary SHINSEKI. We are in the process of piloting now, you 

are familiar with VBMS, it is Veterans Benefit Management System, first automation tool we have had in VA. We are still 

paperbound today all these many years later. 

Mr. STEARNS. I just don’t want to interrupt you but Steve Buyer 

was chairman of the committee, he had a bill that was going to 
40 

solve that problem, and this is many moons ago. So when you indicate you had this for the first time—I am just saying I thought that 

was implemented some time ago, but you are saying it wasn’t. 

Secretary SHINSEKI. I would have to go back and refresh myself 

on what Chairman Buyer’s initiative was. But clearly in the testimony I presented before the committee there was no automation 

tool ever discussed in the last 31⁄2 years. In fact, the testimony was 

that we were building this and it was going to require close collaboration with DOD. We get paper from DOD, we are a paperbound 

process. And so in order to go paperless in VA, it is going to take 

coordination between both Departments and we are piloting that 

automation tool today and we intend to have 16 regional offices automation on VBMS by the end of this year. And by the end of 2013, 

VBMS on all of our 56 regional offices, 14 and 15 to take down the 

backlog. 

Now Mr. Stearns, we created the backlog in large measure. We 

made an Agent Orange decision that added a quarter of a million 

claims to the existing inventory. We made a decision on combat 

PTSD that added half a million claims to that inventory. Some 

would say, why would you do that. It was the right decision to do 

for veterans had been waiting for many, many years. We are going 

to work the backlog now. Automation is the key piece here we are 

after. 

Secretary PANETTA. Congressman, what you pointed out is a hell 

of a challenge. I mean, we are not kidding anybody. What you 

pointed out is exactly the concern because we are going to be adding more and more to that list. I think the key for us is if we can 

develop the systems to deal with what we are dealing with now 

and make those work, it is going to make it much easier as additional individuals come on board. If we don’t get through this, if we 

don’t deal with it and make it more efficient now, then it will become an even worse problem in the future. 

Mr. STEARNS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. MILLER. Our final questioner today will be Dr. Benishek. 

You are recognized for 2 minutes. 

Mr. BENISHEK. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I have a question as 

to the nature of the collaboration between the Department of Defense and the VA on reducing the backlog. Can you tell me more 

about that? How much—are you working together for this or can 

you just comment on that? 

Secretary PANETTA. That is one of the fundamental challenges 

that we have taken on in both Departments is to address that 

backlog and try to make sure that both of us are trying to work 

in a way that reduces those numbers. I think the Secretary has 

done a great job at the Veterans side to try to reduce the number 

of days there. We are working to try to reduce the number of days 

on our side and to be able to try to provide this kind of seamless 

relationship so that overall we can deal with this huge backlog. It 

is a problem, we have recognized it as a problem, and I can tell 

you we are doing everything possible to try to see if we can confront it. 

Mr. BENISHEK. Are your staff talking every day then? 

Secretary SHINSEKI. Yes, they are. They are. When we say backlog here, there are about two or three transition programs from 
41 

DOD to VA. We have IDES that most of us are familiar with, 

which is primarily a transitioning of seriously wounded and injured 

folks out of uniform and then to veteran status with us. That is 

only about 7 percent of the people leaving the military. We have 

two other programs called Benefits Delivery at Discharge and 

Quick Start, again transitioning individuals out of the military to 

us. Together those two programs account for maybe 6 percent of 

the number of folks leaving the military. So the vast majority is 

this large discussion of backlog that I was responding to Mr. 

Stearns on. And part of that backlog is created by decisions we 

have made and that we have testified to. Agent Orange, combat 

PTSD, Gulf War illness, all the right decisions. But understand 

that that creates a volume of claims. We are going to be better able 

to deal with it as we get automation in place. So that is an important step. We need to get that program funded and hold onto IT 

funding dollars that we have testified to. 

The second piece of this is this collaboration of DOD and VA sitting side by side making sure we have warm handoffs. It is one 

thing to know that there are 100,000 people coming out next year, 

but if they all come out on 1 October that is a different problem 

than this being scheduled out over 12 months or if they all come 

out at one location that is different than being spread across the 

country. We will match up, VA will match up with whatever the 

plan is in DOD and that is why this collaboration is important. 

Mr. BENISHEK. Thank you, gentlemen. I see my time is up. 

Mr. MILLER. Thank you very much, gentlemen. Thank you for 

being here today, spending 21⁄2 hours with our two committees. We 

appreciate you being so generous with your time to answer some 

very important questions. I would ask unanimous consent that all 

members would have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their 

remarks. Without objection, so ordered. 

With that, the committee is adjourned. 

[Whereupon, at 12:35 p.m., the committees were adjourned.] 

A P P E N D I X 

JULY 25, 2012 

PREPARED STATEMENTS SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD 

JULY 25, 2012 

(47) 
48 
49 
50 
51 
52 
53 
54 
55 
56 
57 
58 
59 
60 
61 
62 
63 
64 
65 
66 
67 
68 
69 
70 
71 
72 
73 
74 
75 
76 
77 
78 
79 

WITNESS RESPONSES TO QUESTIONS ASKED DURING 

THE HEARING 

JULY 25, 2012 

(83) 

RESPONSE TO QUESTION SUBMITTED BY MR. MCKEON AND 

MR. MILLER 

Secretary PANETTA. DOD and VA currently share more clinical data than any 

other two healthcare organizations in the world. However, healthcare operations between the Departments are not integrated. The DOD and VA have multiple 

healthcare legacy systems and data stores, developed over decades, that must be 

modernized to enable the sustainability, flexibility and interoperability required to 

improve continuity of care. The integrated Electronic Health Record (iEHR) will employ a joint platform and service-oriented architecture that is standards-based; this 

will give the Departments the ability to integrate healthcare capabilities for streamlined care and benefits delivery and an architecture that supports rapid delivery 

and enhancement of new capabilities as needed. The agreements between the Departments associated with iEHR have been widely publicized. The Departments 

must balance the need to conduct proper planning for the overall effort with a 

strong desire to field new systems and applications as rapidly as possible. 

Effective governance has been established and put in place to assist the DOD/VA 

Interagency Program Office (IPO) in navigating Department-specific processes for 

acquiring IT solutions to ensure iEHR does not incur unnecessary delays. Given the 

need to merge two acquisition life cycles, the Departments have acknowledged the 

need to optimally align their processes to ensure agile and cost efficient delivery of 

capabilities to the clinical community. The iEHR is subject to the programmatic requirements of both the DOD Business Capability Lifecycle (BCL) and the VA Program Management Accountability System (PMAS). The IPO, DOD, and VA identified areas where process differences may exist, and are collaboratively engaging in 

efforts to ensure that any impediment that may arise is resolved in an efficient 

manner. The IPO leveraged BCL and PMAS to create a Capability Development 

Life Cycle Framework which captures the required documentation and milestone decisions for each phase, to include funding and investment decisions. 

The IPO has appropriately placed its initial focus on putting critical iEHR infrastructure and services in place. The iEHR requires significant work to create a technical framework in which clinical capabilities can be incrementally incorporated. 

Key steps have been taken toward achieving the infrastructure upon which the 

iEHR will be built and a master schedule is in place to guide iEHR progress: A 

Service Oriented Architecture (SOA) and Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) contract that 

has been let and those programs are meeting their milestones. Use of SOA reduces 

dependence on proprietary technologies and enables the Departments to avoid being 

‘‘locked-in’’ to a specific vendor for a long term, which would hamper ongoing competition and stifle innovation. 

Ultimately, the iEHR will unify the two Departments’ EHR systems into a common system that will ensure that DOD and VA health facilities have Service members’ and Veterans’ health information available throughout their lifetime. We anticipate joint use of the iEHR will help contain healthcare costs and provide higher 

value based healthcare delivery systems. By implementing a single, common health 

record for DOD and VA medical facilities, the iEHR will ensure that information 

about injuries and illnesses incurred during military service remain available for 

health and benefits purposes throughout a person’s lifetime, supporting patient safety and continuity of care and facilitating access to and delivery of benefits. Seamless 

information sharing is expected to support the expeditious processing of disability 

claims in the future. Further, the iEHR will support the objectives of the HIPAA 

Privacy and Security Rules to ensure that when protected health information (PHI) 

is collected, maintained, used, disclosed or transmitted, reasonable and appropriate 

administrative, physical and technical safeguards have been implemented to ensure 

integrity, availability and confidentiality. 

The initial iEHR capabilities, laboratory and immunizations, will be delivered to 

two sites (San Antonio, Texas and Hampton Roads, Virginia) by the end of 2014. 

The capabilities of the iEHR will be increased incrementally through the end of 

2017. [See page 15.] 
84 

RESPONSE TO QUESTION SUBMITTED BY MR. MCKEON 

Secretary PANETTA. The President’s budget makes the necessary budget constrictions to avoid devastating the Department through sequestration. If sequestration 

becomes an inevitability, the Department will evaluate all options available to comply with the law. [See page 14.] 
QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY MEMBERS POST HEARING 

JULY 25, 2012 

(87) 

QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY MR. LANGEVIN 

Mr. LANGEVIN. Both DOD and the VA receive funding for spinal cord injury treatment, research, and education—the VA through the Office of Research and Development, and the DOD specifically through the Congressionally Directed Medical Research Program. 

While the programs share a common goal, there are important differences. To 

what extent are spinal cord injury research efforts coordinated and shared across 

Departments? 

Secretary PANETTA. Spinal cord injury (SCI) research efforts are coordinated and 

shared across the Departments of Defense and Veterans Affairs at several levels. 

First, DOD and VA jointly sponsor research portfolio reviews and analyses (R&A) 

of major research efforts in Traumatic Brain Injury and Psychological Health; Clinical, Rehabilitative, and Regenerative Medicine; Combat Casualty Care; Military 

Operational Medicine; Military Infectious Diseases; and Health Information Technology and Medical Training. SCI research is covered in the Traumatic Brain Injury 

and Psychological Health, and Clinical, Rehabilitative, and Regenerative Medicine 

R&As. Through this review, research gaps are identified for future research investment and collaborative DOD/VA research opportunities. 

Second, VA participates in the CDMRP research planning efforts. Specifically, VA 

has co-chaired the SCI Research Program Integration Panel for the past two years. 

Other Panel members are from the VA the military Services (Army, Navy, and Air 

Force), the National Institutes of Health (NIH), and academic institutions, the Department of Education’s National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research, and consumer advocacy organizations (Paralyzed Veterans Association, 

United Spinal Association). The SCI panel provides strategic direction, screens preproposals, recommends proposals for funding, identifies research gaps and sets the 

vision for the coming year. 

Mr. LANGEVIN. Secretary Panetta, in today’s tepid economy, the DOD cannot 

downsize our forces without ensuring we provide mechanisms and programs for the 

service members to utilize before, during and after their transition from the military. In your words, what is the single most important role the DOD can play to 

assist these warriors in transition? 

Secretary PANETTA. The Department’s most important role is to prepare our Service members to become successful civilian citizens in their communities. We do this 

through a re-designed transition assistance program that focuses on providing all 

Service members with the appropriate tools needed to succeed. These tools include 

a crosswalk between military service and civilian experience; financial planning 

seminar; information about Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) benefits, and the 

Department of Labor employment workshop. The transition assistance program provides a transitioning Service member with a tangible product such as a budget, resume, listing of civilian careers that match military service experience and the practical application of how to apply for education benefits, home loans, disability (benefits, as appropriate) and experience in interviewing and searching for jobs. Using 

these tools along with the support from our interagency partners will result in the 

smooth transition from Service member to civilian. 

Mr. LANGEVIN. Both DOD and the VA receive funding for spinal cord injury treatment, research, and education—the VA through the Office of Research and Development, and the DOD specifically through the Congressionally Directed Medical Research Program. 

While the programs share a common goal, there are important differences. To 

what extent are spinal cord injury research efforts coordinated and shared across 

Departments? 

Secretary SHINSEKI. [The information referred to was not available at the time of 

printing.] 

Mr. LANGEVIN. The suicide rate for both service members and veterans is rising 

at an alarming rate, what is the VA doing to address this tragic rise today and what 

are your plans to address this trend in the future? 

Secretary SHINSEKI. [The information referred to was not available at the time of 

printing.] 
88 

QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY MR. COOPER 

Mr. COOPER. Has VA measured how effective the VA National PTSD Center’s numerous webinars and training sessions are for promoting among providers safer 

drug treatments for veterans experience PTSD? How many providers use those 

webinars and training sessions? Is this a number of providers that is satisfactory 

to VA and DOD? Has VA and DOD seen a change yet in PTSD treatment plans 

following these webinars and trainings? Are DOD and VA prepared to measure how 

effective the sessions are? 

Secretary PANETTA. The Under Secretary for Health of the Department of Veterans Affairs and the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Health Affairs signed a formal Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) in March 2012 to facilitate collaboration, coordination, and evaluation of training courses and programs in both Departments. DOD encourages providers to utilize all government resources when meeting 

continuing education requirements for medical professionals. 

Although DOD has not specified a target number of providers to participate in VA 

webinars, the new MOU can be used to further develop methods to increase DOD 

and VA webinar participation as well as efforts to develop a formalized method to 

assess the impact on provider practice. 

DOD has also partnered with VA via the Integrated Mental Health Strategy 

(IMHS) to improve collaboration related to provider training and webinars. In addition, DOD has begun to develop processes to measure effectiveness and changes in 

PH treatment outcomes after best practice implementation across the Military 

Health System. 

Mr. COOPER. A July 13, 2012, IOM study noted that PTSD screening, treatment, 

and rehabilitation services should be done ‘‘in different populations of active-duty 

personnel and veterans.’’ Does VA and DOD know of PTSD studies performed on 

active-duty service men and women, and/or military veterans? How numerous and 

how comprehensive have those studies been? That recent IOM study goes on to recommend that ‘‘the DOD and the VA should coordinate, evaluate, and review these 

[active-duty personnel and veteran study] efforts continually and routinely and 

should disseminate the findings widely.’’ How is the VA and DOD disseminating 

treatment findings now? How can they disseminate best practice treatment findings 

now? Would the EHR or drug formulary be helpful in doing this? Is there any incentive in place for VA and DOD providers to share, consult with, and use best practices found in other VA facilities? 

Secretary PANETTA. There have been over 1,500 studies related to Active Duty 

military with PTSD, and 3,000 studies related to veterans with PTSD, completed 

since 1980. DOD has allocated significant resources dedicated to fund ongoing comprehensive PTSD research focused on the effectiveness of prevention, screening, 

treatment, and rehabilitation programs for Service members. PTSD research is also 

in progress through multiple military research institutions, to include the Armed 

Forces Health Surveillance Center, the Army Medical and Materiel Research Command, the Walter Reed Army Institute of Medicine, the Deployment Health Clinical 

Center, the Center for the Study of Traumatic Stress, and the Naval Health Research Center. These entities share their findings through annual reports posted on 

websites, publications in scientific journals, presentations at professional conferences, and various public forums. The VA/DOD Integrated Mental Health Strategy (IMHS) has specific task groups working to develop processes to rapidly translate research and move innovative programs into practice. 

DOD findings are translated into clinical practice via formal and informal PTSD 

training programs as well as clinical practice guidelines, recommendations, and support tools. For example, the Center for Deployment Psychology (CDP) is a DOD resource that trains mental health providers in evidence-based psychotherapies for 

PTSD. To date, CDP has trained approximately 6,700 mental health providers to 

deliver evidence-based psychotherapies for PTSD. There are also provider on-line 

training courses that are hosted through DOD, such as the Military Health System 

Learning Portal and the Center for Deployment Psychology. The Army Medical 

Command’s Office of Quality Management provides tools to assist providers to follow 

the VA DOD Clinical Practice Guideline for Management of Post-traumatic Stress. 

DOD’s National Center for Telehealth and Technology (T2), a Component Center 

of the Defense Center of Excellence for Psychological Health and Traumatic Brain 

Injury (DCoE), has developed products to inform providers, Service members, and 

their families about evidence-based practices for the treatment of PTSD, to include 

smart phone applications that assist patients and providers to follow evidence-based 

practices. T2 also designed innovative, state-of-the-art virtual delivery systems to increase the availability of evidence-based PTSD treatment. Further, DOD has multiple postgraduate education, internship, and fellowship behavioral health training 
89 

programs for new accessions that require students to be trained in evidence-based 

Psychological Health (PH) practices. 

The electronic health record (EHR) will continue to be an important dissemination 

tool for PH treatment best practices, and DOD is positioned to further leverage the 

EHR to develop and implement standard PH practice guidelines, to include PTSD 

guidelines. For example, DOD currently uses an application in the EHR to inform 

primary care providers about medication best practices related to PTSD; the application has been used to treat over 30,000 patients. DOD recognizes that pharmacists in the Military Health System can help further improve psychiatric medication standard of care, and created a policy memorandum from February 22, 2012 

entitled ‘‘Guidance for Providers Prescribing Atypical Antipsychotic Medication.’’ 

This memorandum suggests that Military Treatment Commanders work with their 

Pharmacy and Therapeutics Committee to monitor providers and their compliance 

with best practices related to use of medication for PTSD treatment. 

DOD ensures evidence-based and best practice treatment skills are integrated 

into care as part of the health care appraisal system, including a peer review process to ensure the highest standard of care is met. In addition, hospitals are motivated to use best practices that decrease care costs and maximize treatment outcomes through various means. 

Mr. COOPER. Do DOD and VA plan to create ‘‘an evidence base to guide the integration of treatment for comorbidities with treatment for PTSD?’’ How do you plan 

to encourage that kind of research? 

Secretary PANETTA. DOD has already provided an evidence-based guide that helps 

providers manage co-occurring conditions, the ‘‘Co-occurring Conditions Toolkit: 

Mild Traumatic Brain Injury and Psychological Health.’’ This toolkit, based on scientific evidence, was developed to help primary care providers better assess and 

manage patients with psychological health and TBI conditions. In formulating these 

guides, knowledge gaps were identified to inform future research. In addition, DOD 

has funded over 30 studies related to treatment of PTSD and comorbid diagnoses 

(TBI, sleep disorders, alcohol and substance use disorders, anxiety, depression, and 

suicide). The results from these studies will further our knowledge in improving diagnosis and treatment of these conditions. 

In addition, DOD partners with other research institutes. For example, STRONG 

STAR (The South Texas Research Organizational Network Guiding Trauma and Resilience) is a multidisciplinary, multi-institutional research consortium funded by 

the DOD’s Psychological Health and TBI Research Program. Their research includes 

the investigation of PTSD treatment with co-occurring disorders that include chronic 

pain, alcohol use, and insomnia. 

DOD creates research opportunities annually in the areas of traumatic brain injury and psychological health through the release of Program Announcements that 

describe the program of interest and the research need, the purpose and objectives, 

submission information, application review procedures, award administrative information, agency contacts, and time lines for submission and reviews. Program Announcements are posted on grants.gov for open and fair competition and submissions are received electronically. 

Mr. COOPER. Have DOD and VA identified PTSD treatment practices that are 

usually ineffective in active-duty service men and women and veterans? 

Secretary PANETTA. DOD and VA published the VA DOD Clinical Practice Guideline for the Management of Post-Traumatic Stress in 2010. This guideline is based 

on thorough reviews of scientifically published evidence of Posttraumatic Stress Disorder treatments, including psychotherapy, medication, and complementary and alternative medicine interventions. This guideline includes an extensive discussion 

about treatments that have been found to be effective, found to be ineffective, have 

yet to be established as either effective or ineffective, or have found to be potentially 

harmful. A copy of the guideline is available at: 

http://www.healthquality.va.gov/Post_Traumatic_Stress_Disorder_PTSD.asp 

Mr. COOPER. Approximately what percentage of the experts who put together the 

VA/DOD Clinical Practice Guideline for Management of Post-Traumatic Stress have 

first-hand experience with treating veterans or active-duty personnel with prescription drugs? How much are those guidelines based on studies done in active-duty 

personnel and veterans? 

Secretary PANETTA. Twenty one of the thirty-two DOD and VHA members of the 

Working Group for the 2010 revision of the VA/DOD Clinical Practice Guideline for 

the Management of Post-Traumatic have first-hand experience as prescribers. All of 

the members have experience treating veterans and active-duty personnel. A full list 

of members of this working group is found on page 10 of the Guideline (see below 

footnote for link). 
90 

The Guidelines were based on literature and empirical findings specific to—and 

most relevant to—treatment of active duty Service members and veterans. The Introduction section of the Guideline provides an excellent overview of the criteria and 

standards used in the review of literature. 

Mr. COOPER. A July 13, 2012, Institute of Medicine study recommended that ‘‘to 

study the efficacy of treatment and to move toward measurement-based PTSD care 

in the DOD and the VA, assessment data should be collected before, during, and 

after treatment and should be entered into patients’ medical records. This information should be made accessible to researchers with appropriate safeguards to ensure 

patient confidentiality.’’ How quickly can the VA and DOD put this recommendation 

into practice? What are the barriers to beginning to do this and how substantial are 

those barriers if they exist? 

Secretary PANETTA. Assessment data is already collected before, during, and after 

treatment and entered into patients’ medical records. The administration of standardized and validated PTSD clinical screening tools that are often used in research 

(e.g., the PTSD Checklist) is endorsed by the DOD for use when a Service member 

might benefit from further clinical evaluation or in monitoring treatment response. 

No standardized screening or assessment tool is available that can replace a comprehensive clinical interview that assesses the full spectrum of both PTSD and nonPTSD symptoms within broader social and occupational contexts. The DOD standard of care is that all data, inclusive of clinical assessment measures, becomes a 

part of the Service member’s healthcare record. 

There are no inherent barriers to access of these records for research. Access to 

the use of TRICARE Management Activity (TMA) owned or managed data is subject 

to patient protections, privacy safeguards, and other research protocols mandated by 

law and implemented by institutional review boards and obtained through a formal 

agreement with TMA for sharing and use of data elements. The TMA Privacy and 

Civil Liberties Office (TMA Privacy Office) manages the data sharing agreement 

program and research protection program. 

The Department of Defense (DOD), Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense 

(Health Affairs) (OASD[HA]) and the TRICARE Management Activity (TMA) support and encourage research, including human subject research. The Department of 

Defense (DOD) invests in Psychological Health (PH) research and the largest portion of the PH portfolio is directed toward PTSD. Out of the 225 current research 

projects in the PH portfolio, 162 focus on PTSD including studies specific to examining efficacy of treatment for PTSD and studies that focus on evidence-based longterm recovery protocols to decrease recurrence of PTSD symptoms. 

Recently, the Department in collaboration with the VA announced the creation of 

two research consortia one of which is focused on PTSD. The Consortium to Alleviate PTSD (CAP) Award will consist of a Coordinating Center and multiple Study 

Sites, and will be supported through this DOD/VA collaborative research effort. The 

primary purpose of the collaborative DOD/VA Consortium will be to improve the 

health and well-being of Service Members (Active Duty, National Guard, and Reservist) and Veterans, with the most effective diagnostics, prognostics, novel treatments, and rehabilitative strategies to treat acute PTSD and to prevent chronic 

PTSD. Key priorities of this Consortium are elucidation of factors that influence the 

different trajectories (onset/progression/duration) of PTSD and associated chronic 

mental and physical sequelae (including depression, anger/aggression, and substance use/abuse, etc.) and identification of measures for determining who is likely 

to go on to develop chronic PTSD. The Consortium will therefore work to improve 

prognostics, advance treatments, and mitigate negative long-term consequences associated with traumatic exposure. 

Mr. COOPER. In general, how does VA and DOD get evidence based medical information out to be used systematically throughout the systems? Is there a good example of a best practice being widely disseminated and used? 

Secretary PANETTA. There are many points for wide dissemination of evidencebased medical information. A few are listed below: 

• The DOD has central website for wellness resources for the military community 

at http://www.afterdeployment.org/. An adjunct program to this website has just 

been opened as a centralized information mart for providers at http:// 

www.afterdeployment.org/providers/home. It includes continuing education materials, mobile applications, patient educational resources, libraries, briefings 

and quick links to the DOD/VA Clinical Practice guidelines. 

• The DOD/VA Clinical Practice Guidelines are available at http://www. 

healthquality.va.gov/index.asp. 

• PDHealth.mil at http://www.pdhealth.mil/main.asp provides a gateway to information on deployment health and healthcare for healthcare providers, service 

members, veterans, and families. It was designed to assist clinicians in the de-
91 

livery of post-deployment healthcare by fostering a partnership between service 

members, veterans, families, and healthcare providers. • Up-to-date and current information pertaining to research and best practices is 

available through the Combat & Operational Stress Research Quarterly published by the Navy (www.nccosc.navy.mil or direct link @ http://bit.ly/wnadBm) 

and the Deployment Health Clinical Center newsletter dispatched daily by 

email. • The Department of Defense also disseminates evidence based information pertaining to practice, responsibilities, and requirements through the publication 

of Directives, Instructions and Guidance Memorandums. 

The clinical practice guideline titled ‘‘Management of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder and Acute Stress Reaction (2010)’’ posted on the DOD/VA Clinical Practice 

Guidelines home page is an excellent example of a best practice that is widely disseminated and used. 

Mr. COOPER. Has evidence based psychotherapy been evaluated in active-duty 

service men and women with PTSD? 

Secretary PANETTA. There are many points for wide dissemination of evidencebased medical information. A few are listed below: • The DOD has central website for wellness resources for the military community 

at http://www.afterdeployment.org/. An adjunct program to this website has just 

been opened as a centralized information mart for providers at http:// 

www.afterdeployment.org/providers/home. It includes continuing education materials, mobile applications, patient educational resources, libraries, briefings 

and quick links to the DOD/VA Clinical Practice guidelines. • The DOD/VA Clinical Practice Guidelines are available at http://www. 

healthquality.va.gov/index.asp. • PDHealth.mil at http://www.pdhealth.mil/main.asp provides a gateway to information on deployment health and healthcare for healthcare providers, service 

members, veterans, and families. It was designed to assist clinicians in the delivery of post-deployment healthcare by fostering a partnership between service 

members, veterans, families, and healthcare providers. • Up-to-date and current information pertaining to research and best practices is 

available through the Combat & Operational Stress Research Quarterly published by the Navy (www.nccosc.navy.mil or direct link @ http://bit.ly/wnadBm) 

and the Deployment Health Clinical Center newsletter dispatched daily by 

email. • The Department of Defense also disseminates evidence based information pertaining to practice, responsibilities, and requirements through the publication 

of Directives, Instructions and Guidance Memorandums. 

The clinical practice guideline titled ‘‘Management of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder and Acute Stress Reaction (2010)’’ posted on the DOD/VA Clinical Practice 

Guidelines home page is an excellent example of a best practice that is widely disseminated and used. 

Mr. COOPER. Has VA measured how effective the VA National PTSD Center’s numerous webinars and training sessions are for promoting safer drug treatments for 

veterans experience PTSD? How many providers use those webinars and training 

sessions? Is this a number of providers that is satisfactory to VA and DOD? Has 

VA and DOD seen yet a change in treatments following these webinars and 

trainings? Are they prepared to measure how effective the sessions are? 

Secretary SHINSEKI. [The information referred to was not available at the time of 

printing.] 

Mr. COOPER. A July 13, 2012, IOM study noted that PTSD screening, treatment, 

and rehabilitation services should be done ‘‘in different populations of active-duty 

personnel and veterans.’’ Does VA and DOD know of PTSD studies performed on 

active-duty service men and women, and/or military veterans? How numerous and 

how comprehensive have those studies been? That recent IOM study goes on to recommend that ‘‘the DOD and the VA should coordinate, evaluate, and review these 

[active-duty personnel and veteran study] efforts continually and routinely and 

should disseminate the findings widely.’’ How is the VA and DOD disseminating 

treatment findings now? How can they disseminate best practice treatment findings 

now? Would the EHR or drug formulary be helpful in doing this? Is there any incentive in place for VA and DOD providers to share, consult with, and use best practices found in other VA facilities? 

Secretary SHINSEKI. [The information referred to was not available at the time of 

printing.] 

Mr. COOPER. Do DOD and VA plan to create ‘‘an evidence base to guide the integration of treatment for comorbidities with treatment for PTSD?’’ How do you plan 

to encourage that kind of research? 
92 

Secretary SHINSEKI. [The information referred to was not available at the time of 

printing.] 

Mr. COOPER. Have DOD and VA identified PTSD treatment practices that are 

usually ineffective in active-duty service men and women and veterans? 

Secretary SHINSEKI. [The information referred to was not available at the time of 

printing.] 

Mr. COOPER. Approximately what percentage of the experts who put together the 

VA/DOD Clinical Practice Guideline for Management of Post-Traumatic Stress have 

first-hand experience with treating veterans or active-duty personnel with prescription drugs? How much are those guidelines based on studies done in active-duty 

personnel and veterans? 

Secretary SHINSEKI. [The information referred to was not available at the time of 

printing.] 

Mr. COOPER. As Secretary Shinseki mentioned, the VA has ‘‘a pretty comprehensive record of who to treat [for PTSD, TBI, substance abuse, sexual assaults] and 

then [the VA] sets about treating them.’’ If this is the case, is how these veterans 

are treated for PTSD, tracked at all? Does the VA know for a fact which treatments 

are given most frequently to veterans with PTSD and in what combination? Do 

these treatments match up with what evidence there is for the most effective way 

to treat these veterans? Has either the VA or DOD studied patterns in treatment 

of PTSD in active-duty personnel and veterans? 

Secretary SHINSEKI. [The information referred to was not available at the time of 

printing.] 

Mr. COOPER. A July 13, 2012, Institute of Medicine study recommended that ‘‘to 

study the efficacy of treatment and to move toward measurement-based PTSD care 

in the DOD and the VA, assessment data should be collected before, during, and 

after treatment and should be entered into patients’ medical records. This information should be made accessible to researchers with appropriate safeguards to ensure 

patient confidentiality.’’ How quickly can the VA and DOD put this recommendation 

into practice? What are the barriers to beginning to do this and how substantial are 

those barriers if they exist? 

Secretary SHINSEKI. [The information referred to was not available at the time of 

printing.] 

Mr. COOPER. In general, how does VA and DOD get evidence based medical information out to be used systematically throughout the systems? Is there a good example of a best practice being widely disseminated and used? 

Secretary SHINSEKI. [The information referred to was not available at the time of 

printing.] 

QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY MS. BORDALLO 

Ms. BORDALLO. If we are to create a joint medical electronic records system, where 

all services including the VA will be using it at the same time, what will be different 

about this system that will prevent the system from running slow during peak 

hours or crashing in the middle of a heavy patient appointment schedule? 

Secretary PANETTA. Systems Engineering and Testing will be conducted throughout the development and deployment of the integrated Electronic Health Record 

(iEHR) to ensure the system is stable and reliable in production environments. Network capacity planning will be performed and performance measures will be validated. The Development and Test Center/Environment (DTC/DTE), which consists 

of a set of systems, software, network, and test tools will be utilized throughout the 

system life cycle for continuous test and evaluation of system performance. 

Ms. BORDALLO. Aside from the efficiencies a joint electronic medical record system 

will create, could you share some of the other benefits this system will produce as 

a byproduct? 

Secretary PANETTA. The ultimate benefit the integrated Electronic Health Record 

(iEHR) will be improved quality of healthcare for our Service members and Veterans. The iEHR’s close coupling with the VLER Health information exchange initiatives will accelerate the ability for DOD and VA healthcare providers to exchange 

information with other federal and private industry partners about patients they 

collectively care for. 

• Patient-Centered Care: Patients will have a comprehensive and transportable 

medical profile that will support seamless transition of care between DOD and 

VA treatment facilities—as well as private providers. The iEHR will promote 

and facilitate an empowered patient, healthcare staff, and patient-centric approach, that will support healthcare information technology (HIT) systems that 

foster the delivery of effective, efficient, safe, and quality patient care. 
93 

• Precision of Care: Enhanced Clinical Decision Support (CDS) tools enabled by 

the iEHR will increase the precision of care delivered/received by providing access to comprehensive patient data and increased information exchange capabilities among providers that would otherwise not be available. • More Time with Patients: Healthcare providers will be able to spend more time 

with their patients instead of searching for their data and signing on to multiple systems. 

• Personal Health Records: Promoting partnership between healthcare team 

members and patients through an empowered patient care model for delivery 

of high quality medical care that engages patients in the healthcare process. 

• Improve Quality of Care per Dollar Spent: Improving clinical outcomes while 

creating cost efficiencies in both workforce and IT life cycle costs. 

• Population Health: Access to quality population health data and analytic tools 

will result in cost efficiencies and improved preventative healthcare. For example, insight into the number of diabetics who have not had their H1Cs done 

could inform a patient outreach program that have been shown to result in a 

reduction in amputations. 

• Innovation: Promote innovations in technology and product research that support the delivery of quality healthcare and improved patient outcomes. 

• Maturity of International HIT Standards: As the largest healthcare network in 

the world encouraging open solutions, the iEHR will be a driving force in the 

maturation of HIT standards improving the quality and landscape of HIT solutions available in the market. 

• Interagency Collaboration Center of Excellence: The scale and scope of this effort provides the opportunity set the standard and influence policy for large 

scale interagency collaboration activities moving forward. 

Ms. BORDALLO. What efforts are underway to improve the electronic delivery of 

information from DOD to VA and vice versa to improve benefits and health care delivery to service members and veterans? Additionally, can either witness discuss 

what is being done to develop a joint electronic medical records system. It’s my understanding that each service including the VA currently operates a separate system 

and there is very little cross service functionality between any of the systems so how 

will you achieve cross-functionality and how do we improve the slow processing of 

the systems currently in place? 

Secretary SHINSEKI. [The information referred to was not available at the time of 

printing.] 

Ms. BORDALLO. If we are to create a joint medical electronic records system, where 

all services including the VA will be using it at the same time, what will be different 

about this system that will prevent the system from running slow during peak 

hours or crashing in the middle of a heavy patient appointment schedule? 

Secretary SHINSEKI. [The information referred to was not available at the time of 

printing.] 

Ms. BORDALLO. Aside from the efficiencies a joint electronic medical record system 

will create, could you share some of the other benefits this system will produce as 

a byproduct? 

Secretary SHINSEKI. [The information referred to was not available at the time of 

printing.] 

QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY MR. FRANKS 

Mr. FRANKS. Reports show that suicide rates among veterans, especially combat 

veterans, have increased over the past several years. Furthermore, studies have 

shown a correlation between people of faith and lower rates of suicide. Therefore, 

I’m concerned by reports indicating that the military is censoring religious references and symbols beyond Constitutional requirements. How is religion being incorporated into suicide prevention, and does the military’s extra-Constitutional censorship of religion support your departments’ suicide prevention efforts? 

Secretary PANETTA. Suicide and the prevention thereof is one of the most vexing 

and important challenges the Department faces and we are committed to using 

every means available to assist our Service members and their families. Progress 

on this crucial issue will require a multi-functional and multi-faceted approach and 

our Chaplains fulfill a vital role in lending assistance to commanders, troops, and 

families in need. The Chaplaincies of the Military Departments are established to 

advise and assist commanders, troops, and families in the free exercise of religion 

in the context of military service as guaranteed by the Constitution. Our Chaplains 

serve a religiously diverse population and provide comprehensive religious support 

to all who seek it. 
94 

The Department does not censure religious support. Indeed, all of the Military Departments have, over the course of the last several years, placed increased emphasis 

upon holistic efforts aimed at improving every aspect of fitness. This emphasis with 

a view toward the total comprehensive fitness of the force recognizes the vital component faith serves in the lives of many of our military families. 

Mr. FRANKS. Reports show that suicide rates among veterans, especially combat 

veterans, have increased over the past several years. Furthermore, studies have 

shown a correlation between people of faith and lower rates of suicide. Therefore, 

I’m concerned by reports indicating that the military is censoring religious references and symbols beyond Constitutional requirements. How is religion being incorporated into suicide prevention, and does the military’s extra-Constitutional censorship of religion support your departments’ suicide prevention efforts? 

Secretary SHINSEKI. [The information referred to was not available at the time of 

printing.] 

QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY MR. LOEBSACK 

Mr. LOEBSACK. What specific steps are the Department of Defense and the Department of Veterans Affairs taking to coordinate transition assistance and benefits 

for members of the National Guard and Reserve transitioning from Active Duty 

service back to civilian jobs and civilian life? How are the Departments coordinating 

to ensure members of the Reserve Component are aware of the DOD and VA benefits available to them? 

Secretary PANETTA. In order to coordinate transition assistance and benefits for 

members of National Guard and Reserve transitioning from active duty to civilian 

life, DOD has worked with thje Department of Veterans Affairs, Department of 

Homeland Security, Department of Education and Office of Personnel Management 

over the last year to redesign the Transition Assistance Program (includes eligible 

National Guard and Reserve Service members). 

All eligible National Guard and Reserve Service members will receive transition 

assistance, which includes Pre-separation Counseling and VA Benefits Briefing. 

They will also be afforded the opportunity to register for their eBenefits account as 

well as the opportunity to either sign up for VA benefits to which they may be entitled and/or schedule a one-on-one appointment with a VA representative to submit 

applications for benefits. 

In addition, the VOW to Hire Heroes Act requires all eligible National Guard and 

Reserve members to participate in the re-designed Department of Labor Employment Workshop (except those with exemptions). 

Finally, the Transition GPS (Goals, Plans, Success) includes a CORE Curriculum 

which consists of the following modules and topics: Transition Overview, Considerations for Families, Special Issue, Value of a Mentor, Military Occupational Code 

(MOC) Crosswalk, and a Financial Management Seminar. The Transition GPS also 

includes three tracks (Education, Career Technical Training, and Entrepreneurship) 

which are in addition to the CORE curriculum. The track they select is based on 

their personal needs and goals. 

Furthermore, the DOD’s Yellow Ribbon Reintegration Program (YRRP) provides 

National Guard and Reserve Service members and their families with critical support throughout the entire deployment cycle (pre- during and post-), easing transitions as Service members move between their military and civilian roles. Post-deployment activities are specially focused on reintegration into the family, community 

and workforce, providing information and resources through local and state agencies, military transition assistance, and other military-related non-profit organizations. On-site assistance with enrollment and other benefits is included in all YRRP 

activities, with follow-up capabilities offered for those Service members with more 

long-term needs. 

Mr. LOEBSACK. What specific steps are the Department of Defense and the Department of Veterans Affairs taking to identify service members transitioning to civilian life who require Post Traumatic Stress, Traumatic Brain Injury, or mental 

health care? How are the Departments ensuring that these service members do not 

fall through the cracks as they transition between the DOD and VA health systems? 

What steps are being taken to ensure that transitioning service members and their 

families are aware of the suicide prevention resources available to them? 

Secretary PANETTA. For those Service members transitioning to civilian life who 

require Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD), Traumatic Brain Injury (TBI), or 

mental health care for other identified mental health conditions, the DOD ensures 

proper treatment and successful transition to civilian life through care coordination 

and transition assistance services through the following policies and practices: 
95 

• The Military Departments have engineered clinical case management services 

and practices for aspects of care within the Military Health System (MHS), particularly as it relates to the care of the wounded, ill or injured (WII) Service 

members. Directive-Type Memorandum (DTM) 08–033, ‘‘Interim Guidance for 

Clinical Case Management for the Wounded, Ill, and Injured Service Member 

in the Military Health System’’ was initially published in 2009 and updated in 

2012. This guidance delineates the requirements for the implementation of clinical case management in the MHS and established MHS medical and clinical 

policies and procedures for WII care. • In 2011, DOD published policy, ‘‘Continuity of Behavioral Health Care for 

Transferring and Transitioning Service Members,’’ which prescribes guidelines 

that ensure continuity of care for Service members transferring to a new duty 

station or transitioning out of the Service. This policy directs the Military Services to develop policies for transfer of behavioral health care from military to 

civilian providers, including VA providers. When a separating Service member 

provides consent for sharing information with a follow-on behavioral health provider, DOD shares all relevant clinical information. This includes diagnoses, 

medications, treatment history including suicide risk, test results, treatment 

plans and prognosis. Service members’ treatment record information is available to VA providers via the Bidirectional Health Information Exchange. • DOD’s inTransition program provides a telephonic coach for transitioning Service members with behavioral health issues, whether that is in the VA health 

care system, the Military Health System, TRICARE, or the community. The 

inTransition program has opened thousands of coaching cases since its inception 

in February 2010. The acceptance rate for service members referred to the program since inception exceeds 95%. • The VA Liaison for Healthcare, a social worker or nurse strategically placed at 

an MTF with recovering service members returning from Afghanistan, is another asset. 33 Liaisons for Healthcare are stationed at 18 MTFs, helping transition ill and injured Service members from DOD to the VA system of care. 

Thousands of health care transitions have been coordinated. 

For individuals who have suffered a traumatic brain injury: 

• The Defense Veterans Brain Injury Center (DVBIC) Regional Care Coordinator 

(RCC) program provides a nationwide care coordination network for Service 

members with TBI. This program facilitates transition from the DOD to VA 

care by working with VA case management teams. • For Service members with more severe brain injuries, a DOD–VA Polytrauma 

Telehealth Network connects the current DOD treating team with the accepting 

treating team in the VA. This facilitates transfer planning, affords families an 

opportunity to meet care teams and ensures that medical records are transferred between facilities. 

• DOD and VA work together on a Congressionally-mandated five year pilot program which assesses the effectiveness of providing assisted living services to 

Service members and Veterans with TBI who require ongoing care in the community. VA collaborated with the DVBIC on a family caregiver panel to develop 

a uniform training curriculum for family members in providing care and assistance. 

TRICARE Regional Offices have VA Liaisons who serve as intermediaries between 

VA facilities and the TRICARE regional contractors. VA Liaisons actively assist 

with authorizations and claims, and TRICARE contractors hold monthly calls with 

the VA’s Medical Sharing Office to review the cases of active duty Service members 

who are receiving joint VA/DOD care. 

At each point of contact in these chain of transition events and post-active duty 

follow-on (e.g., the periodic health assessments, post-deployment screening, and yellow ribbon events), assessment for the potential for suicide occurs and information 

regarding suicide prevention and other helping resources are made available. In addition, Service and VA Mental Health and suicide prevention coordinators, suicide 

hotlines (VA and DOD), we have Military OneSource are available resources. 

The DOD–VA Integrated Mental Health Strategy includes actions specifically focused on transition and continuity of behavioral health care. DOD will continue to 

work with VA in implementation of our policies regarding transition and continuity 

of behavioral health and TBI care. We will ensure our providers address transition 

of behavioral health care for wounded warriors to VA and other civilian providers, 

and will continue to manage the important issues of suicide risk, occupational impairment, and PTSD. 

Mr. LOEBSACK. I have held multiple veterans forums across my District and have 

heard time and again from Iowa veterans that they are deeply frustrated by the 

time it takes to process their disability claims. The Integrated Disability System 
96 

was meant to integrate the DOD and VA disability evaluation processes. What steps 

are being taken to improve IDES? Do additional steps need to be taken to standardize and streamline the disability evaluation process and improve DOD and VA 

collaboration? 

Secretary PANETTA. The Departments collaborate closely on efforts to jointly refine and improve the IDES. In FY 2012, major efforts in this area included: • The Military Departments significantly increased IDES staff levels in FY2012. 

DOD added authorizations for over 1,500 case managers, administrative assistants, and lawyers over the next four fiscal years to improve case processing 

timeliness and customer service. Additionally, each of the Services is increasing 

efforts to hire and retain physicians, particularly behavioral or mental health 

professionals. We expect to see process improvements during FY2013. 

• In April 2012, the Secretary of Defense and Secretary of Veterans Affairs directed their Departments to implement a paperless, searchable claims file for 

the Integrated Disability Evaluation System (IDES). The Departments created 

an electronic case file transfer capability for IDES cases as an interim step towards that objective. The Departments initiated a pilot test of that capability 

at 11 locations in September 2012. The Departments will decide whether to 

field the electronic case file transfer capability in January 2013. 

• In June 2012, VA released version 2.0 of the Veterans Tracking Application 

(VTA). This version incorporated operational reports that improved IDES case 

oversight capabilities. Additionally, DOD developed and fielded case tracking 

tools that enable installation-level visibility of case duration and data errors. 

• A DOD IDES Task Force, comprised of senior leaders from the Department, 

conducted an end-to-end business process review of the IDES and, as of October 

2012, is preparing recommendations for additional improvements for the Secretary of Defense. 

Mr. LOEBSACK. What specific steps are the Department of Defense and the Department of Veterans Affairs taking to coordinate transition assistance and benefits 

for members of the National Guard and Reserve transitioning from Active Duty 

service back to civilian jobs and civilian life? How are the Departments coordinating 

to ensure members of the Reserve Component are aware of the DOD and VA benefits available to them? 

Secretary SHINSEKI. [The information referred to was not available at the time of 

printing.] 

Mr. LOEBSACK. What specific steps are the Department of Defense and the Department of Veterans Affairs taking to identify service members transitioning to civilian life who require Post Traumatic Stress, Traumatic Brain Injury, or mental 

health care? How are the Departments ensuring that these service members do not 

fall through the cracks as they transition between the DOD and VA health systems? 

What steps are being taken to ensure that transitioning service members and their 

families are aware of the suicide prevention resources available to them? 

Secretary SHINSEKI. [The information referred to was not available at the time of 

printing.] 

Mr. LOEBSACK. I have held multiple veterans forums across my District and have 

heard time and again from Iowa veterans that they are deeply frustrated by the 

time it takes to process their disability claims. The Integrated Disability System 

was meant to integrate the DOD and VA disability evaluation processes. What steps 

are being taken to improve IDES? Do additional steps need to be taken to standardize and streamline the disability evaluation process and improve DOD and VA 

collaboration? 

Secretary SHINSEKI. [The information referred to was not available at the time of 

printing.] 

QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY MR. KISSELL 

Mr. KISSELL. What is the possibility of getting VA and DOD medical records electronically available for civilian medical venues? How and when might this be implemented? 

Secretary PANETTA. One important goal of the integrated electronic health record 

(iEHR) is to maximize the information exchanged among DOD and VA health providers and private providers via bilateral communications and health information 

sharing. Specifically, the IPO is continuing to develop the Virtual Lifetime Electronic Record (VLER) Health program that enables the exchange of electronic medical data with the private sector. For example, under VLER Health, a private sector 

provider or hospital can request electronic health data from the DOD or VA, and 

the Departments can securely provide that information back to the requesting party. 
97 

This exchange is governed by the Data Use and Reciprocal Support Agreement 

(DURSA) developed by the Office of the National Coordinator (ONC) at Health and 

Human Services (HHS). ONC is also responsible for the development of the infrastructure that supports this exchange. This infrastructure is called the Nation-wide 

Health Information Network (NwHIN), and the DOD and VA have been actively engaged in its development. Through the DOD’s and VA’s participation in the NwHIN, 

the departments will be able to exchange electronic health data in a secure and 

trusted way with private healthcare entities. 

VLER Health capability has been demonstrated at 4 joint DOD/VA sites, and at 

11 other VA sites as part of the VLER Health demonstrations. Recently, the Joint 

Executive Committee (JEC) has approved the further deployment of VLER Health 

at sites that meet criteria that ensures its effective implementation: where there are 

large numbers of beneficiaries using private sector care, where the state Health Information Exchanges (HIEs) are mature, where the private sector has electronic 

medical records, and where the beneficiaries have ‘‘opted-in’’ to the program. These 

exchanges will continue to grow over the life of the iEHR. 

Mr. KISSELL. What is the possibility of getting VA and DOD medical records electronically available for civilian medical venues? How and when might this be implemented? 

Secretary SHINSEKI. [The information referred to was not available at the time of 

printing.] 

QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY MR. GARAMENDI 

Mr. GARAMENDI. Please advise of the contractor that developed and currently 

maintain DOD’s electronic health records system and the contractor that developed 

and currently maintain the VA’s electronic health records system. Are either of 

these contractors developing the Joint Electronic Health Record, iEHR? If not, has 

this attributed to the delay of iEHR? What steps are being taken to ensure a seamless transition between current contractors and new contractor? 

Secretary PANETTA. VistA was developed by the VA clinical community, rather 

than contractors. The Composite Health Care System (CHCS), DOD’s predecessor 

system, was developed using the Veteran Administration’s Decentralized Hospital 

Computer Program (DHCP) as the foundation and modifying modules when possible 

to meet the requirements established by DOD. Additionally, CHCS has a long history and does not have one specific contractor that can be singled out as responsible 

for its development. 

The current contractor support to iEHR was not involved in the support provided 

to DOD and VA legacy electronic health record (EHR) systems; however, this has 

not resulted in a delay. The DOD/VA IPO’s government staff has extensive technical 

knowledge of respective legacy systems and/or reach back to the Departments for 

expertise as needed. 

Mr. GARAMENDI. In your testimony, you stated that the iEHR is expected to be 

fully operational no later than 2017. Considering the immediate need for this system, will additional funding enable you to provide the system sooner? If not, what 

steps can be taken to improve your current schedule? 

Secretary SHINSEKI. [The information referred to was not available at the time of 

printing.] 

QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY MR. SCHILLING 

Mr. SCHILLING. From casework, I’ve heard that veterans who have been treated 

for PTSD have been overwhelmed by doctors and that they have not made things 

better, but worse. In fact in one case a patient, who later committed suicide, was 

over-medicated by multiple doctors who did not check with each other, per his father. Is it common practice to have multiple doctors for one patient with PTSD? Can 

this be fixed by this new system? 

Secretary PANETTA. It is not common practice for one patient to be treated for the 

sole condition of PTSD at the same time by multiple doctors. However, conditions 

that lead to or co-occur with PTSD (e.g. poly-trauma) may involve multiple providers 

and teams of care. The current system implemented by the DOD has many safeguards and risk mitigation strategies in place to prevent this type of incident from 

occurring—especially in regard to the prescription of pharmaceuticals. For example: 

• The Tricare Policy Manual mandates that coordination between various medication providers must be evidenced in the treatment plan. 
98 

• Poly-pharmacy in the use of opiate medications has been reduced in Warrior 

Transition Units, and other clinical settings owing to leadership and case management interventions. • The Army has implemented the Sole Provider Program to help identify patients 

who exhibit drug-seeking behavior by conducting periodic reviews of all prescriptions for controlled substances, identifying suspicious drug usage patterns. • Clinic procedures limit the number of pills dispensed to potentially high-risk patients. 

• Warning flags appear in electronic drug dispensing menus which require physician attention. 

• Military Treatment Facilities (MTFs) have prescription restriction programs, 

and real-time monitoring and reconciliation of prescriptions dispensed through 

MTFs, mail-order, and network pharmacies. 

• The Department of Defense (DOD) PharmacoEconomic Center (PEC) provides 

a single, comprehensive patient drug profile for DOD beneficiaries across the 

Military Health System, allowing monitoring and surveillance of drug contraindications or usage patterns of concern. 

• When a prescription is filled within the U.S. Military Health System, an online 

system, the Pharmacy Data Transaction System, automatically checks the prescription against the patient’s medication history before the drug is dispensed. 

This process includes retail, mail and military treatment facility pharmacies 

and has helped avoid more than 171,000 potentially life-threatening drug interactions. 

• Pharmacists throughout the Military Health System provide consumers with a 

medication information sheet on each new and renewed prescription. DOD evaluates for drug-drug interactions on every prescription prescribed by mail order, 

a retail pharmacy or MTF, ensuring our patients receive medication that is safe 

and medically indicated. 

Mr. SCHILLING. From casework, I’ve heard that veterans who have been treated 

for PTSD have been overwhelmed by doctors and that they have not made things 

better, but worse. In fact in one case a patient, who later committed suicide, was 

over-medicated by multiple doctors who did not check with each other, per his father. Is it common practice to have multiple doctors for one patient with PTSD? Can 

this be fixed by this new system? 

Secretary SHINSEKI. [The information referred to was not available at the time of 

printing.] 

QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY MR. BARBER 

Mr. BARBER. Our armed service members are some of the best trained, most disciplined, and most ambitious men and women in our country. How can the Department of Defense work with our other agencies, including the Department of Labor, 

to better educate employers and departing service members about how military skill 

sets translate to civilian skill sets? How Congress can be more helpful in conveying 

the skills and attribute of our veterans? 

Secretary PANETTA. The Department very much appreciates Congress’ actions to 

improve the employability of our Veterans. Sections 558 and 551 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012 are assisting us in identifying critical 

training gaps and in beginning skills training in sufficient time to facilitate a 

smooth transition to civilian life. Authorities in the recently enacted Veterans Skills 

to Jobs Act, Public Law 112–147 (H.R. 4155) will help with several aspects of 

credentialing and licensing of Service members. These recent Congressional initiatives are essential in the transition of our Service members from Active Duty to civilian life. 

The Department is working very closely with our federal partners to better educate employers about translating military to civilian skills. In May, we established 

the DOD Credentialing and Licensing Task Force led by the Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Readiness to oversee all credentialing and licensing initiatives 

within the Department. Our Federal partners from the Departments of Labor, Veterans Affairs, Education and Transportation are represented on the Task Force and 

are working with us to address the unique challenges faced by Service members as 

they transition to civilian life. The Department is also working with the National 

Council of State Legislators, the American Legion, and several state governments 

to facilitate civilian recognition of military skills. 

Education and outreach by DOD and other Federal agencies are critical to helping 

employers better understand military skills. Meeting with employers on a regular, 

ongoing basis to address specific issues, such as promoting the quality and transfer-
99 

ability of military education, training and experience, is important and may include 

translation of military technical and leadership skills using a nationally recognized 

badging system. Also, educating employers about Service members unique needs in 

regard to domicile/residency requirements, recognizing national certifications or 

other national exams, and deployment experiences and why these are not detriments to hiring Veterans would also be helpful. 

Civilian companies can become more involved in the hiring process by being encouraged to participate in job fairs where military members can interview with their 

resumes and military records in hand. 

DOD and other Federal agencies can also help business leaders better understand 

how well military members perform using recently added title 10 authorities that 

deal with apprenticeship and transition training opportunities for separating Service members. This may involve pilots with industry to hire military members at mid 

to senior levels on a trial basis and not merely focusing on the unemployed or sponsoring them at entry levels. 

Mr. BARBER. As service members return from deployment and reintegrate, they 

experience a period of readjustment. Growing up in a military family, I know that 

their families, too, go through an often difficult transition. What are some of the 

efforts that DOD is working on to engage military families in the transition process 

and encourage spouses to take advantage of transition services? 

Secretary PANETTA. The Department of Defense provides a number of services 

that support the transition of Service members and their families throughout the 

military life cycle. The return of a Service member from deployment is understandably an adjustment for the military family and calls for targeted efforts. 

Each Service branch sponsors information and support programs for Service members and their families and begin with pre-deployment preparation, like family care 

plans, and include deployed family events that take place during the Service member’s deployment. Current programs also consist of reintegration briefings sponsored 

by the installation Family Support, Community Support or Readiness center. These 

reintegration briefings include family members and cover topics like preparing for 

a reunion, updating administrative, legal, financial, and employment affairs, and 

adjustments to be experienced by a Service member, spouse, and children. For 

Guard and Reserve personnel, Yellow Ribbon Reintegration events and the Joint 

Family Support Assistance Program are integral to family support. 

These centers also provide resources in the form of DVDs, books and activities for 

children of Service members to assist with dealing with the absence and return of 

the deployed family member. 

The Family Support Centers and Chapels of most military installations also offer 

Military Family Life Counselors (MFLCs), marriage counseling and communication 

classes, free childcare and or discounted activities for families. 

Of course, the military lifecycle includes the transition into civilian life. The redesigned Transition Assistance Program (TAP), known as Goals, Plans, Success 

(GPS), prepares separating Service members and their families by building career 

readiness skills and self-confidence necessary to assist in successful reentry into the 

civilian work force or student life. Spouses are encouraged to participate in transition planning and curriculum to the maximum extent possible alongside their 

spouses or attend on their own. 

The TAP GPS core curriculum provides information and training on financial 

management, teaches Service members how to translate their individual military 

skills into civilian skills, provides a detailed overview of potential veteran’s benefits, 

and employment tools and resources to aid in finding a career. The TAP GPS Career 

Track modules are provided based on an individual’s career choices and needs be 

those higher education, technical training, or entrepreneurial aspirations. Transition 

preparation cannot be a one size fits all approach and, just as our military families 

don’t fit one mold, the new TAP GPS can be customized to meet their family needs. 

Service members must also create an Individual Transition Plan (ITP), a holistic 

tool that leads Service members through thoughtful consideration of family issues 

like impact of the career change upon children, elderly parents, and spouses. The 

changing financial situation, due to separation from military careers, is specifically 

highlighted and planned. Social support networks must be considered. The ITP is 

competed in private during TAP GPS modules so that family members can participate in its development at home and in classes. 

Utilization of Transition GPS will improve the Service members’ effectiveness and 

their ability to be ‘‘career ready.’’ By creating an ITP that starts early and considers 

the spouse, children and family needs, the family can also be better prepared. 

Mr. BARBER. Post Traumatic Stress Disorder and Traumatic Brain Injury have 

been called the signature injuries of the current wars abroad, but they can be silent 

injuries that often go undiagnosed or come with a stigma that cause them to go un-
100 

reported. What steps is the Department of Defense taking to identify these service 

members and ensure their complete and successful transition into civilian life? 

Secretary PANETTA. The Department of Defense (DOD) has pre- and post-deployment screening for symptoms of TBI, mental health issues and substance use and 

abuse (which can signal unidentified problems). The post-deployment screening occurs immediately following a deployment and is repeated at 3, 6 and 12 month intervals thereafter. All deployment health assessments incorporate both self-report 

questions for Service members and specific questions that guide healthcare providers in conducting mental health assessments for suicide risk, TBI, PTSD, depression, and alcohol use. 

National Guard and Reserve units partner with VA to conduct Yellow Ribbon 

events 90 days post-deployment, increasing awareness of VA benefits, programs and 

services. Military Services’ demobilization events provide a setting for post-deployment National Guard and Reservist members to meet with VA staff to complete enrollment forms. As well, referral recommendations for VA behavioral health care are 

generated for National Guard and Reserve members during the 3-month post deployment assessment. 

For those who are injured and/or transitioning out of active duty status, the DOD 

ensures proper treatment and successful transition to civilian life through care coordination and transition assistance services. This continuum of evaluation, assessment, treatment, and coordination and transition services is carried out throughout 

the lifecycle of a Service member’s tenure. 

In 2011, DOD published ‘‘Continuity of Behavioral Health Care for Transferring 

and Transitioning Service Members,’’ which prescribes guidelines that ensure continuity of care for Service members transferring to a new duty station or 

transitioning out of the Service. This policy directs the Military Services to develop 

policies for transfer of behavioral health care from military to civilian providers, including VA providers. When a separating Service member provides consent for sharing information with a follow-on behavioral health provider, DOD shares all relevant clinical information. This includes diagnoses, medications, treatment history 

including suicide risk, test results, treatment plans and prognosis. Service members’ 

treatment record information is available to VA providers via the Bidirectional 

Health Information Exchange. DOD’s inTransition program provides a telephonic 

coach for transitioning Service members with behavioral health issues, whether that 

is in the VA health care system, a Military Treatment Facility, TRICARE, or the 

community. The inTransition program has opened thousands of coaching cases since 

its inception in February 2010. The acceptance rate for service members referred to 

the program since inception exceeds 95%. 

For those who have suffered a traumatic brain injury, The Defense Veterans 

Brain Injury Center (DVBIC) Regional Care Coordinator (RCC) program provides a 

nationwide care coordination network to support Service members with TBI. This 

program facilitates transition from the DOD to VA care by working with VA case 

management teams. For Service members with more severe brain injuries, a DOD– 

VA Polytrauma Telehealth Network connects the current treating team with the accepting treating team in the VA. This facilitates transfer planning, affords families 

an opportunity to meet receiving care teams and ensures that medical records are 

transferred between facilities. DOD and VA are working together on a Congressionally-mandated five year pilot program which assesses the effectiveness of providing 

assisted living services to Service members and Veterans with TBI who require ongoing care in the community. VA collaborated with the DVBIC on a family caregiver 

panel to develop a uniform training curriculum for family members in providing 

care and assistance. 

TRICARE Regional Offices have VA Liaisons who serve as intermediaries between 

VA facilities and the TRICARE regional contractors. VA Liaisons actively assist 

with authorizations and claims, and TRICARE contractors hold monthly calls with 

the VA’s Medical Sharing Office to review the cases of active duty Service members 

who are receiving joint VA/DOD care. 

The VA Liaison for Healthcare, a social worker or nurse strategically placed at 

an MTF with recovering service members returning from Afghanistan, is another 

asset. 33 Liaisons for Healthcare are stationed at 18 MTFs, helping transition ill 

and injured Service members from DOD to the VA system of care. Thousands of 

health care transitions have been coordinated. 

The DOD–VA Integrated Mental Health Strategy includes actions specifically focused on transition and continuity of behavioral health care. Data are being shared 

between the Departments on rates of follow-up in at VA Medical Centers and Vet 

Centers for Service members referred to VA for a behavioral health issue identified 

during the PDHRA or the Post Deployment Health Assessment (PDHA). These data 

show that among Service members whose behavioral health follow-up is rec-
101 

ommended during the PDHRA, 43% have a behavioral health encounter at a VA facility within 90 days. 

DOD will continue to work with VA in implementation of our policies regarding 

transition and continuity of behavioral health and TBI care. We will ensure our providers address transition of behavioral health care for wounded warriors to VA and 

other civilian providers, and will continue to manage the important issues of suicide 

risk and occupational impairment and suffering from PTSD. 

Mr. BARBER. What is the Department of Defense doing to ensure close access to 

health care services for service members who are stationed in rural areas? Does 

DOD contract with exiting, private sector behavioral health professionals and agencies to provide health care services close to where service members are stationed? 

Secretary PANETTA. Active duty members, including activated National Guard/Reserve members, who are stationed more than 50 miles or more than one hours drive 

from a military treatment facility are enrolled in TRICARE Prime Remote (TPR) to 

ensure most care is provided in their local area. Members may select a primary care 

manager (PCM) from the TRICARE network, or if one is not available, can select 

any TRICARE-authorized, non-network provider as their PCM. The PCM refers 

members to TRICARE network specialists in the local area if available (or 

TRICARE-authorized, non-network specialists), and coordinates with the regional 

contractor for authorizations and claims. 

Mr. BARBER. My district in Southern Arizona is home to more than 10,000 veterans. I appreciate the attention that VA and DOD are giving to this issue of transition assistance—an issue of critical importance to the service men and women I represent and their families. I hear from service members frequently about the long 

lag time between the time they file their VA claims at time of discharge, and the 

time the claim is adjudicated. They frequently wait 6 months or more before they 

receive compensation from the VA. For a service member transitioning from Active 

Duty and looking for a job, that VA check could be their only resource for buying 

food and paying rent. In addition to providing additional transitional assistance to 

our service members, what more can be done to fast track basic transition services 

and reduce the wait time? 

Secretary SHINSEKI. [The information referred to was not available at the time of 

printing.] 

Mr. BARBER. Unemployment among our veterans has reached historic proportions. 

Nearly 780,000 veterans are unemployed, and as the numbers of troops in the Middle East are reduced, about 100,000 more vets will be looking for jobs. According 

to the Bureau of Labor Statistics the average unemployment rate in the U.S. in 

2011 was 8.9 percent, but the rate of unemployment among anyone who was a member of the U.S. Armed Services since September 2001 was 12.1 percent. As part of 

the new Veterans Employment Initiative Task Force, what specifically will be done 

to eliminate this disparity in current unemployment levels between veterans and 

the general population? How will the Department of Veterans Affairs work to accomplish that goal? 

Secretary SHINSEKI. [The information referred to was not available at the time of 

printing.] 

Mr. BARBER. Post Traumatic Stress Disorder and Traumatic Brain Injury have 

been called the signature injuries of the current wars abroad, but they can be silent 

injuries that often go undiagnosed or come with a stigma that cause them to go unreported. What steps is the Department of Veterans Affairs taking to identify these 

service members and ensure their complete and successful transition into civilian 

life? 

Secretary SHINSEKI. [The information referred to was not available at the time of 

printing.] 

Mr. BARBER. What is the Department of Veterans Affairs doing to ensure close 

access to health care services for veterans who live in rural areas far away from 

VA centers and clinics? Is the VA authorizing VA centers to contract with exiting, 

private sector behavioral health professionals and agencies to provide services close 

to where veterans live? 

Secretary SHINSEKI. [The information referred to was not available at the time of 

printing.] 

Æ