Since the September 11 attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, the United States has launched three major military operations: Operation Noble Eagle (ONE), Operation Enduring Freedom (OEF), and Operation Iraqi Freedom (OIF). Operation Noble Eagle is the name given to military operations related to homeland security and support to federal, state, and local agencies in the wake of the September 11 attacks. Operation Enduring Freedom includes ongoing operations in Afghanistan, operations against terrorists in other countries, and training assistance to foreign militaries which are conducting operations against terrorists. Operation Iraqi Freedom includes the invasion of Iraq, the defeat of Saddam Hussein's regime, and the subsequent rebuilding and counter-insurgency operations in Iraq. This report provides short answers to commonly asked questions about military personnel and compensation issues related to these operations. The questions are grouped into three major thematic areas: personnel, compensation, and force structure. The section on personnel addresses issues such as casualties, reserve mobilization, "sole surviving" son or daughter status, conscientious objection, and "stop-loss." The section on compensation addresses issues related to the pay and benefits—including casualty and death benefits—provided to members of the U.S. military participating in ONE/OEF/OIF and their families. The section on force structure addresses issues related to how ONE/OEF/OIF might affect the number of personnel needed by the military, and answers common questions about whether or not a return to conscription is likely under current circumstances. As of January 17, 2006, there were 255 fatalities among U.S. military personnel serving in OEF. Of these, 130 were categorized as killed in action, while 125 were categorized as non-hostile deaths. As of that same date, 677 military personnel had been wounded in action while serving in OEF. Of these, 275 were returned to duty within 72 hours. As of January 17, 2006, there were 2,242 fatalities among U.S. military personnel serving in OIF. Of these, 1,761 were categorized as hostile deaths and 481 as non-hostile. As of that same date, 16,420 military personnel had been wounded in action while serving in OIF. Of these, 8,812 were returned to duty within 72 hours. As of January 15, 2006, there was one U.S. soldier classified as a POW, Private First Class Keith M. Maupin who was captured on April 9, 2004. There were no U.S. military personnel classified as MIA. Between September 11, 2001 and January 17, 2006, a total of 532,539 reservists (which includes the National Guard) were involuntarily called to active duty under federal orders for ONE, OEF, and OIF. Of these, 126,5345 were serving on active duty as of January 17, 2006, while 406,005 had been demobilized prior to that date after completing their tours. Note, however, that the total mobilization and demobilization figures count reservists more than once if they have been mobilized more than once. The total number of individuals mobilized is therefore lower than stated above, and probably by a significant margin due to the number of people who have been called up more than once. These reservists were called to active duty under a mobilization authority known as Partial Mobilization. In time of a national emergency declared by the President, Partial Mobilization authorizes the Service Secretaries to order members of the Ready Reserve to active duty for a period not to exceed 24 consecutive months. Up to 1 million members of the Ready Reserve may serve on active duty at any one time under this provision of law. The President may declare a national emergency and mobilize reservists under this provision of law without approval from Congress. This authority was also used to mobilize reservists during the later part of the Persian Gulf War (1991). DOD's general policy has been to keep reservists on active duty for no more than one year; and in the majority of cases to date, mobilized reservists have not been required to serve more than one year. However, the policy does allow the Service Secretary to keep reservists on active duty for up to 24 cumulative months if they are needed to meet operational or other requirements. It should be noted that DOD's policy capping reserve service at 24 cumulative months is more restrictive than the 24 consecutive month cap specified in law. If DOD were to change its policy to mirror the law, reservists could be mobilized multiple times for tours of 24 consecutive months apiece. Also, some members of the National Guard have been called up to perform duties related to ONE in a non-federal status . Additionally, in 2001 and 2002, thousands of members of the National Guard were activated at the order of their respective governors to provide additional security at airports. They were called up under Title 32 of the U.S. Code, which means they were under state control, but with federal pay and benefits. These distinctions have a significant bearing on the type of pay, benefits, and legal protections to which the affected individuals are entitled. For more information on this topic, see CRS Report RL30802, Reserve Component Personnel Issues: Questions and Answers , by [author name scrubbed]. No statute governs the deployment of "sole surviving" sons and daughters in today's all-volunteer military. However, the Department of Defense does have an administrative policy governing assignments of a "sole surviving" son or daughter. This policy allows "sole surviving" sons or daughters to apply for a protective assignment status which, once approved, prohibits his or her assignment "to any overseas area designated as a hostile-fire or imminent-danger area ... nor to duties that regularly might subject him or her to combat with the enemy." In addition to protective assignment, enlisted personnel who become sole surviving sons or daughters after having entered service may also apply for and be granted a discharge in most circumstances. However, the term " sole surviving son or daughter " does not simply mean the only child in a family. According to DOD's definition, a sole surviving son or daughter is the only remaining son or daughter in a family where the father or mother, or one or more sons or daughters, served in the Armed Forces of the United States and, because of hazards with such military service, either (1) was killed, (2) died as a result of wounds, accident or disease, (3) is in a captured or missing-in-action (MIA) status, or (4) is permanently 100-percent disabled, is hospitalized on a continuing basis, and is not employed gainfully because of such disability. The "sole surviving" son or daughter issue is different from the commonly cited, albeit fictional, "Sullivan Act" or "Sullivan Law." The Sullivans were five brothers serving on board a single U.S. Navy ship (the U.S.S. Juneau ) during World War II. Their ship was sunk by the Japanese on November 13, 1942, and all of the brothers died. In response to this tragedy, some proposals were made to prohibit brothers from serving together on the same ship, but Congress did not pass any such law, nor did the President issue an executive order to that effect. In response to a similar tragedy which occurred the previous year (three brothers serving aboard the U.S.S. Arizona perished during the Pearl Harbor attacks) the Navy did issue a policy forbidding commanding officers from approving requests from brothers to serve together, but the policy was apparently not enforced and did not prohibit the Navy from assigning brothers to the same ship. Current DOD policy states that "concurrent assigning of service members of the immediate family to the same military unit or ship is not prohibited, but requests for reassignment to a different unit or ship may be approved for all but one service member." Approval of such requests, however, are contingent upon military requirements. No statute governs the treatment of conscientious objectors currently serving in the military. However, the Department of Defense does have an administrative policy relating to this issue. Of course, in today's all-volunteer military, those who have moral objections to participating in war will likely choose not to join the military. Nonetheless, some people volunteer to join the armed forces with every intention of fulfilling their military obligations, but later develop religious or moral objections to participation in war. Such people may apply for transfer to non-combat related duties or for an administrative discharge, depending on the nature of their convictions. Following application, a formal investigatory procedure is initiated by the military to ascertain the facts and nature of the applicant's claim. Based on this investigation and the criteria for granting conscientious objector status defined in the DOD policy, a determination is made to either grant or deny the applicant's claim. With respect to the criteria for granting conscientious objector status, a crucial one is the requirement that the individual be "opposed to participation in war in any form." In other words, the objection "must be to all wars rather than a specific war." This standard precludes those who are opposed to some wars, but not all wars, from being classified as conscientious objectors. In 2000, slightly over 100 servicemembers applied for conscientious objector status; in 2004 this number was over 400. Of those who apply, approximately half are approved. Yes, if a service member is killed, dies, or is declared captured or missing, the other service members of the same family will be exempt, upon request, from serving in designated hostile-fire areas or if already serving in such as area, will be reassigned. This also applies to those who are categorized as 100% disabled by the Service or the Veterans Administration. In addition, wounded personnel who have been medically evacuated and hospitalized for more than 30 days outside the hostile-fire area will not be returned during the same tour; they may, however, be eligible for subsequent combat tours.