[House Hearing, 112 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Printing Office]
[H.A.S.C. No. 112-28]
HEARING
ON
NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT
FOR FISCAL YEAR 2012
AND
OVERSIGHT OF PREVIOUSLY AUTHORIZED PROGRAMS
BEFORE THE
COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED TWELFTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
__________
SUBCOMMITTEE ON MILITARY PERSONNEL HEARING
ON
MILITARY PERSONNEL OVERVIEW
__________
HEARING HELD
MARCH 17, 2011
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TONGRESS.#13
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
65-595 WASHINGTON : 2011
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
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.
SUBCOMMITTEE ON MILITARY PERSONNEL
JOE WILSON, South Carolina, Chairman
WALTER B. JONES, North Carolina SUSAN A. DAVIS, California
MIKE COFFMAN, Colorado ROBERT A. BRADY, Pennsylvania
TOM ROONEY, Florida MADELEINE Z. BORDALLO, Guam
JOE HECK, Nevada DAVE LOEBSACK, Iowa
ALLEN B. WEST, Florida NIKI TSONGAS, Massachusetts
AUSTIN SCOTT, Georgia CHELLIE PINGREE, Maine
VICKY HARTZLER, Missouri
Craig Greene, Professional Staff Member
Debra Wada, Professional Staff Member
Jim Weiss, Staff Assistant
C O N T E N T S
----------
CHRONOLOGICAL LIST OF HEARINGS
2011
Page
Hearing:
Thursday, March 17, 2011, Military Personnel Overview............ 1
Appendix:
Thursday, March 17, 2011......................................... 23
----------
THURSDAY, MARCH 17, 2011
MILITARY PERSONNEL OVERVIEW
STATEMENTS PRESENTED BY MEMBERS OF CONGRESS
Davis, Hon. Susan A., a Representative from California, Ranking
Member, Subcommittee on Military Personnel..................... 2
Wilson, Hon. Joe, a Representative from South Carolina, Chairman,
Subcommittee on Military Personnel............................. 1
WITNESSES
Bostick, Lt. Gen. Thomas P., USA, Deputy Chief of Staff, G-1,
U.S. Army...................................................... 4
Ferguson, Vice Adm. Mark E., III, USN, Chief of Naval Personnel,
Deputy Chief of Naval Operations, U.S. Navy.................... 6
Jones, Lt. Gen. Darrell D., USAF, Deputy Chief of Staff for
Manpower and Personnel, U.S. Air Force......................... 8
Milstead, Lt. Gen. Robert E., Jr., USMC, Deputy Commandant for
Manpower and Reserve Affairs, U.S. Marine Corps................ 7
Stanley, Hon. Clifford L., Ph.D., Under Secretary of Defense for
Personnel and Readiness........................................ 3
APPENDIX
Prepared Statements:
Bostick, Lt. Gen. Thomas P................................... 84
Davis, Hon. Susan A.......................................... 28
Ferguson, Vice Adm. Mark E., III............................. 105
Jones, Lt. Gen. Darrell D.................................... 153
Milstead, Lt. Gen. Robert E., Jr............................. 128
Stanley, Hon. Clifford L..................................... 30
Wilson, Hon. Joe............................................. 27
Documents Submitted for the Record:
The Fleet Reserve Association Statement for the Record on
Military Personnel Policy, Benefits, and Compensation...... 173
The Military Coalition Statement for the Record on Military
Personnel and Compensation Matters......................... 180
The National Military Family Association Statement for the
Record..................................................... 207
The Reserve Officers Association of the United States and the
Reserve Enlisted Association Statement for the Record...... 240
Witness Responses to Questions Asked During the Hearing:
Ms. Bordallo................................................. 251
Mrs. Davis................................................... 251
Questions Submitted by Members Post Hearing:
Ms. Tsongas.................................................. 256
Mr. Wilson................................................... 255
MILITARY PERSONNEL OVERVIEW
----------
House of Representatives,
Committee on Armed Services,
Subcommittee on Military Personnel,
Washington, DC, Thursday, March 17, 2011.
The subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 11:16 a.m., in
room 2212, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Joe Wilson
(chairman of the subcommittee) presiding.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. JOE WILSON, A REPRESENTATIVE FROM
SOUTH CAROLINA, CHAIRMAN, SUBCOMMITTEE ON MILITARY PERSONNEL
Mr. Wilson. Good morning, ladies and gentlemen. Thank you
for being here today for a subcommittee meeting of the Military
Personnel Subcommittee of the House Armed Services Committee.
This is a very important hearing as to military personnel
overview.
Today the subcommittee will turn its attention to the
important issue of maintaining an All-Volunteer Force that is
not only faced with continuing to fight even after 10 years of
war, but also is now in a period of fiscal constraints and
manpower reductions.
The Department of Defense has completed an efficiency
review, which will result in $100 billion being reinvested into
the services over the next 5 years.
The Department is also facing an additional $78 billion cut
over 5 years to its top-line, with proposed cuts by the
Department to a variety of programs to include end strength
reductions for the Army and Marine Corps in 2015 and 2016.
Today's hearing will focus on actions the services have
taken to create efficiencies in personnel employment programs,
to include pay and compensation, and the policies and programs
that still need to be examined to successfully continue down a
path of fiscal responsibility without undermining the readiness
of the All-Volunteer Force.
We will also examine how the proposed reduction of end of
strength for the Army and Marine Corps will impact individual
dwell time in light of unknown force requirements in the
future.
We are also concerned about the manpower reductions that
all services will undertake and how they will employ voluntary
and involuntary separation measures to achieve those reductions
and how they will reduce the nondeployable populations in their
services.
We are joined today by an excellent panel consisting of the
Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness and the
four personnel chiefs of the military services to help us
explore these issues.
I would request that all witnesses--and it is going to be
tough--maintain an oral opening statement at 3 minutes. And
Craig Greene is really tough on this, and so good luck.
But, hey, he is the impartial scorekeeper.
Without objection, all written statements will be entered
into the record, to include statements submitted by the Reserve
Officers Association, the Military Coalition, the Fleet Reserve
Association, and the National Military Family Association.
I would also like at this time to introduce our panel. The
Honorable Dr. Clifford Stanley, the Under Secretary of Defense
for Personnel and Readiness. Lieutenant General Thomas P.
Bostick, the Deputy Chief of Staff G-1, Headquarters of the
U.S. Army. Vice Admiral Mark E. Ferguson, III, Chief of Naval
Personnel, Deputy Chief of Naval Operations, Total Force, U.S.
Navy. Lieutenant General Robert E. Milstead, Jr., the Deputy
Commandant for Manpower and Reserve Affairs, Headquarters of
the U.S. Marine Corps. Lieutenant General Darrell D. Jones, the
Deputy Chief of Staff, Manpower and Personnel, Headquarters of
the U.S. Air Force.
And I would especially like to welcome General Milstead and
General Jones, who will be testifying for the first time in
their new roles and very important positions that you have.
I at this time will defer to the Ranking Member, the
distinguished member of Congress from California, Susan Davis.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Wilson can be found in the
Appendix on page 27.]
STATEMENT OF HON. SUSAN A. DAVIS, A REPRESENTATIVE FROM
CALIFORNIA, RANKING MEMBER, SUBCOMMITTEE ON MILITARY PERSONNEL
Mrs. Davis. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
And to all of you, we appreciate your being here.
Dr. Stanley, welcome back.
And, Lieutenant General Bostick, and Vice Admiral Ferguson,
Lieutenant General Milstead, and Lieutenant General Jones, to
all of you, we are glad you are here.
After nearly 10 years of war I look forward to hearing from
you on the state of our military personnel and their families
and the impact that the current economic climate is having on
them.
In recent years the services have enjoyed both a robust
recruiting environment and budget. This has led to record
achievements in recruiting and retention objectives, as well as
an increase in the quality of our recruits.
But recent indicators are sending a different signal. I am
concerned that as job growth continues to improve and budget
reductions are being implemented, the services may find
themselves back to where we were just a few short years ago--a
difficult recruiting environment.
The major difference will be that we may not have the
budgetary headroom to quickly change course. I hope we will
address this issue.
I am also concerned that the budget reductions will have an
adverse impact on our quality-of-life programs for our
servicemembers and their families. While the services all made
a good faith effort to ensure that that the spending was
included in the baseline budget, personnel and operation and
maintenance funding seem to be in the first place where the
services seek to reduce expenditures.
Many of our quality-of-life programs are vital. We know
that. They are vital to our servicemembers and their families,
especially during these last 10 years of high tempo deployment.
As the demand for these services remains constant and the
budget continues to decline, we are going to face difficult
choices. But we must remember that it is our men and women in
uniform that makes our military the best in the world.
Thank you all once again for being here.
And, Mr. Chairman, I look forward to their testimony.
[The prepared statement of Mrs. Davis can be found in the
Appendix on page 28.]
Mr. Wilson. Thank you, Mrs. Davis.
And even before we begin, I have had the privilege and
opportunity of meeting with each of you. And when I think of
military personnel and military service, to me it is an
opportunity for young people to achieve to their highest
possible level.
And it is very personal. My dad served with the Flying
Tigers in the Army Air Corps, so--and I have a nephew who is in
the Air Force. So I know how meaningful it has been.
And then I have--I served 31 years, General Bostick, in the
Army National Guard. I have three sons in the National Guard,
and each one, they actually enjoy going to drill. So this is
very positive.
And then I am so grateful that another son is a doctor in
the Navy. And so I know how uplifting. And then my late father-
in-law and late brother-in-law were marines. So we are joint
service.
With that, I would like to proceed to Secretary Stanley.
STATEMENT OF HON. CLIFFORD L. STANLEY, PH.D., UNDER SECRETARY
OF DEFENSE FOR PERSONNEL AND READINESS
Secretary Stanley. Well, good morning, Chairman Wilson, and
Ranking Member Davis, and members of the committee.
First of all, I want to respectfully request my witness
statement be made a part of the record. And with this hearing I
will have officially reached the 1-year mark in my tenure as
the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness.
But during this past year, I have focused on honoring,
protecting, and improving the lives of our soldiers, sailors,
airmen, and marines.
This next year will demonstrate that while my focus has not
changed, I will continue to refine my priorities to better
serve our servicemembers and their loved ones.
I look forward to continuing to work with you and this
subcommittee as we support our total force of Active, National
Guard, and Reserve servicemembers, as well as our civilian
workforce and the dedicated families that support them.
My focus: Total force readiness, caring for our people, and
creating a culture of relevance, effectiveness, and efficiency.
I view total force readiness as a mental, physical, emotional,
and spiritual preparedness and resilience.
And this involves enabling training, equipping, and
supporting the total force when they are deployed and ensuring
that they and their families have the care and support they
need and deserve when they are at home.
We have committed ourselves to supporting the Secretary of
Defense in preparing the force to manage risk, preserve assets,
and meet the challenges of a dynamic operational environment.
We must increase the emphasis on agility, flexible force
structures, responsive force-shaping policies, and integrated
personnel management processes.
We will continue to experience global competition for our
educated and skilled workforce. Therefore, it is more
imperative than ever for the Department of Defense to have
personnel policies that attract, retain, train, educate, and
sustain the right people.
As we examine the total force, an All-Volunteer Force that
first emerged in 1973, we intend to go beyond the scope of our
Active, Guard and Reserve force, and in particular we are
looking at the role of civilians in supporting the force, and
most especially how families and volunteers fit into the total
force equation.
I also cannot overemphasize enough how essential it is that
we continue to work in providing quality of life commensurate
with the quality of service for our military, and most
especially their families, and we will work to do everything
possible to support our military families.
It is our families, as you well know, who support our
servicemembers, who support our Nation.
I want to thank the subcommittee for all you do for our
dedicated servicemembers, and I look forward to your questions.
[The prepared statement of Secretary Stanley can be found
in the Appendix on page 30.]
Mr. Wilson. Thank you very much.
At this time, General Bostick.
STATEMENT OF LT. GEN. THOMAS P. BOSTICK, USA, DEPUTY CHIEF OF
STAFF, G-1, U.S. ARMY
General Bostick. Chairman Wilson and Ranking Member Davis,
distinguished members of the Subcommittee on Military
Personnel, thank you for this opportunity to appear before you.
Chairman Wilson, I just want to thank you for your personal
service in our military and also thank you for your sons and
all that they have done to serve in uniform. We appreciate
that.
And, Representative Davis, I want to thank you for your
focus on our people. We had a former Chief of Staff Abrams that
used to say that people are not in the Army, they are the Army.
So we agree with you and we are going to focus on our people,
both our soldiers, civilians and their families.
On behalf of the Secretary of the Army, the Honorable John
McHugh, and our Chief of Staff, General George Casey, I would
like to thank you for your unwavering support and demonstrated
commitment to our soldiers, Army civilians, and family members.
Our All-Volunteer Army is now in its 10th year of continuous
combat operations. More than 1.1 million soldiers have deployed
into combat, and this has impacted not only the soldiers, but
their families as well.
Additionally, Army civilians shoulder the majority of the
burden in the generating-force mission, and 30,000 civilians
have deployed into harm's way.
Despite this unprecedented operational tempo, the Army is
on track to achieve sustainable deployment tempo for our forces
and restore balance to the Army by 2012. Both the Secretary and
the Chief of Staff of the Army have set two priorities for the
coming year: First, maintain our combat edge while we
reconstitute the force; and, second to build resiliency in our
people.
To maintain our combat edge and sustain the All-Volunteer
Army, we must continue to recruit and retain citizens and
soldiers with the greatest potential for service. With the
support of the Congress and the Nation, we are very proud to
report that America's Army exceeded its enlisted goals of
recruiting and our retention missions for fiscal year 2010, and
we are confident that we will meet the goals for fiscal year
2011.
We also achieved all benchmarks with regard for recruiting
highly qualified soldiers. Moreover, all components of the Army
exceeded their reenlistment goals. Your support of initiatives
and incentives remains key to our multi-year success.
As the pace of the economic recovery increases, we will
continue to carefully review incentives and seek your support
to ensure we remain highly competitive in the evolving job
market. The Army has already reduced bonuses dramatically for
new accessions, as well as the retention mission. Average
recruiting bonuses dropped from over $13,000 in fiscal year
2009 to just under $3,000 today and are only used to
incentivize longer-term enlistments in a small percentage of
critical skills.
These incentives are only used to ensure the success of the
total Army recruiting and retention mission and to shape the
force to meet specific grade and skill requirements.
Despite our success in recruiting, the Army and the Nation
face a significant challenge in this area due to increased
obesity and decreased high-school graduation rates in certain
parts of the country.
Currently less than 3 in 10 17- to 24-year-olds are
eligible to serve, primarily due to physical and educational
requirements. Only 1 in 5 youth fails to graduate high school;
1 in 5 youth 12- to 19-year-old is currently overweight
compared to 1 in 20 in the 1960s and this trend is projected to
grow 1 in 4 by 2015. As a Nation together we must continue to
address these concerns.
The Army implemented a civilian workforce transformation
effort that will invigorate and strengthen the civilian
workforce by addressing critical issues of structure,
accession, development, retention, and succession planning.
This initiative will give civilians the tools and resources to
plan and achieve their career goals while at the same time
providing Army leaders a workforce with the right skills and
experiences to meet current and future missions.
The Secretary of the Army and the Chief of Staff of the
Army have directed that we continue to provide services and
programs to build resiliency in our soldiers, civilians, and
families, and to maintain or increase as necessary the quality
of care, support and services that they require. We look
forward to working with you as we move on a broad front to
address the challenges of 10 years of war for our soldiers,
civilians, and their families.
To conclude, I want to thank you for your continued
support, which remains vital to sustain our All-Volunteer Army
through an unprecedented period of continuous combat
operations. Now, as we prepare to draw down the Army and
prepare for the complex strategic environment of the future, we
will continue to work toward restoring balance and sustaining
the high-quality Army.
Chairman and members of the subcommittee, I thank you for
your generous and unwavering support for our soldiers,
civilians and families and I look forward to answering your
questions.
[The prepared statement of General Bostick can be found in
the Appendix on page 84.]
Mr. Wilson. Thank you very much.
And, Admiral Ferguson.
STATEMENT OF VICE ADM. MARK E. FERGUSON III, USN, CHIEF OF
NAVAL PERSONNEL, DEPUTY CHIEF OF NAVAL OPERATIONS, U.S. NAVY
Admiral Ferguson. Chairman Wilson, Ranking Member Davis and
distinguished members of the committee, good morning and thank
you for the opportunity to review our fiscal year 2012 budget
request.
We believe our request appropriately balances risk in
supporting the readiness requirements of the fleet and the
joint force, growth in new and emerging mission areas, and the
essential programs that provide for the care of our sailors and
their families.
The extraordinary people of our Navy are serving around the
globe with nearly 50 percent of our ships underway or deployed.
Sailors remain engaged on the ground in Iraq and Afghanistan,
and more than 24,000 Active and Reserve sailors are serving in
the Central Command region.
Our forward-deployed Naval forces give us the flexibility
to respond around the globe at a moment's notice. They provide
deterrence, support maritime security, as well as conduct
combat operations, and are able to rapidly respond to a
humanitarian crisis, as we have seen in Indonesia, in Haiti,
and now Japan.
Our unique capabilities and our extraordinary people stand
watch every day from the Middle East to the Mediterranean to
the Western Pacific.
Our sustained operational tempo continues to place stresses
on the force. Providing a continuum of care for our sailors and
their families remains our constant priority. Our safe harbor,
operational stress control, and medical home port programs are
critical elements of this continuum.
We continue to adapt these programs to meet the needs of
our sailors and their families. We monitor the health of the
force through surveys and retention data, and pleased to report
that sailors indicate they are satisfied with their leadership,
their benefits, and their compensation. Your support has made
this possible.
In developing our fiscal year 2012 budget, we review
current operations, our procurement profile, and our readiness
requirements. This review indicated a need to add approximately
6,800 billets to the operating forces.
To source these billets without additions to our overall
end strength, we reduced or consolidated approximately 8,400
billets in the fleet, squadron staffs and shore activities.
Additionally, the Navy has placed end strength previously
funded by supplemental appropriation into our baseline program
for fiscal year 2012 and beyond. We assess our end strength
request of 325,700 will meet our projected requirements.
We continue to attract, recruit and retain the Nation's
best talent and have met or exceeded nearly all of our
recruiting and retention goals for the year.
In addition, your Navy has received over 20 national awards
over the past 12 months recognizing accomplishments in the
areas of workplace flexibility, training, diversity,
recruiting, and workforce development.
On behalf of the men and women of the United States Navy
and their families, I extend my sincere appreciation to the
committee and the Congress for your support.
Thank you, and I look forward to your questions.
[The prepared statement of Admiral Ferguson can be found in
the Appendix on page 105.]
Mr. Wilson. Thank you very much.
And, General Milstead.
STATEMENT OF LT. GEN. ROBERT E. MILSTEAD, JR., USMC, DEPUTY
COMMANDANT FOR MANPOWER AND RESERVE AFFAIRS, U.S. MARINE CORPS
General Milstead. Good morning.
Chairman Wilson, Ranking Member Davis, and distinguished
members of the subcommittee, it is my privilege to appear
before you today.
The Marine Corps is our Nation's expeditionary force in
readiness, and we are ready to respond to today's crisis with
today's force, today.
In addition to the over 20,000 marines engaged in combat in
Afghanistan, marines are already providing humanitarian
assistance to those impacted by the earthquake and the tsunami
disaster in Japan. We began deploying forces less than 24 hours
after the disaster hit and our numbers will soon total 2,200.
The individual marine is our corps' most sacred resource,
and the quality of our force has never been better. Part of my
job is to make sure it stays that way.
Regardless of any future force reductions and structure
changes, the challenge of shaping our force with the right
grades, combat experience, and skills to fulfill operational
requirements will remain.
We appreciate your continued support for the tools and
funding to succeed.
The top priority of the Commandant and mine is to keep
faith with our marines, sailors, and their families through
program improvements, and with your support we are doing just
that.
The Marines are proud of their eagle, globe, and anchor and
what it represents to our country, and with your support a
vibrant Marine Corps will continue to meet our Nation's call.
I look forward to answering your questions.
[The prepared statement of General Milstead can be found in
the Appendix on page 128.]
Mr. Wilson. Thank you very much.
And, General Jones.
STATEMENT OF LT. GEN. DARRELL D. JONES, USAF, DEPUTY CHIEF OF
STAFF FOR MANPOWER AND PERSONNEL, U.S. AIR FORCE
General Jones. Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Davis, and
members of the subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to
appear before you today and represent all the men and women of
the United States Air Force.
These tremendously talented men and women, the officers,
enlisted, and Air Force civilians of the total force are the
backbone of our service.
In an era of evolving requirements and constrained budgets,
our Air Force faces an ever-increasing set of challenges. As
the Deputy Chief of Staff for Manpower, Personnel and Services,
I will do everything I can to deliver fully qualified and ready
airmen to the joint warfighter while meeting the essential
needs of the airmen and their families.
We are dedicated to properly managing our end strength.
Unfortunately, with retention at a 16-year record high, we are
compelled to use voluntary and involuntary programs.
We expect to exceed our end strength in fiscal year 2011 by
roughly 1,500 officers and could experience additional growth
through fiscal year 2012 if we do not actively manage our force
levels.
Our force management strategy is not a quick fix, but a
tailored, multi-year effort. Beyond existing force management
legislative authorities, we are working with the Office of the
Secretary of Defense to seek additional legislative authorities
to provide the tools to better manage our end strength.
America deserves the very best Air Force in the world and
that is what you have. As a result, it is our job to recruit,
develop, and retain the highest-quality airmen from the
broadest landscape to maintain that status.
Even though quality and retention are high, we are
obligating a portion of our budget for bonuses to recruit the
right skill sets and retain experienced airmen in critical
warfighting skills. Without these funds, we will handicap our
commanders and their ability to carry out the full range of the
missions that America demands of our Air Force.
We are committed to streamlining and strengthening the
resilience of our airmen and their families. Our goal is to
build resilient airmen who have the ability to withstand,
recover and grow in the face of stressors and changing demands.
We remain fully committed to caring for our wounded airmen.
We continue to provide support and assistance through the Air
Force Survivor Assistance Program, the Recovery Care Program,
and the Air Force Wounded Warrior Program, and we will do so
for as long as needed.
With your support, the warrior and survivor care programs
will continue.
In closing, today's airmen are an unsurpassed dedicated
group. They enable us to have the competitive advantage against
our adversaries and deliver dominance in air, space and,
cyberspace. We continue to recruit, train, and retain America's
finest and we will provide the care and the service that they
and their families need.
We appreciate your unfailing support to the men and women
of our Air Force, and on behalf of the Chief of Staff of the
United States Air Force, I look forward to answering your
questions.
[The prepared statement of General Jones can be found in
the Appendix on page 153.]
Mr. Wilson. Thank you very much.
And we will now begin the 5-minute rounds, and beginning
with me, and strictly adhere as best we can to this. And Mr.
Greene will be the scorekeeper.
So at this time I would like to point out that I am a
strong supporter of the all-volunteer military. I have seen it
work. I know and you--we do have America's finest. The new
generation out there is so committed. They do remember the
attack on our country on September 11, 2001, and so they are
motivated to serve.
I also am very, very concerned in the last 60 days events
have occurred that I just didn't anticipate. First, we know of
the instability of North Africa, the Middle East, the Persian
Gulf, our great ally Bahrain that is so crucial. There is
instability that certainly we need to be reconsidering what
force structure is.
Then we had the multiple catastrophes, disasters in Japan.
Here one of the most advanced countries on Earth, and our
sympathy to the people of Japan. But we saw what happened to us
with Hurricane Katrina, and again massive areas of their
country, just as Katrina was massive areas of our country. The
military is just crucial, as we see, trying to protect the
people of Japan, and we are backing them up. I want to thank
all of you.
Additionally, we are fighting cowardly combatants in Iraq
and Afghanistan simultaneously. With that in mind--and,
Secretary, we will go in the order whoever can answer--I am
very concerned about a force reduction and the instability that
is just worldwide.
Secretary Stanley. Congressman Wilson, let me just take the
first stab at that and then turn it over to the services.
We are also--it is not a matter of just being concerned, it
is actually a top priority. I was fortunate to have been on
active duty in a manpower billet at Headquarters Marine Corps
when we went through this process in the 1990s.
And so we kind of--I remember vividly what happened then,
what worked, what didn't work. And so as we look at right now,
looking at our management tools, helping the services out, and
even going to Congress to ask for help maybe with either
voluntary or, you know, boards and so forth--with separation,
to get the right force structure in place.
And this is what General Jones alluded to, but there are
other things that go along in the equation.
I am going to turn it over to services and have them also
address this.
General Bostick. Chairman, as you know, the Congress
approved a 22,000 temporary end strength increase for the Army,
and in that we will come down in September of 2013. And we
think we have the tools in place in order to do that properly.
And we really needed that because of the end of stop-loss
and because of the nondeployable situation that ran in our
wounded warriors. So we deeply appreciate that. And based on
the demand that we see ahead of us, we feel that we have the
tools in place to bring that force down.
The second reduction, in 2015, is going to be much more
difficult for us, and as the Secretary of Defense said, it is
conditions-based for us, and we are going to hold 547 through
fiscal year 2014, and over the next 15 months, in 2015 and
2016, we will draw down that 27,000.
And the key for us is, what is the environment at that
time? And we are doing our plans with the G-3 and the other
leaders in our department to make sure that we do it
appropriately and our number one mission, which is to fight and
win the wars for the country, that we can do that both at home
and abroad.
Admiral Ferguson. Well, thank you.
In the Navy we continuously plan and assess our manpower
requirements versus force structure and the demands placed on
the force. And we are in a period where we have, you know, we,
the Navy drew down from the period of 2003 to 2010 by about
45,000 that we came down. And so the last few years, we are in
a very stable profile tied to our force structure, and the 2012
proposal has us continuing on a fairly stable.
As we go forward and should there be changes in force
structure or reduction in commitments, then we will continue
adjust both the size of the force, and we feel we have the
adequate tools at this point to do so.
General Milstead. Yes, sir. You know, the Marine Corps did
grow. We grew from 175,000 to 202,000, we grew 27,000 for this
fight, this dual-front fight. We have just finished our Force
Structure Review Group. It is capabilities-based. We feel that
we can bring the corps down to 186,800; that is about 15,000.
Again, it is capabilities based, but it is important to
stress to you that we have no intention of reducing our size
until either 2014 or we are done with Afghanistan. So until we
are done with Afghanistan, we have no intention on reducing our
corps.
And again, it is capabilities-based, and so we feel that
that will allow us to do what the Nation expects us to do.
Mr. Wilson. Thank you all very much.
And we will proceed to Mrs. Davis.
Mrs. Davis. Thank you very much again for being here and
for responding, I think, to that.
I want to thank you for the response in Japan. I think that
we always have to have that capability. I think it is one of
the most important things we do, is responding to our friends
and allies around the world, especially in such a calamitous
time as they are experiencing, and it is good that we are there
and that we are able to do it.
I wanted to just turn to a few issues that I hear about,
and when I go on base in San Diego probably more than anything
else I have sailors who come up to me and talk about their own
personal situations, especially with their children. And I
wanted to ask you about the National Defense Authorization Act
of 2010, which required the establishment of the Office of
Community Support for military families with special needs.
Dr. Stanley, that was under you, I believe, and I am
wondering who you have designated as the director of the office
and when you think we will be able to learn what programs and
what policies are being implemented to assist families with
special needs?
Secretary Stanley. Well, thank you, Congresswoman Davis.
First of all, we have established the office within our
Military, Community, and Family Policy Office. That office has
been stood up. We have actually started working with the
services to determine what the services' requirements may be
and are. We have also launched about three different studies to
actually help us as we go through the process of working with
the services, you know, on exceptional family members.
The money that was associated with that did not come with
that, so we work with the services in providing them money to
assist them in the Exceptional Family Member Program.
Mrs. Davis. Do you happen to know about what they are able
to utilize in terms of those dollars? I think $50 million was
in the authorization, $40 million was allocated to the services
to carry out the task.
Secretary Stanley. I would have to get back to you,
Congresswoman. I can take that for the record on the actual
amount.
[The information referred to can be found in the Appendix
on page 251.]
Mrs. Davis. All right. Thank you. I know that the different
times that we have met, I have always wanted to check in on
that and find out what is happening. It is not something that
is known, of course, to the families at this time, but we are
hoping that they will become more aware of it and we will have
many vehicles for getting that information out.
Probably not wanting to set too high an expectation, but on
the other hand it should be available to them and we need folks
who are helping.
Secretary Stanley, I wanted to ask you also about programs
which are helping in the transition. San Diego's veterans
community has been very interested in a program at Camp
Pendleton, and I wanted to just commend Pendleton for that.
The program, Veterans in Piping, where a partnership has
been established between the Marine Corps and the United
Association that takes marines who are about to leave the
service and places them into a 16-week apprenticeship program.
This program helps marines get good-paying jobs, of course,
when they leave the service, but the training is carried out
without any real cost--direct cost--to the government or to the
Marine Corps. About 97 marines have graduated from the program
and it sounds like almost everyone who has participated has
gotten a job on leaving.
So I wanted to know whether you support the program and
would you and the Administration support a revision to Title 10
that explicitly allows, but by no means would require the
services to have this kind of program available on base?
Secretary Stanley. Okay. Thank you, Congresswoman. I
appreciate the question and I actually know the people
personally who are actually running the program, a couple of
retired Marine generals, and have met with them, and I am very
supportive of the program.
Have not followed up on it recently. Put them in contact
with not only my Wounded Warrior--our Wounded Warrior office
but also the Department of Labor. I would have to circle back
with them to see where it is right now.
I will say that I would have to take it for the record on
whether or not that should be a Title 10, you know,
entitlement, but I certainly am supportive of the program and
the success they have already enjoyed. I am very supportive.
[The information referred to can be found in the Appendix
on page 251.]
Mrs. Davis. All right, thank you.
I will let that go there, but I--the enthusiasm for this
program is such that we really do need to follow up and make
certain that we are not having some issues where we are not
able to allow people to do that when it really would be of such
great benefit to them as they are leaving. So I thank you for
that.
And I will go ahead and turn back my time, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Wilson. Thank you.
And Congressman Allen West, of Florida.
Mr. West. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and Madam Ranking Member.
And to the panel, I can't tell you the privilege it is to
having been in uniform and now have the opportunity to be on
this side, but to continue to serve the men and women that make
this country great and protect our freedoms.
And, General Bostick, just to let you know, my young nephew
is the artillery assignments officer down at Fort Knox,
Kentucky, so kind of had to talk to him about his perspectives
on personnel.
But, you know, when I look at the history of U.S. military
operations, especially in the 20th century, we seem to have
peaks and valleys. And, you know, one of the big concerns that
I look at is how we ramp up for certain things and then the
next thing you know we ramp back down. And we always seem to
get ourselves caught, you know, excuse me, with our pants down.
And we have seen that. I saw that when I was a brigade S-3
and a battalion XO [executive officer] post-the Soviet Union
collapse, post-Desert Shield/Desert Storm, all of a sudden we
start to riff and ramp down.
So as I look at now--and this kind of dovetails off what
the chairman brought up--how we have a more deployed military,
to include our Reserve Component forces, we want to try to have
that 1:3 dwell time out there.
The fact that we have so severely cut the Navy, from 546
ships down to 283 ships, but now we see the maritime threats
that we have out there, which definitely dovetails over to the
Marines. And of course we have an Army that is stretched thin,
we have an Air Force that is--you know, needs to get back to
being a force projection platform.
My concern is this, and this is my question. General
Cavazos, who was a great mentor for me, always said that
quantity has a quality all its own.
So in looking at that, do you believe that your total force
is at a steady state to support the full spectrum of the
operations and challenges that we see on this modern, complex,
and very fluid 21st century battlefield, because the world as
we knew it on the first of January 2011 is already a totally
different world, and it seems that it changes just about week
to week.
So I just want to make sure that we don't find ourselves
going into one of these valleys, because the people that
ultimately will have to suffer because of that are the men and
women we put in uniform, so.
Secretary Stanley. I will give my service counterparts here
an opportunity to think about that a little bit as I take a
stab into that.
Total force, as I alluded to first of all, deals with not
only those on our Active, but also our Guard and our Reserve. I
think they are an important part of the equation. But also we
have civilians who are also a part of this.
And so as we look at what we are doing, that is how we are
shaping and approaching this. The assessment--your question is
actually a part of the assessment process that we are going
through right now.
I am going to defer my time to the services. I know it is
precious.
General Bostick. Congressman, I would agree with you that
we have taken some risk in our ability to operate on the higher
end of the spectrum due to the requirements to fight as we are
in the operations in Iraq and Afghanistan.
We know that we need to train at the higher end, and for
the first time, recently we had a brigade combat team at the
National Training Center that was able to train at the high
intensity of combat end of the spectrum.
So we are rusty in that. We know that. And as we come out
of Iraq and Afghanistan we are certainly training in that area.
We are also concerned that we get the dwell time that our
soldiers and families need. As you pointed out, for the first
time we believe that we will have 2 years of dwell for our
soldiers and families. When the soldiers deploy in October of
this year, when they come back for the first time they can
expect that they will have 2 years of dwell. And that hasn't
happened from any of them for quite some time.
The other thing we found that we have to do, to address
your point on contracting and expanding military, is that we
have to look at new ways to expand our force. We have to look
at lateral exits and lateral entry. We have to look at
sabbatical assignments where you can go get a Ph.D. and be away
from the Army for 3 years and then come back in. We have to
look at continuum of service, where you can leave the Active
Army and go into the Guard and Reserve or you can come from the
Guard and Reserve, come in Active.
So all of those types of ideas is what we are looking at
now because we have the same concern, that we might have to
ramp up very quickly and how do we do that, particularly in our
Officer Corps, which once they leave generally do not come
back.
Admiral Ferguson. Congressman, for the Navy the CNO [Chief
of Naval Operations] has testified that a floor of
approximately 313 ships is what we will need to sustain a
global Navy at demands that we see today and the threats into
the future. And we are on a building profile to reach that
point in our budget submissions.
We believe a balanced force with an integrated Reserve that
is operational rise, that has the continuum of service which we
are working to is vital. But we are making new investments. We
are increasing our investment in the cyber area. We are
investing in ballistic missile defense, and we are reinvesting
in our warfare capabilities in anti-submarine warfare,
electronic warfare, in the high end in our budget submission.
We are able at the force structure that we have to call on
our Reserves to surge, which they have been invaluable in that
and have been able to sustain in most of our areas, about a 2.8
to 3:1 dwell time. So we feel we are in balance at this point.
General Milstead. Sir, you expect your Marine Corps to be
most ready when the Nation is least ready. That means we have
to be ready today. That does not facilitate tiered readiness,
as you spoke of. We can't have peaks and valleys. We have to be
ready and we have to be ready today.
I will tell you this is the healthiest Marine Corps that I
have seen, and I am just beginning my 36th year of service. It
is the healthiest corps I have seen in 36 years.
And it is all about the people, as General Bostick
mentioned. What sets us aside as a corps is people. And, you
know, what it takes to be a marine today is what it will take
to be a marine tomorrow.
So we will continue to recruit that high-quality young men
and women that feels called to serve their Nation, something
greater than them. And I have no qualms about what the future
holds for our corps.
Mr. Wilson. At this time we need to proceed, but, General
Milstead, I want you to know that the next person is very
interested in the marines being stationed in her very beautiful
and strategically located island of Guam.
Congresswoman Madeleine Bordallo.
Ms. Bordallo. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. You have
always been so supportive of our military buildup on Guam.
And I just have two quick questions. As Guam is the closest
U.S. neighbor to Japan, I want to thank all the services for
the support you have given during this disaster.
General Bostick, I want to ask you about a problem we have
been experiencing on Guam now for some time. This provision--or
it is relevant to the section 621 of last year's defense
authorization bill, and this provision provided a 1-year
extension of authority to provide travel allowances for
inactive duty training outside normal distances.
Now, members of the Guam National Guard live just north of
Guam in the Northern Marianas Islands. These men and women have
limited transportation options for training on Guam and often
spend a lot of money out of pocket to get to and from drills.
I have asked for a pilot program to be launched in Guam
that would allow these servicemembers to utilize this authority
to defray the cost of travel.
This is an important readiness issue, as well as key
recruiting and retention matter for our Guam National Guard.
All we hear from past correspondence is that we are working on
it.
So my question for you is, what must be done to get this
program started? What can the committee do to assist in regards
to this matter? And can I get your commitment to work with me
on this initiative?
General Bostick. First, Congresswoman, you do have my
commitment. This was brought to my attention. And the primary
thing that we have to work is the joint travel regulation,
which doesn't authorize this flight travel.
But we have the issue, we are talking with your team and
the team in the Department, and I believe we can find a way to
resolve this.
But I concur with the issue. We are working it, and I will
personally get back to you on it.
[The information referred to can be found in the Appendix
on page 251.]
Ms. Bordallo. Is this because we are located outside of the
mainland United States?
General Bostick. No, it is just--we work exceptions to all
of our regulations and policies, as you know, all the time. So
it is just something that we have to come to closure on.
Ms. Bordallo. Well, thank you very much for your
commitment, and we will remember that.
My second question is to General Milstead. In the Secretary
of Defense's recent posture hearing before this committee, he
mentioned a reduction in Army and Marine Corps end strength in
the out-years of the FYDP [future years defense program].
What impact will these reductions have on the proposed
Marine units that will be realigned to Guam over the coming
years? And could this impact the bed-down of marines on Guam in
terms of what units and skill sets will be placed on Guam?
What impact might these reductions have on our ability to
participate in operations such as humanitarian assistance,
disaster relief or mil-to-mil engagement in the Pacific?
General Milstead. Yes, ma'am. We indeed were directed to
reduce our corps 20,000 over the years 2014 and 2015. And as I
mentioned earlier, we have completed our Force Structure Review
Group where we briefed the Secretary and he agreed that we
would go down about 15,000, and it would be 186,800, not to
commence until we are complete with combat operations in
Afghanistan.
As far as how that will affect specifically our bed-down
per units on Guam, I would like to take that for record if I
may and that is a PP&O [plans, policies, and operations] piece,
and I will get you a good solid answer that I am not prepared
to provide at this time.
[The information referred to was not available at the time
of printing.]
Ms. Bordallo. Very good. We will wait for that information.
And thank you, Mr. Chairman, for always being so supportive
of our buildup on Guam.
Mr. Wilson. Well, I have been there, so I know how good it
is and what a strategic location it is, and wonderful people.
So thank you for your service.
We will proceed to a second round in coordination with the
Ranking Member, and what we will do is each person will ask
another question.
As we proceed, I am very grateful that Congressman West
brought up maritime challenges. And, Admiral, many of us
thought that piracy was something that occurred 250 years ago
with the Barbary pirates. We are aware how shocking that really
you have to face piracy today, which is affecting world
commerce, and safety, and security. And that is in addition to
a threat from Iran.
So I want to thank Congressman West for bringing up the
increasing maritime threat.
I know firsthand that Active Duty personnel, Guard
personnel, and Reserves are grateful to serve. They are
grateful to be deployed. I know firsthand, my former National
Guard unit, the 218th Brigade, served for a year in
Afghanistan, 1,600 troops led by our current--our new adjutant
general, Bob Livingston. It was the largest deployment since
World War II. But the people were very proud of their service.
But something that has to be kept in mind is dwell time.
And as we look at reduction or downsizing, beginning with
Secretary Stanley, I would like to know what the goal of dwell
time is? This is of great concern to members of the military
and their families.
Secretary Stanley. Thank you, Chairman Wilson.
Secretary Gates set dwell time goals of 1:5 for Active and
1:2 for--excuse me, 1:5 for our Reserve, 1:2 for actually our
Active Component. I actually think that is 1:3, I think I just
wrote it down just 1:3.
And the services now are moving in the direction of getting
there, and I am going to allow the services to address that if
that is okay.
Mr. Wilson. Yes.
General Bostick. We would certainly like to get to 1:2 for
the Active, 1:4 for the Reserve component. There has been
discussion about going to 3 years, and it is really a 1:3. So
it is 1 year or--we think if you go to 1:3 it could be 9 months
deployed, for example, and 27 months back home. So that is a
1:3 ratio, not necessarily 3 years back.
Right now we are at 1:2 for the Active Force, and we
believe that it takes 2 to 3 years to get your family and
yourself settled after a tour of 1 year in length. So it is
important for us to get as a minimum to 2 years back home. And
we think for the units that deploy in October of this year, we
will see that when they return.
And so it is very much of interest for us. We are working
towards that.
What really matters for us, though, is the end strength is
important, but it is, what are the demands? What are the
demands on the force? If those demands come down then within
the end strength that we are directed to go to, we could still
meet a 1:2--dwell and a 1:4 for the Reserves.
Admiral Ferguson. Chairman Wilson, we are meeting, as I
stated earlier, on the broad force, we are seeing selected
units go under increasing stress. And I want to mention our
special operations forces, explosive ordnance detail, and our
special operators in particular because their training ranges
and what they need to do to work up is not co-located at their
home site, that they spend a greater amount of time away from
home in preparation to deploy and then in actual deployment.
So we have concerns about those particular forces. They are
very small. But in the broader force we manage it very
carefully. We set fairly strict policies and track their
PERSTEMPO [personnel tempo] and dwell. And to break certain
boundaries, the Chief of Naval Operations has to approve those.
And so we feel comfortable, but do see some concern with
those forces that are carrying the fight in theater for us.
Mr. Wilson. And they are so effective.
Excuse me, General Milstead I believe is next.
General Milstead. Yes, sir.
For the Marine Corps our goal for our Active Forces is a
1:2 dwell, and then post-Afghanistan our goal will be a 1:3.
For the Reserves currently in combat it is a 1:4, and post-OCO
[overseas contingency operations] our goal will be a 1:5.
Mr. Wilson. Thank you.
And, General Jones.
General Jones. Mr. Chairman post-conflict our goal would be
1:4 dwell time for our airmen, who are very much in the fight.
Thirty-seven thousand airmen are deployed today; 29,000 of
those are in the CENTCOM [United States Central Command] AOR
[area of responsibility].
But also we have to remember that in the Air Force we have
a large number of our forces who are supporting COCOM
[combatant commands] requirements every day. In fact, 43
percent, about 217,000 people at places like Creech Air Force
Base in the Nevada desert, which as you walk through the front
door you see the sign that says, ``You are now entering the
CENTCOM area of responsibility,'' because they are able to do
their mission in a distributed fashion, actually flying the
remotely piloted aircraft over the conflict. So we are very
much involved.
We need to provide--as we have bands and buckets with our
different dwell times, from 1:1 to 1:2 to 1:3, we try to focus
very hard on getting those airmen that are in the hot--the
short dwell times, the 1:1 and the 1:2, to incentivize them, to
give them the special bonuses to reenlist, to keep the numbers
up, because only by keeping the numbers up in those specialties
can you increase their dwell time and shorten the amount of
them that they have back home--or excuse me, increase the
amount of time they have back home with their families.
Mr. Wilson. Thank you, and I appreciate you mentioning
unmanned aerial vehicles. I always hope with two sons in Iraq
that there was one over their head. So let them know at Creech,
we appreciate them.
Congresswoman Davis.
Mrs. Davis. Thank you.
I know everybody is really struggling with some of the
personnel accounts and trying to find efficiencies out of
those. We also know that we haven't given our managers a lot of
room to maneuver with them as well, so much of it is driven by
formula.
But I wanted to just ask about one in particular because I
hear about this more as a work-life family balance issue often,
and that is the permanent changes of station moves.
It has been considered as one of the efficiencies that we
need to look at, particularly in terms of travel expenses. But
I also wondered about some of the other issues. Because
particularly for women who are in the services and are deciding
whether or not they are going to stay in the service, the fact
that they and often their spouse have to move a great deal
makes a difference.
We know there are reasons for that in the different
services, but I am wondering to what extent you think that that
is actually a good place to be looking to see whether there is
a way to better create that work-life balance while at the same
time dealing with that as a budgetary issue. Or is that, you
know, just not a possibility in the way that we might think,
certainly in terms of those efficiencies?
Secretary Stanley. I am just going to just make one
comment, Congresswoman Davis. We actually have started those
discussions, and I don't know if we have even begun to have
those discussions with the services yet, as we look at how we
approach that very important subject, as we look at the
balancing and looking at how our forces. Because as I said in
our opening statement, families, they are part of this
equation, moves and everything.
So I don't know where the services are yet on it because we
haven't had mature discussions on it yet. I will defer to them.
Mrs. Davis. Anybody want to comment?
General Jones. Ma'am, in the Air Force we have increased
the length of PCS [permanent change of station] moves or the
amount of time you get to stay at your base over the years and
that is important because, as you point out, with the work-life
balance, around 19 percent of our force are women in the Air
Force, officers and enlisted, and about 48,000 of those are
joint spouse couples married to another servicemember.
And we try very hard to manage the assignments of those
officers and those enlisted members where they can continue to
progress at their base and get them in the same general
location.
In some career fields that is easy, in some career fields
that is obviously more difficult. And women in the same career
field, it increases the difficulty.
But we feel like we work that very, very hard, and that is
something we would like to consider to work and try to add that
stability. And I can tell you as a dependent when I was young,
having gone through it with my own family, and now watching my
son go through it in the Air Force, we need to focus on those
family things because that is what keeps us in the Air Force
and their ability to serve their family and also serve their
Nation.
Admiral Ferguson. I agree with General Jones. And we also
approach it similarly, as a family readiness issue, a work
balance and a quality-of-life issue.
I would like to present another aspect of it for your
consideration, and that relates to continued operation under a
continuing resolution. Because of the manpower counts that we
operate under, about 96 percent are nondiscretionary pay
bonuses allowances.
And as we approach the end of the year, if we were to
continue for the entire fiscal year under a continuing
resolution, in the Navy we would be forced to start to halt
moves, to use those funds to pay for pay, base pay and bonuses
and other things that are required.
And so the uncertainty of our funding stream presents a
challenge to our families who start to plan on moves and
relocations and children starting school in the fall. And so I
would just offer that that is a great concern to us, that if we
start to progress later into the spring under a continuing
resolution, we will have to take actions to delay moves and to
slide them into next fiscal year in order to ensure we have
sufficient funds to cover our accounts.
Mrs. Davis. I hear that is a hot topic on the Internet, on
Facebook right now among our servicemembers.
Anybody else?
General Bostick. Congresswoman Davis, as you said, much of
our budget is must-fund for the Army, 96 percent of our budget
is must-fund, so PCS and tuition assistance and education and
other things that are very important to our soldiers and
families are in that 4 percent.
I don't think there is a lot of wiggle room in PCS moves.
Part of our Army force generation model that is a rotational
model in about 50 percent of the force coming back from a
brigade combat team is going to have to move to schools and
move to training, move to other assignments as they move higher
in grade.
What we have been sensitive to is spouses and children that
need to complete school, or spouses that are in a position or a
job where they want to retain that position, or families that
while their husband or wife is deployed, their soldier is
deployed, allowing them to remain in an area where their
housing is stable, their school is stable, and their job is
stable.
General Milstead. Yes, ma'am, I will just close it out. And
I will agree with everything that has been said, you know.
About 47 to 48 percent of our corps is married. There is little
flexibility in the MILPERS [military personnel] accounts,
absolutely. It is a rob Peter to pay Paul. And so then you have
to maintain that balance and make sure that you don't take away
from the other things.
As Admiral Ferguson pointed out, the continuing resolution
is a significant issue here. With the Marine Corps, if we were
to remain on the CR [continuing resolution], we are looking at
somewhere close to $500 million. And we are going to have to
rob Peter. And Peter is going to be procurement accounts. It is
going to be other things.
So, you know, I would just reinforce what my Navy brother
said.
Thank you.
Mr. Wilson. Thank you all. And we will be concluding with
Congressman Allen West of Florida.
Mr. West. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member.
Recently I had the opportunity to go down to SOUTHCOM
[United States Southern Command] headquarters down in Miami.
And when you sit there, you get the Major General (Select),
Chief of Staff USMC [United States Marine Corps] really did a
great job hosting me.
When you sit down at SOUTHCOM you get the sensing that this
is kind of the economy of force AOR. But when you get the ops
and intel brief, you really get concerned about some of the
actors that are starting to come into that AOR because, you
know, the bad guy always looks for the soft underbelly.
My first question is, you know, how are we looking at our
allocation of forces that we have in the SOUTHCOM AOR? And how
quickly we can increase the allocation of forces to the
SOUTHCOM AOR?
And then the second question is, after the visit I had to
Guantanamo Bay--and I have to tell you these soldiers, sailors,
airmen, and marines down there are doing a fantastic job and I
think that we need to make sure we get that message out.
But as we talk about drawing down forces in Afghanistan, as
you know, we have the prison facility there in Bagram where we
are expanding that to Parwan, if we are going to draw down
forces in Afghanistan, what happens with the--some very bad
actors, high-value detainees that we have there.
Are we looking down the road as we lessen our capability to
deal with the detention facility in theater in Afghanistan, how
do we increase a level of personnel, not ad hoc personnel, but
how do we increase a permanent cadre of personnel at Guantanamo
Bay, and also the facilities for the families down there as
well? So those are my two final questions.
I yield back.
General Bostick. I would just say we don't see it as an
economy of force. I think with each of the combatant commanders
we provide them the joint personnel and all of their
requirements. At least from the stable authorizations in the
joint arena, we have been providing the Army portion of that.
In terms of how quickly we could ramp up, that is a good
part of the reason our chief and secretary drove us to the Army
force generation model. Right now we meet all demands that we
are asked to meet, and when we run out of forces, we cannot
meet others.
We are trying to get to a supply-based force of 1 corps, 5
divisions, 20 brigade combat teams and about 90,000 enablers to
provide places like Afghanistan and Iraq or other locations.
But we are not at the point where can surge anywhere. And we
are trying to build that surge capability. And once the demand
comes down in Iraq and Afghanistan and if a surge requirement
were necessary, that is part of the Army force generation model
design.
Admiral Ferguson. Congressman, I would offer that we
recognized that about 2 years ago when we stood up the 4th
Fleet staff down in Florida under Admiral Guillory. And he
reports directly to SOUTHCOM because there is a necessity for
an ongoing planning effort and operational awareness of what is
happening in theater, and he provides that as well as the close
contact with the countries of the region.
There is a great flexibility in naval forces. You know, the
first forces on the scene in Haiti were naval forces and the
ability to surge from our various ports on the East Coast or
even forces returning from theater I think can meet the
allocation.
And like the other services, we are responsive to the
combatant commander in how that allocation process works. But
the ongoing relationship piece I think is the important part
that we recognize.
General Milstead. I would just add again to what Admiral
Ferguson said.
There is great flexibility in the Navy-Marine Corps team.
Theater security cooperation efforts in that area can have a
great return on investment.
When something happens, probably the COCOM's first question
is, you know, where is the MEU [Marine expeditionary unit] and
where is the carrier battle group? I think that these give you
that sort of flexibility. You know, again, our FSRG [force
structure review group], our 186,800, that is the number, and
we feel it will allow us to still do those things and source
those MEUs and remain a flexible force and be continually ready
to go.
And I guess the last thing I would say is we are also
looking at operationalizing our Reserve. I think there is more
opportunity to use them in an operational role.
Thank you.
General Jones. Sir, we are very pleased to have Air Force
General Doug Fraser down commanding SOUTHCOM and he is doing a
great job. And we just spoke with him the other day, and we are
trying to give General Fraser everything he needs for the AOR
that he supports.
But one of the great jewels the Air Force is fortunate to
support is the Inter-American Air Forces Academy in San Antonio
that allows us to bring members of South American and Central
American air forces and other--and police forces up and train
them alongside their U.S. counterparts, and allows for those
long-term relationships for when we do need contacts in those
areas.
And so we can provide support through many avenues taking
that approach.
Mr. West. Any thoughts on Gitmo and how we can--that
personnel challenge if we draw down our force in Afghanistan,
which means that will effect the detention facility there?
Secretary Stanley. I don't have any thoughts on it because
that is not in my domain of what I have worked operationally,
if you know what I mean.
Mr. West. Yield back.
Mr. Wilson. Thank you very much. As we conclude, I want to
thank all of you. And I want to thank Congressman West.
As we were thinking of uncertainty, we have uncertainty to
our southern border, whether it be the humanitarian efforts
that all of you were so helpful with, with the people of Haiti,
but then the instability of our great neighbor, a country that
is very important to all of us, Mexico.
So thank you for what you do, and I am delighted to hear
about the 4th Fleet.
So at this time, unless there is anything further, we shall
adjourn. Thank you.
[Whereupon, at 12:19 p.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.]
?
=======================================================================
A P P E N D I X
March 17, 2011
=======================================================================
?
=======================================================================
PREPARED STATEMENTS SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD
March 17, 2011
=======================================================================
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.001
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.143
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.144
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.002
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.003
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.004
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.005
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.006
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.007
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.008
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.009
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.010
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.011
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.012
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.013
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.014
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.015
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.016
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.017
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.018
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.019
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.020
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.021
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.022
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.023
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.024
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.025
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.026
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.027
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.028
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.029
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.030
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.031
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.032
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.033
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.034
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.035
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.036
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.037
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.038
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.039
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.040
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.041
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.042
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.043
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.044
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.045
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.046
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.047
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.048
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.049
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.050
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.051
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.052
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.053
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.054
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.055
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.056
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.057
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.058
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.059
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.060
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.061
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.062
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.063
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.064
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.065
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.066
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.067
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.068
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.069
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.070
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.071
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.072
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.073
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.074
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.075
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.076
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.077
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.078
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.079
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.080
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.081
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.082
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.083
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.084
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.085
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.086
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.087
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.088
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.089
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.090
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.091
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.092
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.093
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.094
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.095
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.096
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.097
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.098
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.099
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.118
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.119
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.120
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.121
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.122
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.123
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.124
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.125
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.126
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.127
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.128
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.129
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.130
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.131
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.132
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.133
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.134
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.135
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.136
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.137
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.138
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.139
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.140
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.141
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.142
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.100
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.101
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.102
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.103
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.104
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.105
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.106
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.107
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.108
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.109
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.110
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.111
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.112
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.113
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.114
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.115
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.116
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.117
?
=======================================================================
DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD
March 17, 2011
=======================================================================
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.154
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.155
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.156
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.157
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.158
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.159
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.160
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.161
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.162
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.163
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.164
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.165
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.166
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.167
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.168
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.169
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.170
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.171
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.172
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.173
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.174
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.175
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.176
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.177
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.178
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.179
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.180
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.181
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.182
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.183
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.184
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.185
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.186
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.187
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.188
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.189
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.190
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.191
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.192
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.193
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.194
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.195
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.196
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.197
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.198
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.199
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.200
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.201
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.202
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.203
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.204
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.205
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.206
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.207
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.208
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.209
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.210
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.211
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.212
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.213
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.214
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.215
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.216
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.217
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.218
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.219
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.220
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.145
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.146
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.147
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.148
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.149
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.150
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.151
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.152
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T5595.153
?
=======================================================================
WITNESS RESPONSES TO QUESTIONS ASKED DURING
THE HEARING
March 17, 2011
=======================================================================
RESPONSES TO QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY MRS. DAVIS
Secretary Stanley. Although the NDAA 2010 authorized $50M for the
programs, appropriations did not follow. However, the Department took
the following actions to comply with the NDAA:
Provided the Services bridge funding in FY 2010 and FY
2011 to establish case managers (120) within the Exceptional Family
Member Program (EFMP). These case managers were new to the Air Force
and Navy, while the positions were used to supplement the well-
established Army and Marine Corps programs.
Drafted a new issuance clarifying policy regarding the
Exceptional Family Member Program (EFMP). The new issuance will reflect
the requirements of U.S.C. 1781c, as added by the NDAA 2010, for a
uniform DOD policy regarding military families with special needs. A
draft for Service review will be available in the Spring 2011.
Initiated three research studies:
Availability and accessibility of services for children
with autism (Phase 1 completed; report and directory to be
available on Military HOMEFRONT website Spring 2011).
Availability and accessibility of Medicaid to military
families with special needs (anticipated completion date:
September 2011)
Benchmark study to assist in establishing family support
programs for military families with special needs (anticipated
completion date: November 2011).
Developed professional materials to communicate the EFMP
to military families. Materials to be disseminated to all military
installation family centers in April 2011.
Developed electronic learning modules, which will be
available to families with special needs and to providers on DOD and
Military Service websites. The eLearning modules will educate families
on the benefits and services available to them and the member with
special needs. Anticipate first module to be available summer 2011.
Initiated a Functional Analysis of the EFMP including a
review of the Military Services' current policies, procedures,
databases and case management systems as a first step in developing a
joint database/case management system. The Functional Analysis will be
conducted during FY 2011 to examine existing systems and project future
needs for sharing information. This is a long term project to assist in
the development of a joint database. The final outcome will network
EFMP family support, personnel activities and military health systems
to provide information as needed for assignments and for family
support.
We are working with the Services to validate the level of EFMP
staffing necessary to meet the intention of the law for individualized
services, and to ensure that the Services have adequate funding for
these positions beginning in FY 2012. [See page 11.]
Secretary Stanley. The Department has no objection to an amendment
to Title 10 that would authorize, but not require vocational training
on military installations. [See page 12.]
______
RESPONSE TO QUESTION SUBMITTED BY MS. BORDALLO
General Bostick. We believe we can support the NGB's request for
IDT travel reimbursement without the need to establish a Pilot Program.
To do so requires validation of shortage Military Occupational
Specialty (MOS) in Guam and a change to the Joint Federal Travel
Regulation (JFTR) to modify the 150 mile one-way commuting distance for
U.S territories. On May 2, 2011, the Army requested a change to the
JFTR. We expect a final determination by May 27, 2011. [See page 15.]
?
=======================================================================
QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY MEMBERS POST HEARING
March 17, 2011
=======================================================================
QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY MR. WILSON
Mr. Wilson. Mr. Secretary, today there is an increased emphasis on
reducing federal spending, especially on programs that have not been
operating effectively. Can you help the committee understand, how
effective has the JAMRS program been both in terms of helping the
Department attain its objectives for maintaining the all-volunteer
force and in terms of the returns for the dollars being invested?
Secretary Stanley. Yes, the work done by the Joint Advertising
Market Research and Studies (JAMRS) is necessary for sustaining the
All-Volunteer Force (AVF). JAMRS has been proven operationally
effective, and a critical resource DOD's recruiting efforts.
Specifically, JAMRS bolsters the effectiveness of every Service
component's (Active, Guard, Reserve) recruiting efforts by helping them
better understand and adapt to the complexities of the recruiting
environment. JAMRS serves three primary functions within the Department
and tracks the operational effectiveness of these functional areas,
demonstrating strong performance in each:
1) Market Research: To successfully recruit the AVF, the Services
must have actionable information about recruiting markets. JAMRS
performs this function for all the Services through efforts like the
DOD Youth Poll, an effort conducted since the advent of the AVF to
provide the necessary intelligence to maintain it. This was clearly
demonstrated in early 2006, when JAMRS provided key indications that
enabled USD (P&R) to take preemptive action to sustain recruiting and
retention efforts. The operational effectiveness of JAMRS' market
research efforts are evaluated annually through a survey of all of
JAMRS' constituent groups. The results from this survey continually
affirm the necessity of the research conducted by JAMRS and the high
level of service that JAMRS provides. Moreover, the operational
effectiveness of JAMRS is demonstrated through the Services' actions as
they continually turn to JAMRS' staff for consultation on the
recruiting market and to request special studies on hard-to-recruit
populations (e.g., physicians, prior service members, etc.).
2) Comprehensive Prospect Database: The centralized efforts by
JAMRS to acquire, maintain and update a database of potential prospects
(30.5 million names and more than 90% coverage of the recruit age
population) create efficiencies for all recruiters. This database is
the backbone of the Services' direct marketing and recruiting efforts.
As a result, every military recruiter becomes more efficient because
they have a database of prospects in their area, and direct mailing
efforts DOD-wide can be targeted to those households with recruit age
youth.
3) Outreach: Through outreach, JAMRS has created a more receptive
environment for recruiting in definable and measureable ways. JAMRS
developed an award winning campaign that actively advertised to adult
influencers (e.g., parents, grandparents, educators, etc.) of recruit
age youth. This advertising campaign played a key role in sustaining
public support for military service during the war, and was
specifically praised by former Chairman of the House Armed Services
Committee, Ike Skelton. JAMRS routinely conducts studies measuring the
return on investment on its outreach efforts. These studies demonstrate
that exposure to JAMRS' outreach efforts result in influencers being
more knowledgeable about military service and willing to engage in more
pro-recruiting behaviors (e.g., have conversation with youth about the
Military, support decision to join, etc.).
In summary, the efforts of JAMRS save DOD considerable money (an
estimated $96 million) and effort. The high return on investment is
achieved through close coordination between JAMRS and the Services as
well as efficient streamlining of roles and responsibilities. These
consolidations identify common needs across the Services and then
remain the responsibility of JAMRS alone. Moving forward, the return on
investment must also incorporate gains achieved as a result of more
precise and targeted recruiting efforts. These efforts may be furthered
through market research and the prospect database and the creation of a
more receptive recruiting environment through continuous influencer
outreach.
Mr. Wilson. Mr. Secretary, in your written statement you indicate
that JAMRS is one of the most cost-effective recruiting programs in the
Department. Can you please elaborate and explain to the committee what
evidence you have to support this position?
Secretary Stanley. Yes. The goal of JAMRS' (Joint Advertising
Market Research and Studies') is to ensure that the shared needs of
military recruiting are performed one time for the entire Department
rather than once per Service so that the Services can focus on their
unique recruiting goals. Although each Service approaches recruiting
differently as they each have unique recruiting goals and cultures, the
Services share many of the same basic information and resource needs.
JAMRS works side by side with the Services (via daily collaboration as
well as formal meetings) to identify the activities to perform so that
shared needs are met efficiently. This approach ensures that JAMRS
provides only those resources that are vital to support the Services'
needs.
Without JAMRS, each Service would be forced to take on functions
that the program has successfully provided for more than a decade,
ultimately resulting in the total cost of military recruiting
increasing needlessly (approximately $96 million). These functions
include:
1) Market Research: JAMRS ensures that the shared information needs
required for military recruiting are met and that duplication of
efforts is minimized. This includes conducting tracking studies to
monitor propensity to serve and the attitudes and behaviors of specific
populations essential for recruiting success (i.e., prospect, educator,
parents, prior service, recruiters). JAMRS also tracks the
effectiveness of all DOD recruitment advertising campaigns so the
Services can optimize their marketing resources, and helps to ensure
nearly a billion dollars of advertising is spent effectively (GAO-03-
1005 recommendation). Additionally, JAMRS conducts specific mission
critical research to provide intelligence on hard to recruit markets
(i.e., physicians, racial/ethnic diversity recruiting). Together these
efforts unveil trends so the Services can prepare strategies to combat
problematic issues before missions are missed or resources are wasted.
Performing this function at the joint level saves DOD a minimum of $25
million annually.
2) Comprehensive Prospect Database: JAMRS acquires, maintains, and
updates a database of over 30.5 million names. The Services rely on
this database as their primary source of contact information for
prospective recruits and it serves as the backbone of the Services'
outreach efforts. JAMRS brokers consolidated purchases from DMVs and
public vendors on the behalf of all Services, allowing the Department
to purchase names once for use by all. This minimizes the duplication
of cost and effort, creating an essential resource at a meaningful cost
savings for the Department. JAMRS spends approximately $3.5 million on
this database. Having the Services independently create and maintain
this database would increase cost to DOD by at least $35 million
annually.
3) Outreach: Outreach efforts conducted by JAMRS are distinct
from--yet integral to--those of the Services. Recruiting is a long-term
effort and joining the Military is a big decision that takes an
extended period of time and involves the prospect, his/her family,
close friends, and educators. To stay successful, the Department must
stay relevant. In 2002, a congressional report recommended that DOD
``reconnect with America''; JAMRS outreach efforts strive to do just
that. Today, JAMRS is the only DOD entity that actively advertises to
adult influencers of recruitment-aged youth (i.e., parents,
grandparents, educators, etc.). JAMRS disseminates information and
persuasive messages via direct marketing, three websites (each with a
unique purpose), magazines distributed to 95% of public high schools
nationwide, and TV and magazine advertising. Conducting outreach to
influencers at the joint level saves DOD approximately $36 million
annually and allows the Services to focus on prospects.
______
QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY MS. TSONGAS
Ms. Tsongas. I would like to commend the Army for their hard work
in developing and fielding the Third Generation Extended Cold Weather
Clothing System (GEN III ECWCS) which continues to play an essential
role in the combat effectiveness, health and safety of our soldiers.
Prior to October 2010, industry was producing 20,000 GEN III ECWCS sets
a month to ensure that all deploying soldiers were issued this required
clothing system. It is my understanding that in 2011 the Army has
greatly reduced the orders of this clothing system in the new Operation
Enduring Freedom Camouflage Pattern (OCP). These numbers represent a
130,000 decrease in annual GEN III ECWCS orders and do not appear to be
sufficient to properly equip the deploying force nor sustain the
domestic supply chain. It is critical that the Army continues to ensure
both soldier safety and the effective use of taxpayer dollars. For this
reason, I am concerned that the recent sharp decrease in GEN III ECWCS
production is already resulting in shortages of a critical combat
clothing system and is creating a substantial disruption in the
domestic supply chain that supports our troops. It is my understanding
that this is a fragile supply chain and as these manufacturing lines
cease operation and layoffs occur that the United States stands to lose
the ability to domestically produce GEN III ECWCS as well as other
basic items necessary for combat and peacekeeping operations. I would
like to ascertain the Army's near-term plans to ensure that the GEN III
ECWCS supply chain is sustained in order to ensure our nation's
capability to fill future personnel requirements.
Secretary Stanley. This request is not within the purview of the
USD (P&R) issue portfolio and instead is within the Army's area of
expertise. Therefore, the following response has been provided by the
Army.
There are no GEN III ECWCS shortages for deploying or deployed
Soldiers. The Army is in the final year of a five-year contract for
ECWCS initial fielding to Soldiers. To date, the Army has procured over
850,000 kits since the introduction of ECWCS onto the Rapid Fielding
Initiative (RFI) list of issued equipment. Soldiers retain the ECWCS
after initial fielding for future deployments. After the initial
fielding requirement is met, the Defense Logistics Agency Troop Support
(DLA-Troop Support) will provide sustainment quantities to ensure every
deploying Soldier will continue to receive ECWCS as required. DLA-Troop
Support is in the process of awarding new contracts for the ECWCS
individual layers to maintain the supply chain and ensure future
capability in the industrial base.
Ms. Tsongas. I would like to commend the Army for their hard work
in developing and fielding the Third Generation Extended Cold Weather
Clothing System (GEN III ECWCS) which continues to play an essential
role in the combat effectiveness, health and safety of our
soldiers.Prior to October 2010, industry was producing 20,000 GEN III
ECWCS sets a month to ensure that all deploying soldiers were issued
this required clothing system. It is my understanding that in 2011 the
Army has greatly reduced the orders of this clothing system in the new
Operation Enduring Freedom Camouflage Pattern (OCP). These numbers
represent a 130,000 decrease in annual GEN III ECWCS orders and do not
appear to be sufficient to properly equip the deploying force nor
sustain the domestic supply chain. It is critical that the Army
continues to ensure both soldier safety and the effective use of
taxpayer dollars. For this reason, I am concerned that the recent sharp
decrease in GEN III ECWCS production is already resulting in shortages
of a critical combat clothing system and is creating a substantial
disruption in the domestic supply chain that supports our troops. It is
my understanding that this is a fragile supply chain and as these
manufacturing lines cease operation and layoffs occur that the United
States stands to lose the ability to domestically produce GEN III ECWCS
as well as other basic items necessary for combat and peacekeeping
operations. I would like to ascertain the Army's near-term plans to
ensure that the GEN III ECWCS supply chain is sustained in order to
ensure our nation's capability to fill future personnel requirements.
General Bostick. There are no GEN III ECWCS shortages for deploying
or deployed Soldiers. The Army is in the final year of a five-year
contract for ECWCS initial fielding to Soldiers. To date, the Army has
procured over 850,000 kits since the introduction of ECWCS onto the
Rapid Fielding Initiative (RFI) list of issued equipment. Soldiers
retain the ECWCS after initial fielding for future deployments. After
the initial fielding requirement is met, the Defense Logistics Agency
Troop Support (DLA-Troop Support) will provide sustainment quantities
to ensure every deploying Soldier will continue to receive ECWCS as
required. DLA-Troop Support is in the process of awarding new contracts
for the ECWCS individual layers to maintain the supply chain and ensure
future capability in the industrial base.
|
NEWSLETTER
|
|
Join the GlobalSecurity.org mailing list
|
|
|
